macgui

To me a stammer was never a condition but a nervous reaction to shock or fear manifested as staccato-like speech or utterances, and not at all the same meaning as stutter. I know that a lot of people use the two words interchangeably.

Not being a speech pathologist or lexicographer I have no idea if there is or isn't a difference in their medical definition. I still see and use them as different words with different meanings.

Growing up I had a friend who had a bad stutter and was bullied mercilessly K-6. I got in a lot of fights over it and parents of the losers (multiple levels) their little angels were boys being boys and that my friend just needed to toughen up. We both did and a lot of people regretted it. Eventually things smoothed out. At some point he learned that if he sang, the stutter would abate. So he picked up a six-string... Oh wait that wasn't him. But he did join a small local band and had some improvement when not singing. He was a great guy.

I don't know how entrenched is the concept of a stammer being a chronic speech impediment. If it is deeply so, maybe Apple should at least cull the words that bring up woozy face. But remove it, no.

A lot of people want anything that offends them removed, sanctioned, whatever. I once worked with someone named Karen who was ahead of the curve, being the stereotypical 'Karen' before there was such a thing.

Otherwise, anything that promotes kindness and decency is OK in my book. It seems to be in very short and diminishing supply on this side of the pond.

larryjw said:

These game agreements smack of contracts of adhesion. Further, there is also the fact that minors do not have the legal authority to enter into contracts. Finally, no one is allowed to enter into a contract when they have knowledge, or should have knowledge that the other party is not mentally/legally competent to enter into a contract. This applies to minors as well as adults who are mentally incapacitated -- permanent, temporary or due to age.

Then, there is the concept of attractive nuisance. Is there is anything more of an attractive nuisance than computer games for 6 year olds?

Please show one legal precedent of a parent not being culpable for a debt incurred by their child running up a bill because of IAPs. The child didn't enter in a contract, the parent did.

The parent, who is responsible for rearing the child, for teach the child, and lastly for monitoring the child.

It was OK to let her child play these games. She apparently was ok with his "cocaine" addiction, until it cost her money. It seems that she just handed the child the iPad with parental controls disabled and didn't check out the content her child chose. She was totally clueless?

This isn't a matter of a harried, busy parent turning her back for a second and the kid darts out the door into traffic. This is ongoing behavior over a period of months. It's the parents duty to do due diligence because the child can't.

We have responsibilities. Some of accept that we have to step up when we make mistakes and some of us what someone else to pay the price.

That I believe the parent bears the brunt of responsibility and certainly is culpable, doesn't mean I or others are without empathy. But forgiving her of her responsibilities is not a requirement for having empathy (though clearly some here do not). 

Several years ago, a lot of people riled when some other child racked up a tonne of debt from playing games. And the parents and others cried "Apple! How could you!" Bare deflection of responsibilities. So Apple implemented Parental Controls. They gave parents a "set and forget" answer, now they could go about their day while the child went about theirs.

Years later, in spite of being given tools to absolutely prevent this from happening, a parent manages to let this happen. "I didn't know". It's not nearly as involved as reading an EULA. But it's still our responsibility. She could have prevented this, and she should have prevented this.

I hope Apple doesn't pay. They get enough nuisance suits as it is. If she has a legitimate, legal grip with anybody it might be with Chase. But in a litigious society anybody can sue anybody. 

MacPro said:

I am sure these are aimed at professional studios

Not at all. There's a huge difference between headphones designed tto be used for sound mixing music. Headphones like the ATH-50X are popular in professional studios because they can reveal small flaws in music. And because of their narrow focus, they're cheap.

You don't need ANC in a music studio and it wouldn't give the most accurate rendition of music being mixed. You don't need spatial awareness in 99% of music studios. Maybe in a movie studio doing some kind of AR thing... But not in a studio.  And studio monitors, be they speakers or headphones, make a poor choice for actually enjoying music and not engineering it.

Apple is aiming these at people who really like listening to music and and can appreciate superior sound. The ANC is for less 'critical' listening probably when walking around the mean streets. 

The digital crown is terrific. I think the location on the top is the best for a more natural hand movement/positioning to control its function(s). A better position might be on the back edge of a cup but that might be bumped by head movement. Let actual reviews begin.

I wish somebody would test the HP and the HPm for use with video. Audio not nearly perfectly synced bugs the hell outta me.

gatorguy said:

I'm honestly surprised it's taken so long to gain traction. 

I'm not, as this is the very first I've heard of it, unless it was mentioned at the HPmini's event and I missed it. Not being deeply involved in Home automation (limited to light use of Siri, Alexa, and Philips) may be why Thread is news to me.

gatorguy said:

Home automation should be much more straightforward than it has been and Thread will be a major part of making it so.

I really hope so. My X-10 system was very straight forward to understand, integrate, and operate. It was also very limited, and had some flaws. But it was better than nothing and arguably helped pave the way for current products.

SpamSandwich said:

Still unconvinced there is any value whatsoever in home automation.

And it many never any value whatsoever, to you. Your takeaway should be that you are not that important beyond being the center of your own world and what you value and opine is almost universally of no concern to anyone outside your world. It's not up to me or anyone else to convince you of HA's value.

But I will offer that as a result of a military injury reducing some mobility and making the active portion of my day much, much shorter than I'd like, HA has been a near Godsend for me. Prior to my injuries, I would have been very interested in HA purely for the convenience and cool factor, as seen in the old Sci-Fi B movies and later.

Now convenience is something of a necessity and has made my life far easier, has taken the day-to-day from questionably tolerable to actually enjoyable, and has extended the active portion of my day after PT. I'm ambulatory and do not require a wheelchair, though there were times it seemed I would. I'm very lucky but HA has been a big part of that.

There are a lot of people derive far more benefit than I from the "convenience" of HA  You obviously take for granted something as simple as flipping a switch to turn off a light bulb, or getting up in the dark to switch on a light. Do you remember the times when turning the TV on or off or changing the channel meant getting up and walking over to it to turn a knob? Did you not ever use a remote? That's HA even if you don't know it, on small scale. Modern TVs practically can't function without one, but that's not the same thing. If you have no use for HA, fine, it's not for you. Spare us your arrogance and lack of imagination.