zoltaan

also no traditional USB and no MagSafe. My next laptop will be a non-Apple one. (luckily my McBook Air serves me well, recently extended its lifespan with new battery)

Best way of disabling Google Chrome sign in and sync: Uninstall Chrome.

Do you want to suppress my perception? The tone of the answer was in tune of the reply, if one was thorny, the other too. You may choose to see that the other user was intentionally ignoring common knowledge to pick condescending tone, but you chose not to. You should not be arbitrarily partial. Thanks!

In case you really do not understand please google 'disable ios update notifications' (note the hit count), or alike. (you must have limited experience in iOS despite of your long time exposure)

Damn! There comes the bullying of upgrading. :( I am sure they want the best for us when they shove it down our throat.

"don't be evil"

(unless it's profitable)

Agreed about the 4s. I expected having the same form factors with less borders for a bigger screen. There was quite a potential in that (edge to edge screen might been exciting the coolness chasers as well). Shame did not happen.

Technology does not destroys people.

People destroy people!

Technology just sits there doing nothing without someone starts using it.

"I don't want corners cut when lives are on the line"

...still not sure if you are talking about the (heavily) cost optimising conglomerates or not....if we agree to constrain the topic to finances leaving out innovative ideas, ethics, integrity, trustworthiness, etc. where conglomerates may be loose with standards.

Also do you know how Apple and Google started? (I hoped the suggestion will get through without stating the obvious, but it did not)

I don't get it. Do you suggest that Google or big players make things better than anyone else? Or other way around, small startups cannot make good products? I believe if it was so then only companies starting with 1000+ people could do anything useful, small startups were doomed to fail, also big player could never do wrong. Sounds a bit simplistic and contrary to countless examples from life.

Sounds like a 'we sell more shoes than airplanes so we don't need airplanes no more' kind of argument.

"Nobody even really sells desktop PCs anymore except custom gaming rigs and low-power kiosk boxes." I believe you should embrace the novelty concept called 'work' sometime. Then you may see some 'niche' application of PCs. Mobile devices can, yes, be sold in bigger numbers, may produce higher profit, many trivial applications like browsing for news and sharing our newest and greatest experiences by tweets and photos do not require, luckily, a desktop anymore and so these paramount usages could been shifted to the only important platform of mobile devices, yet the second grade activities of design, manufacturing, academia and so still rely on the archaic concept of desktop computers and they keep alive this dying artefact. Even traitor mobile developers (all of them, the fools!) dare to use desktop computers still instead of solely relying on mobile phones. But not long, soon the last aircraft engineer or corporate accountant will sell their desks and throw away the last of the keyboards moving to the only necessary platform of mobiles so the PC can go extinct finally!

"the doctors bigger concern may be insurance fraud" Less serious but immediate is the bad publicity of the fact that they aggressively sue unsatisfied patients. I may think twice going to such a person instead of other alternatives.

Right. Even so, don't you see problem in that too? Pretending doing one but in fact doing other?

Just imagine using that for a non noble cause....

This is not waht's in the title of the article! The title says the account is threatened to be closed on the grounds of circumventing censorship! Big fat lie!

The account suspension threat is based on using something that is not permitted! Knowingly not permitted, illegitimate use!

I can imagine why someone cares if someone else pretend being that someone....

Based on the story Amazon has no problem with you circumventing censorship, it is not the subject of the topic at all, do not lie please because you only hurt your own reputation and trustfulness - which in a highly sensitive area that you are working in is paramount!

I am a very satisfied owner of the PM3 myself, I was glad finding it a year ago after a long search. Now what? Should I resume search when my headphone wears out or unfortunately get broken or lost? I was relaxed that I always can buy a new one or even an improved one after that happens. Maybe I should buy a reserve now!

What a _o_se_se!

