This exploit doesn't just allow emulators to be installed, it affects a wide range of apps. Sure, emulators are impacted, but it is also a potential vector for end-running around security on the phone. That is a huge concern, that as far as I'm concerned, Apple is fully justified in dealing with. If someone managed to use this to generate a malware infection spreading throughout the iOS ecosystem, and it was known that Apple hadn't addressed it, they would be raked across the coals. Jailbreaking is still an option and it both accommodates those who want unapproved apps installed, and keeps Apple away from being liable for the activity of apps that aren't approved.
C'mon, this admin has far and away already been the best for the RIAA/MPAA/ASCAP, etc already. Look at what they did with the USTR and the DOJ on behalf of those industries. Frankly, this is small sauce compared to the loads of other IP bullshit they've engaged in.
Being liked and appreciate around the world, is not really a realistic or achievable goal. Treating people ethically, especially our friends and enemies, is. I'd prefer we focus on that instead of hoping that every tinpot dictator and nationalist over the world ever gives a damn about my country.
Actual facts (heh, well) out there in the public domain available for analysis and debate, OR random assumptions and wild ass guesses about what the CIA did or did not do?
Personally, I'm all about get the truth (my definition probably doesn't match the CIA's, but whatever) out there.
Horror movie writers, producers and directors have known for a long time that nothing they can put on screen truly exceeds what the right combination of noise effects, shadows, and other subtle indications can cause to spring up in the imaginations of their audience. Same fucking principle here. Get the actual facts (again, well) out there and let there be a proper debate on it. People everywhere are already pissed off.
Might as well let them be pissed off at things known to be true instead of the worst things they can imagine (well, we'll see). The longer this obfuscation and delay goes on, the longer it takes for us as a people to move on from it (and hopefully learn to reign the CIA's ass in a bit).
Western medicine has cured polio, immunized against a wide-range of diseases and yet in places like Africa (and California, and India, and the U.K., etc) rabid religious nuts and power-mad idiots routinely convince the uneducated and others to not use it (evil western plots to sterilize people for example).
Considering the primary method of transmitting Ebola is through exchange of bodily fluids, I think education is the key to combatting and containing it, not necessarily a cure. Regardless of what ever is discussed here, resources for research and development, regardless of how it's funded, are limited. If there's an alternative to spending, quite literally, billions of dollars to curing something, such as education and hygiene, that's probably where the initial focus should be. Private pharmaceutical companies have issues no doubt, but I don't see vast streams of funding flooding into development of cure in the Public or Charitable sectors either.
As a suggestion, if you really want to get under a politician's skin: If they're a liberal democrat, question their devotion to freedom and liberty If they're a conservative republican, question their support of the economy and jobs
Those categories are broad enough to be able to apply just about anything to them.
I probably wouldn't have been so passionate about sending my Rep a response if he had voted in favor of this. Maybe a thank you or something. However mine was in the group that voted against this. Just sent him a polite nasty-gram. I would encourage anyone else in the same boat as I'm in to do the same.
I sympathize with your having been victimized. However, the thought of erasing a human's existence as a deterrent to others' fairly repugnant. I believe in the death penalty. There simply are some people in this world who's crimes are so appalling they should be ended. That should be the only reason the death penalty is invoked. To expect it to act as a deterrent is naive, at best.
To imply (or outright state as you have) that crimes less than the most unspeakable should be subject to the death penalty, speaks to a lack of using rational faculties, and relying on emotion. Emotion, being so subjective, absolutely cannot be a basis for a system of justice, let alone a foundation for setting punishments for criminal acts.
Add to this the inherent nature of man to err, and you increase the chances of innocents being murdered by the state. If you have a profile on techdirt, then I expect you have been reading it for at least some time. How many articles have you read here, where police officers were caught flat out lying to cover their own asses, resulting in seriously damaging the lives, property, and welfare of their fellow citizens? I've seen literally dozens over the last few years here, and elsewhere.
Capital punishment has it's place, but in a world, a nation, of corrupt judges, police, and prosecutors, I don't know that it can be adequately applied much longer. Giving the state the authority to end the lives of it's citizens is a grave and solemn abdication of power to the state. If we can't trust that it will exercise it with honor and truth, I don't know how much longer we can permit it.
The "vaccinations are western plots" nutjob theories have a long and inglorious history around the world actually. This is nothing new. I agree that while the CIA may have been stupid enough to slightly confirm the paranoia, that paranoia has been around a long long long time. Hell, vaccines, condoms, AIDS medication, it's all western plot to subvert and control pretty every nation not American/European for a large portion of the world.
This is a complete misapplication of logic. If you want to reduce the impact that money can have in politics, politicians need to have less POWER (and this goes across the board, legislative, executive, ESPECIALLY regulatory). The less they can do, the less they are worth.
I remember all of this hoopla about Dungeons and Dragons, and got to experience some of it myself.
Many, many years ago, I learned to play Dungeons and Dragons while hanging out with a new kid that moved into the neighborhood. My mother went damn-near apoplectic when she found out. I was forced to watch this ridiculous movie called Mazes and Monsters (kid goes batshit nuts winds up in psych ward). I was also excoriated for playing an "evil and satanic game". My dad called the sourcebooks "smut", and had understanding of it beyond the book titles and some bad headlines in the news.
