waveparticle

tmay said:

GeorgeBMac said:

tmay said:

GeorgeBMac said:

tmay said:

GeorgeBMac said:

22july2013 said:

tmay said:

... Stupid.   Very, very stupid.

The post above is chock full of misinformation.
Given the many times that I have countered George since he has been here, I'll spare you the details. Do your own searches on the details.

It's actually entertaining whenever GBM speaks. I always wonder how he's going to defend brutal dictatorships, and he always manages. I would like to have seen him defend the dictatorships back around 1940.

I wish websites like this would have a way we could block certain users from being seen by us. I know a few people would block me, but I think GBM would take top spot.

I don;t defend "brutal dictatorships".

But I do object to instigating totally unnecessary wars.

All we have to do is guarantee that NATO will not threaten Russia by moving into (another of) its neighbor(s).

But, we instead favor war.   Economic war (at least for us).  But still, war.

Who is going to pay for this war of ours?   As usual, it will be us.

But, I am sorry if the truth does not support your war mongering imperialism.  Perhaps it is YOU that should be blocked?

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2022-02-21/chinas-ukraine-crisis?utm_campaign=tw_daily_soc&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter_posts

The Ukraine crisis is primarily a standoff between Russia and the West, but off to the side, another player stands awkwardly: China. Beijing has tried to walk a fine line on Ukraine. On one hand, it has taken Russia’s side, blaming NATO expansion for causing the crisis and alleging that U.S. predictions of an imminent invasion are aggravating it. On the other hand, especially as the risk of military conflict has grown, it has called for diplomacy over war. 

If Beijing had its way, it would maintain strong ties with Moscow, safeguard its trade relationship with Ukraine, keep the EU in its economic orbit, and avoid the spillover from U.S. and EU sanctions on Moscow—all while preventing relations with the United States from significantly deteriorating. Securing any one of these objectives may well be possible. Achieving all of them is not. 

If Russia invades Ukraine, Beijing could throw Moscow a lifeline: economic relief to alleviate the effect of U.S. sanctions. But doing so would damage Chinese relations with Europe, invite severe repercussions from Washington, and drive traditionally nonaligned countries such as India further into the arms of the West. If Beijing snubs Moscow, by contrast, it may weaken its closest strategic partnership at a time when, given deteriorating security in Asia, it is most in need of outside help.

China should throw Russia under the bus, because Russia is already a failed state, and it wouldn't take much for it to collapse yet again. Might as well give it a push.

We are pushing Russia and China (and a few others) together. 

We are falling back on our last bullet:  financial sanctions  -- and we not using it wisely.   Soon they will have a work-around (actually, they probably already do).

We should have settled this while we could.

Well, evidently it is being settled, as we speak, and I would love Russia and China being forced together, with the end result that the U.S., EU, NATO, and our Indo-Pacific Allies are all on the same page in containing both countries.

How cool would that be!

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/2/22/2081709/-Russia-s-economy-can-t-handle-a-war-but-Putin-can-t-handle-the-Russian-economy

It won't be "both countries".   It will be a world wide cold war.   Again.

Anybody who wants that is a fool.

The first one was created and fed by Russia trying to propagate communism around the world.

They openly admitted that.

This one will be created and fed by the U.S. trying to propagate democracy around the world.

We openly admit that.

It doesn't matter who does it:  Either way the world suffers.

Putin started this latest conflict, and the West will have to finish it.

China can step out of the way, throw Russia under the bus, or double down on its authoritarian alliance. Either way, Putin is dealing with a hell of a large body of countries that are economically much more powerful than Russia, and are now working together against Putin.

OutdoorAppDeveloper said:

Suggestion to Apple: Get ahead of this massive security problem. If anyone can side load any app they want onto their iOS device, that puts every other app at risk from data theft and other hacks. To get around this start working right now on an alternative version of iOS that users can install if they want to, much like the beta profiles you have  now. The alternative side loading open iOS has no Apple App Store. It has no access to iCloud, CloudKit or any other technology that could become compromised by apps that have not been through the app review process. Most iOS users (myself included) will opt for the secure version of iOS for their primary devices. For older, otherwise unused devices, the alternative open but unsecure iOS will be a lot of fun to play with. Think of it as another form of recycling. The open iOS does no not need to be updated as often as the main secure version because (duh) it's not secure.

brian.on.android said:

waveparticle said:

verne arase said:

Apple is much too successful - we need to stop it now! -- Microsoft

Microsoft is pretty pathetic, and Apple's privacy terms rankle Microsoft's nerves. Too bad Windows doesn't have the same privacy safeguards - with Windows attempting to force everything through Edge.

Microsoft runs their own closed ecosystem with XBox, so it's a lot of Microsoft calling the kettle black.

The real monopoly is in the enterprise software realm where Microsoft keeps boosting prices for their good enough software.

What really pisses off Microsoft is that they don't have access to Apple Silicon ARM processors, so Windows ARM will run faster on Apple hardware than on their OEMs - or indeed on their own surface machines.

Microsoft has a point here. In the 90s it was so successful it almost killed Apple. On the other hand, Steve Jobs resurrected Apple without having to stop Microsoft. 

Worth noting Microsoft invested in Apple in the 90's. Apple may owe Microsoft to a degree.

verne arase said:

Apple is much too successful - we need to stop it now! -- Microsoft

Microsoft is pretty pathetic, and Apple's privacy terms rankle Microsoft's nerves. Too bad Windows doesn't have the same privacy safeguards - with Windows attempting to force everything through Edge.

Microsoft runs their own closed ecosystem with XBox, so it's a lot of Microsoft calling the kettle black.

The real monopoly is in the enterprise software realm where Microsoft keeps boosting prices for their good enough software.

What really pisses off Microsoft is that they don't have access to Apple Silicon ARM processors, so Windows ARM will run faster on Apple hardware than on their OEMs - or indeed on their own surface machines.

imikejackson said:

So I'll go ahead and start the flame war with the cliche, as far as price goes you are *not* comparing apples-to-apples (every pun intended). The MSI has a 17" screen so let's go ahead and actually compare the price of the MSI Raider with 17" screen as seen here (https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1639843-REG/msi_ge76_raider_11ug_054_17_3_ge76_raider_gaming.html?SID=s1643237475129c3nda52417) which costs $2485 to the 16" MacBook Pro (https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/macbook-pro/16-inch) which costs $3499. Both have 32GB of RAM and 1TB NVMe.

So maybe a correction or, god forbid, a little honesty in your reporting. Here come the bullet points:
* Been using macOS since 1988.
* Also, the 14" M1 Pro Max MacBook Pro with 32GB Ram and 1TB NVMe drive is $2800. So where are you getting your price data from?
* I don't mind the Apple Fan-boy stuff. Just try to keep it honest.
* We all know that the M1 is way more power efficient. Period. No arguments from anybody, not even Intel. That isn't my complaint about this article.