Except that my 3 level system failed ages ago. Originally I had one, then with more sites coming - several with bogus or recless implementation - it was extended to the aforementioned 3 tier one just to get f*cked up by 'knowing it better' god complex but stupid enforcers requesting or forbidding (!! how stupid is that!) characters. Not to mention leaks forcing me to introduce new ones, having eventually 5 layers with variations on each level because of the highly arbitrary rules of enforcers blocking my well thought of secure passwords.

All led to the situation that I have an encoded file on my computer with passwords (most just referrals/reminders/instructions not the actual password characters).

How stupid is that! Writing down passwords!

Even into secured files, still, increased level of risk. A method with doubtful protection when someone is targeted for his/her secrets personally. Stupid but that is reality. Made necessary by recless developers.

The whole password infrastructure is dead as means of protection. It does not work against serious attackers, only agains random wanderers. And more and more against rightful users!

And the most was done to ruin it by those enforced the users to solve the problem on the user side that in fact lying in the system side.

Passwords will not fullfill their task if: - allowing parties without permission to enter - locking out righful parties Very strict enforcers corrupt the system through the second point. Narrowmindedly focusing on not letting in unwanted elements cause the whole system to case working as intended, locking out and disallowing users to use it, defying the very purpose of existence.

Encouraging users not to use passwords that ever used by someone is just an extremely very radical level of enforcing and again trying to make users fix the inadequacy of the system developers.....

This is not solving systematic problems just conserving a bad habit plus making a bad situation even worse.

Instead giving access to EVERYTHING seems a little overdrive then....

The descriptions are so vague, the high ranking beneficiaries of the system are stating so little so long over and over (sounds like using the same bullshit generator with the same parameters) that there must be very very little and uncertain benefits for the users. If they, the insiders of the system, are unable to explain it in plain and simple facts then it must have very little about clients. What I hear? More parties could access (including manipulation!?) your account. More potential source of errors and problems - and possibly malicious actions. If something goes wrong it will be more complex to figure out where the problem was. Tracking who can do what is an added complexity to managing bank matters. All above means lower security. There is a potential that if more work on the same money they will charge more - assuming not doing it for charity but for fee. There must be hell of a heck benefits, increased efficiency to balance that, eventually leaving more at the clients on the disadvantage of he money industry.... doesn't seem a realistic scenario from a money industry initiative. I see better ways to improve banking, especially UK banking - compared to Scandinavia it is in the stone age -, but not through opening up banking secrets to a lot of parties. To me it goes in the other direction. Let me be wrong eventually.

This bloke is fatally and arrogantly wrong! Spotify's product is not the music, it is the product of the musicians! As a musician he should know this fundamental fact very well like alphabet - especially when thinking about his copyright. When I buy a Sony Walkman from Amazon that is not the product of Amazon - if we want to stick to the stupid analogy stream started by the author at Starbucks. The Spotify's product is the delivery system and that's it! Which is very important! I listen to music for many decades now, I love music and to date Spotify is the best form to carry it out and unleash the experience. Much less bound by physical medium and the unavoidable maintenance cost and effort. It is allowing us to use existing generic infrastructure (computer or other gadgets, internet) and access virtually infinite amount of products. The same is not true for vinyl, CD, not even right managed files which all need to be bought, stored and delivered to the right special gadgets. From a fragmented set of stores in various ways. Need to go and buy manually again, and again - I bought so many music repeatedly just because the media got outdated or lost that it is unfair towards me, the listener. The Spotify form of delivery is something important for listeners, the end clients of the musicians, musicians should be much more respectful what is good for their audience. Without proper delivery methods their music was lost in the space!

If he is dissatisfied I urge the author to do better! For all of us!

"Given what's at stake for his company"

Reputation. Towards wealthy and relatively wealthy, ideology sensitive western customers who can afford the luxury of climate awareness (manifested in prominently declared environmental friendly approaches from Apple), demanding freedom ... and the premium level of Apple products! Towards those who made Apple successfull and give the bulk of the income - yet. All this in a period when Apple's reputation is corroded somewhat anyway.

