jdw

What does the TITLE of this article even mean?  Makes zero sense.  To some people, the mere act of wearing such googles outside is considered bad manners.  So how can one "mind one's manners" and please everyone?  ANSWER: You can't unless you only wear it indoors.

Yet another "app store" for gold-digging lawyers, governments and developers to go after to demand a larger slice of whatever pie Apple decides to present to them?

Who is behind this lawsuit?  The average app user?  Developers?  And minority of people who really don't care about apps at all but who only want money?

Apps are not expensive and most people really aren't complaining that "app prices from Apple are so high!"  All I hear about are developers who want more profits and governments who capitulate to their demands, trying to attack Apple only because Apple is a successful company.  Basically, if you are successful, you ultimately will be charged for having experienced too much success.

Article TITLE: "Extended use of Apple Vision Pro could have adverse effects on cognition"
(Which is why I clicked it.)

Article CONTENT: "However, the research and results appear to be primarily derived from using Meta Quest 3 headsets and other products — not Apple Vision Pro."
And this: "The research points out that wearers of the Meta Quest 3 ran into issues... these problems may be less pronounced for Apple's product."

What the heck?

More Objective TITLE: "Does Apple Vision Pro beat competing headsets when it comes to adverse effects on cognition?"

Pema said:

All you ever read about the Applecar is it's coming. Then senior staff leaving to work at other companies. 

So far, yours is the best comment of the bunch.  Spot on.  It's all talk with ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to show for it.  And on top of that, most people are totally and utterly delusional about 100% autonomous vehicles, which I personally don't think will be a thing until long after I'm gone.  The tech simply isn't there, despite all the news stories talking about advances.  Even Tesla doesn't have a fully autonomous (no need for human intervention) type of a vehicle, which is a car that would need to drive in pretty much any condition (snow, high reflections, fog, etc.)  Sorry, but neither the so-called "Apple Car" or 100% Autonomous vehicles are coming our way anytime soon.  That remains true even if these rumors sites can show hard evidence of patents and other "research" taking place.  That research will be taking place for a very, very long time.  It's not like a 100% autonomous car can be your typical version 1.0 product that has major flaws that will be addressed in upgraded editions.  No.  Major flaws can be life and death wihen it comes to a car.  And then you have things like liability.  No consumer in their right mind would agree to accept liability for their car making a mistake, and I doubt car makers would want to accept it either.  

All said, I don't believe the Apple Car or a fully autonomous vehicle will hit the streets even within the next 25 years.  It's much further into our future.