s.metcalf

About

Username
s.metcalf
Joined
Visits
226
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
553
Badges
1
Posts
1,027

Reactions

252Like44Dislike49Informative

  • Apple seeks stay on allowing external links & purchases during injunction violation appeal...

    s.metcalfs.metcalf
    Don’t be evil, Apple.

    As for us users, take the effort to buy your subscriptions outside the app where possible and you’ll likely pay less.  A small bit of effort but it goes a long way when you add up the savings over time.
    pichael22july2013Oferwilliamlondonappleinsideruser9secondkox2longfangwatto_cobra

  • On-device Apple Intelligence training seems to be based on controversial technology

    s.metcalfs.metcalf
    Wesley Hilliard said:
    mattinoz said:
    Wait so every subsystem used to get CSAM working is controversial now?
    even if it is used in a dozen other places in the system that aren’t considered controversial and adds nothing specific to the controversy?
    idk if you missed it, but on-device and iCloud CSAM detection using these tools were deemed highly controversial.
    Mattinoz didn’t miss anything.  You seem to have missed his point.  The controversial aspects of Apple’s formerly planned CSAM scanning and the (in my view) legitimate backlash had nothing to do with the technology itself but how Apple had planned to implement it specifically.  It would’ve resulted in false positives being sent for review, creating significant privacy concerns.  Like the potential that personal photos or videos of your own kids doing normal things could get flagged and sent to Apple or others.  The things described here are nothing like that and are optional.

    it’s a terrible click-bait headline not supported by the article, and you seem to be defensive for being called out on it.
    muthuk_vanalingammattinozWesley_Hilliardwatto_cobra

  • Apple's canceled Federation Square store lives on in Apple Vision Pro

    s.metcalfs.metcalf
    …or access for large trucks.
    watto_cobra

  • Apple's canceled Federation Square store lives on in Apple Vision Pro

    s.metcalfs.metcalf
    For those wondering, it was disallowed not so much because of Apple’s architectural proposal, but commercialisation of a dominantly public-use space that includes galleries and the like (arguably these are commercial too but far less overtly so).  Federation Square is also a popular viewing area for sporting (they have a large screen) and other events of cultural significance (I’ve been to a spiegeltent there) and I’m not sure this proposal would allow it to be used in these ways.  It would instead become dominated by the giant shop of a large multinational corporation.  It’s just not the right place for an Apple flagship in Melbourne.

    They could’ve taken the GPO building when that was available, but I’m guessing it didn’t have enough back-area space 
    FileMakerFellerwatto_cobra

  • Apple stock bloodbath continues after China applies retaliatory tariffs

    s.metcalfs.metcalf
    Mike Wuerthele said:
    blastdoor said:

    sflocal said:
    Sounds like a great time for Apple to do a massive stock buyback.

    Mods... get rid of these political BS comments.  If I want that, I'll go to CNN or Fox News.  
    Oddly enough we haven't had to delete that much. As if millions of voices cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
    I appreciate the greater tolerance for comments being shown at this site relative to the past. Or at least it seems more tolerant to me, anyway -- maybe I'm wrong. 

    These are unprecedented times and the idea that we should all restrict ourselves to commenting on technology, even though I obviously understand this is a technology-oriented site and the site owners can clearly moderate as they see fit, just seems tone deaf to me. 
    In times of yore, there was the political forum. That was infested by bad actors and worse behavior. We then banned comments of a political nature as things sorted themselves out. Google associated that shitty behavior with the site as a whole, so it got closed down.

    The interpersonal behavior has been better over the last few years, so the conversations get to swing wider.

    We are always watching, though.
    This is a really good approach.  I’ve long said everything is political in one way or another and you can’t ban politics entirely, nor should you in my view.  Attempting to do so  exposes the site to potential bias from those doing the culling.  As long as people aren’t attacking fellow forum posters directly or repeatedly posting wildly inaccurate and blatantly false information I think politics should be allowed, and you’ll probably find it benefits the site.
    ilarynxbaconstangFileMakerFellerwatto_cobra