froo

But the fact that they’re not talking about new products or hinting at anything down the line concerns me...

Why would they show their hand? There's little to be gained from it and it would harm their brand when these technologies don't pan out how they would want. See Google Glass - huge fanfare but no real substance.

Besides, we hear of technology that is supposedly being worked on inside Apple. Project Titan, the AR headset that is looking at a 2020 release date.

McDonalds uses a potato cannon to make fries - they can mass produce them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfZLWEAiixo

They are also dipped in dextrose for colour and Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate to reduce the graying from freezing them.

https://www.cnet.com/news/former-mythbuster-goes-on-mcdonald...

If only George Carlin were still alive. I’m sure he’d have seven words to use to respond to this...

The original point I was trying to make was that this tech was already deployed in consumer facing technology that is just waiting to be turned on.

Did you not watch the video?

I call a car that is cornering, accelerating/braking, actively dealing with traffic and finally parking itself a self driving vehicle.

Given there are auto manufacturers[1] that already exist with self driving cars, I'm going to go ahead and say its not a meme and more just a technology in the process of being fully realised.

Some times, things just take time. Especially when you're trying to create machines capable of not killing the general public.

[1] https://www.tesla.com/autopilot

That doesn't seem to be a manufacturer issue though is it?

In case of tablets, my partner is still using her iPad 2 and Netflix has a version of their app that still runs on that.

The core software on her tablet, like the core software on my older phones that were given to family members still work fine.

Its the 3rd party apps that seem to be abandoned by software developers. That's going to happen regardless of what phone manufacturer's want.

Yes.

My vision isn't great, so I upgraded from my iPhone 4 to the 5 because of the larger screen, and the 5 to the 6+ due to a larger screen.

Really, the screen size has been the main driving factor in my phone purchase decisions.

My 4 & 5 have been passed down to my mother, so they're still in use. Hell, I was still using my 1st gen iPad until just over a year ago when the screen just failed.

> Devices shouldn’t become outdated every year. They should evolve with you.

I really don't understand this sentiment.

I've still got my iPhone 6 Plus. I haven't seen the need to upgrade yet. It does absolutely everything I want.

At this rate, the only reason I'm going to upgrade is if I destroy my phone somehow (I've yet to even put a major scratch on any of my smartphones over the years) or if a vendor comes out with some feature where I'm like "yeah, I could really see myself getting use out of that"

> Technology should assist you so that you can get on with enjoying life.

It's a smartphone for crying out loud. It's a platform designed for communication. Bonus points for having a camera in my pocket and some apps which help me for various tasks.

The first actually open platform phone is the one that will have longevity.

Exactly, I feel that we're kind of getting there with all of the recent phones that have come out in the last couple of years. There's no real killer feature anyone's come out with, just nice things to have.

To be honest, I think catchall solutions work best. I'm more likely to pay for content, if I can just pay 1 or 2 places.

When I heard that Disney was leaving Netflix, I'm not inclined to sign up to Disney as well. To be honest, unless they give me a unique value proposition (like having their feature films available on site weeks after theatrical release) I'm unlikely to want to fork out extra bucks for the one studio.

If they give me something that is a better experience than the competition, I'll throw my money at them. Other than that, meh

Looking at some of the pictures supplied in the article, it looks like they're probably expecting packaging and food service consumption to go up, which you can't digitise.

I suspect it's meant to be a reference to a Futurama episode and meant to denigrate Apple somehow?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GklO9RIj0JA

I don't really understand why one should look down and search for what to press instead of simply using a keyboard shortcut via muscle memory.

From a personal perspective, I agree. I think we generally forget though, we are vastly in the minority and this technology is designed for the layman

Basically my litmus test for this stuff is "would my technologically illiterate mum use and understand this. Will it enrich her computing experience". If yes, it's not a dumb idea. We'll see how the market reacts though

Someone really needs to create a patent that defines methods of patent trolling, so every time one of these scumbags starts a lawsuit you can sue them.