A further example is the case of the earlier mentioned KöMaL. It faced closure this year after the government reformed the funding of journals targeting exceptional students. In the new system it was destined to receive only 1/3 of its operational budget from the government: only 16K EUR instead the necessary 48K EUR / year. Possibly it was an oversight. After public outcry and some donation from common people to keep the journal running eventually the agency in charge promised to provide dedicated funds for the 124 year old journal. Probably this case is more indicative of the Hungarian Approach today than the one in the article. The KöMaL helped countless talents throughout the modern history of Hungary (excluding wartime but including the communist block years) to learn and master mathematics. It is the benchmark of the best high school students. Yet it almost got sacked just over ca. 32k EUR / year (while money flows almost freely in certain non-educational directions). This is more indicative of the Newest Hungarian Approach where continuous structural reforms, forced and urged changes in teaching methods (many times just months before exams), increased bureaucracy and cutting down of even elementary independency and financial self control - with retorsion in sight for "renegades" - of the teachers makes the moral very low in the education system and the outcome unreliable, unsustainable.

Interesting list since they received quite heterogeneous and many times mixed education, home vs. institution, Hungarian vs. foreign, also their adult achievements were many times reached/mastered in other than the educating country. As long as the measure is the production of little children inside one of the historic borders of Hungary (or maybe elsewhere by at least one Hungarian-born parent) who later contributed to mathematics notably, this or that way, here and there, then Hungary is really good at math!

Exactly! My best ideas come through exposure to broad topics of interests, synthesizing knowledge. Implementing approach from a different domain, seeing events in a movie that trigger an idea, reading about the ways living organisms optimise resources, etc. Not to mention social events on any subject when talking to professionals from other domains triggers solution to a long lasting problem. I also recall research on the positive overall benefits of turning our brain off/away/down for a while. ... Yet I also admit the need for highly specialized work-force too, some stages or activities require narrowly trained carthorsers where a creative mind would be just damaging a realization process. All depends on the situation.

Possibly the author is better off this position.

I have the feeling that the point was the simplistic and damagingly narrow screening process here not the criticism of screening as practice, quite the opposite. The side project request became so mechanistic that everyone can expect it but the reliability is questionable as the authenticity of the product is beyond validation. When people face something expected in a competitive situation then the really competitve - and unethical ones - will go to great lengths for raising their profile even through manufacturing reliable looking evidence (doing it continously, possibly plagiarizing), posing as excellent through acting. No good and easy - and cheap - screening process is available as the reliability of workforce is multidimensional beyond the human capacities to comprehend, also beyond the technical level. Over the years I had bright but unfit colleagues (damaging the team effort, jobhoppers, unsteady performance, cheaters) as well as average ones with grey personality carried the company on their backs. The real test of the bread is eating. They have to show in the particular environment if they are capable in that very specific situation or not. Side projects will tell nothing on this. Using it as a turning point is very ... to be polite, unwise. Still not questioning the need for first filters so the chance of wasted efforts is minimised by not nurturing someone inadequate into the precious environment for months in vain. But that first filter must be way broader than the topic of side projects.

The Apple's way of implementing authentication into the various services caused me a lot of frustration. All this constant password reassurances combined with the necessity of complex passwords that is difficult to type in on an iOS device and the previously very persistent enforcement of constant user agreement updates made me use the least possible services. It was far from a pleasant user experience. I might have missed several things, interestingly looking non-essential programs or cool iCloud features that I gave up to avoid these annoyances, but that is it now. I will never know. It is still enough to 'click' those remaining stupid messages away that block you from using the device, like click away warning about the accuracy of local positioning when I want to make a photo on a situation that goes away in 3 seconds (so eventually no point of warning me about metadata of a photo not happening), it is absolutely wrong obstructing the user more, repeatedly, in using its device. I guess I accepted not to use the iPhone that much as its potentials would allow. I don't trust it (firstly just about its usability, now about its security as well).

On the web? No, not much. :)