Xed

globby said:

paisleydisco said:

foregoneconclusion said:

Appleinsider: softball with the EU and hardball with the United States. 

Eliz W deserves to be laughed at. 

Please, let's be respectful of her and use her "spirit name", Fauxahontas. Her whole career started with, uh, "taking" a job from a real Native American, so she knows a thing or two about stealing.

Also interesting that these lawfare attacks on Apple (in the US) are just before election time ... shakedown, anyone?

neoncat said:

And therein lies the core problem with Apple Music: It is to streaming services what Top 40 was to radio in the 80s. Apple is far more concerned with whether Apple Music appears to be aligned with what is "now" than building a vital and comprehensive music service, much less fixing the oft-documented problems with the garbage that is Music.app. The end result is not something that comes across as cool and essential, but rather a bunch of boomers wearing tight-fitting jeans and inviting themselves to industry parties. 

Before the Swifties descend upon me like a ton of bricks: Tay-Tay is not, er, my cup of tea, but she's an amazing business person and I don't find her music actively terrible, or anything. It's the form of Apple's myopic partnerships, not the individual artists.

Another example would be the weird amount of attention they kept giving Billie Eilish, who admitted in a couple interviews she found it all "very strange," and that it was entirely a construct between Apple and her record company. She had nothing to do with it, despite Apple continually selling it as a partnership between her, individually, and Apple. Again—boomers in jeans making sure to be seen rather than thinking about: Is this what my users actually want?

tobian said:

Xed said:

I don't think you thought your comment through... unless you want to defend how automated systems like airbags, antilock braking, traction control, blind spot warnings, lane guidance, cruise control, and adaptive cruise control have lead to less safe driving and more accidents because, as you put it, those make us actively asleep. I, for one, don't miss  having to quickly depress and release the brakes in quick succession to stop fast without locking up the brake, and I can't even imagine what it would be like to have an airbag button that I have to push the moment I'm in an accident.

Of course, you'll say that you didn't mean those things and/or that they don't count (somehow), but the absolutely do. They are autonomous systems — denoting or performed by a device capable of operating without direct human control — that have prevented a great deal of damage and minimized the loss of life, even if it means that the younger generations will never understand how and why a brake can lock up and your vehicle to skid without functional control as a result.

You're naming driving assistive features, not driving substitution. Of course we're not going to sleep, but play games instead, texting, making facetime calls, etc. ..Autopilot was always so unneed to intervene ,) It's soooooooo boring to supervise all the time, but having no joy of *driving* ,)

40domi said:

Although I suspect if Trump wins, the DOJ case will be dropped immediately and DOJ told to concentrate on real crime!