This was an interesting experience in the end, as it was actually my parents who came around to my point of view after YEARS of arguments. See, as a kid, I was stubborn as hell, and I was going to do it anyway. The longer I played without turning into a schizoid freak (regardless of their rules), the more they came around to understanding that they massively over-reacted. Nowadays, each time there's a new moral panic around, they are extremely skeptical about it and generally ignore it.
“The headline should not read that the City Council capped anything,” Harrell said. “It should read that it allowed the ride-shares to come into the industry.”
The blatant ridiculous condescending entitled arrogance of that statement cannot be over-emphasized. This is an elected representative of the city flat-out stating that it is the prerogative of the city council to pick and choose what businesses are allowed to operate. He's not speaking of industry (e.g. fast food, big box store, etc), he's specifically referring to competition within an already legitimate, legally operating industry (paid rides, i.e. cabs). THAT is what should piss people off the most about this.
Fucking morons. These assholes need to just stop. These arrogant crack-smoking elected douchebags need to stop. The level of egotism and arrogance it takes to proudly stand as a member of congressional committee and tell a company that essentially INVENTED modern search technology, how it should work, when a) Your claim to any authority is winning a popularity contest in a nation that watches shit like Here Comes Honey Boo Boo (BIIIG success there) and b) You level of familiarity, let ALONE expertise, in technology ends at Windows 95, is FREAKING AMAZING.
What a class of techno-illiterate fuckwads we have trying to regulate something. These assholes for the most part can't regulate their own sex-drives or drug habits. Probably not a one of these grand-standing luddites has ever done a search by themselves for anything on Google. They need to shut the fuck up, RIGHT NOW.
Re: Re: Blame the advertisers and the hackers, not users
I am in complete agreement here. The trust of those who use tools like NoScript, FlashBlock, AdBlock, etc has very likely been violated at least once, or the trust of someone they know. My going to your site indicates that I am trusting that the stuff you're instructing my browser to download is safe and what I've requested. The blatantly obnoxious shockwave ads with audio are the ABSOLUTE WORST.
The malware bit is particularly critical. Flash-based advertisements are routinely used as vectors of malware delivery. We have no control over which ad network a particular site decides to use to feed us their ads. Therefore the only method of protecting ourselves is block damn near everything.
Not only that, but I'm tracked 90 ways from sunday already, I'd really prefer to minimize the crap built up about me in advertiser's systems. The places online where I ACTUALLY buy stuff, I'm good with them recommending things based on what I've actually purchased in the past.
Add to all that, the sheer absolute wastefulness of bandwidth so much of this crap entails. If some of these ISPs pushing for bandwidth caps get their way, you can say adios to a shitload more advertising revenue, because a lot more people will want to block downloading crap they don't want, in favor of crap they do want.
I will concede one point, there is potential for service based sharing and whatnot on some level. However, expecting a large customer base to accept this large of a paradigm shift all at once is sheer stupidity. Not only that, but to let a rumor mill sit and spin the horror story for months with no walk-back or explanation was truly an idiotic thing to do.
If they had been straight about it from the get go, then maybe they could have garnered some acceptance. If they had tried to dip a toe in the water (perhaps starting with only the digital download games and the "sharing plan" for that), instead of diving headfirst into an icy lake of customer backlash, they might have seen some acceptance.
What pisses me off the most though, is there sheer, unadulterated ASSHOLENESS of the entire discussion of it. Absolutely no thought was given to conceding to the gaming community at large their concerns (the "Deal with it" tweet anyone?), it was presented as hey, we're going to do this, even though for the last 9 months everyone has been talking about how they don't want it, but we're doing it anyway and you're going to like it, we promise.
This shows a complete and total ineptitude and straight out disconnect from their customers. When you get your head shoved so far up your own ass you can't see this issue coming like a freight train, it's time to fire not only your PR department, you need to take a serious look at the fucking asshole that came up with idea, and the 10 or 12 morons that sat there and agreed with him that it was a great idea, and bash him over the head and leave him in a ditch.
There will be limited capability to play PS3 games via Gaikai streaming service. There's almost no detail about it yet apparently, but it was discussed. Whether it will be available for PS1 or PS2 games, and how many games will available at all is still very much in question.
But no true backwards compatibility no, moving from the Cell processor to an Intel processor makes that difficult if not impossible purely based on the architecture difference.
In the WP article, at the very end, you'll find these statements:
Thomas said officials need to strike a balance between the needs of law enforcement and those of the technology companies.
“You want to give law enforcement the ability to have the data they’re legally entitled to get, at the same time not burdening industry and not opening up security holes,” he said.
I bolded the part that I shouldn't be sickened by, but am. I want to yell at this fucker and tell him he's leaving out a really big critically important part of the balancing, and that's the GODDAMNED PRIVACY OF CITIZENS. It's really disgusting that this gets so fucking lost.
I want some damned statistics that show how many crimes they solve prevent SOLELY because of all this data that they gather. The assumption that I currently run with is pretty close to fucking zero (except where they exploit people and push them into crimes they would never commit on their own). It sure seems like most crimes nowadays are still solved the old-fashioned way. WORKING IT.