In an open system, how do you ensure basic safety needs are met - eg, do drivers have licenses?

I sure as hell am not getting into a car with an unlicensed driver

Probably none. By having an open system, prices will invariably get pushed down (better for end users) which will deincentivize drivers (worse for end users)

There may be some equilibrium somewhere, but I don't believe it will be in the users best interest having to wait for cars.

Just my thoughts. I'm probably wrong.

In respect to outsourcing our health to doctors, that is for very good reasons. People are shown to be completely deficient when trying to look out for themselves in this regard.

It's not about the government getting access to a tool like this, Apple specifically doesn't want to create a tool that can easily defeat its own security, to then hand over to the FBI. The government has, on numerous occasions, shown it has some pretty horrible practises in securing information, and this kind of tool being let out into the wild is bad for For everyone (not just Apple).

Why risk opening that Pandora's box? If the tool doesn't exist, it can't be exploited by bad actors

Thank you for the article. Very informative

We've seen violent Christian fundamentalists recently with the Colorado Planned Parenthood shootings.

While many around the world consider that a terrorist activity, it had not been labeled as such by US officials (the guy is only being charged with murder and not additional offenses).

I find the double standards to be what is truly offensive.

Well I have to admit, my understanding of what constitutes terrorism was not solid, so I googled it. It seems the statements don't necessarily need to be political in nature.

The FBI defines domestic terrorism[1] as:

"Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:

- Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;

- Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and

- Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.

The first point, I imagine mass shootings qualify as acts dangerous to human life that violate law.

For the second point, I would argue that sending a manifesto[2] to media with nuggets like what follows are designed to intimidate/coerce a civilian population

"Thanks to you, I die, like Jesus Christ, to inspire generations of the Weak and Defenseless people — my Brothers, Sisters, and Chil- dren —that you fuck. Like Moses, I spread the sea and lead my people —the Weak, the Defenseless, and the Innocent Children of all ages that you fucked and will always try to fuck —to eternal freedom. Thanks to you Sinners, you Spillers of Blood, I set the example of the century for my Children to follow."

Lastly, the attack occurred on US soil.

1 - https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/terrorism/terrorism... 2 - https://schoolshooters.info/sites/default/files/cho_manifest...

A terrorist is someone who uses violence or the threat of violence to coerce or intimidate.

Not trying to nitpick, but with this definition, any police officer who has used the threat of shooting someone with their firearm or taser is using the threat of violence to coerce people.

I'm not a supporter of terrorist organisations in the slightest. I am just sick of the racial profiling that goes on which is helping to fuel their cause.

We can't call mass shootings terrorist attacks when they're perpetrated by disturbed, home-grown killers who haven't made some kind of political statement in connection with their actions.

The Virgina Tech shooter sent an 1800 word manifesto and 27 videos to NBC News during his rampage. I'd say that qualifies as making statements.

"the FBI said they are not seeking to set a precedent in the case, but to get the company to help them open a single phone that may hold crucial evidence to help explain the most deadly terrorist attack on U.S. soil since Sept. 11, 2001."

What qualifies this as being a terrorist attack? Is it because the colour of the perpetrator's skin wasn't white? Sandy Hook had double the number of resulting deaths and so is technically more deadly.

Virgina Tech was done by a South Korean born man with even more deaths than Sandy Hook.

Poor reporting WSJ

In the "Ultralight" backpacking community, I don't see something like this taking off.

I remember watching a video the other day of a guy talking about his gear for the AT and he went so far as to cut his toothbrush down and even talked about drilling holes in the remaining handle to further cut down on weight.

If one is really paranoid, register only a toe print. I've currently got my right big toe registered to my phone as an experiment and it works as often as finger scanning

Oh man, my Nokia 8910 (the one with the titanium casing) was damn near indestructible. I'd dropped it more times than I can count (once off a 2nd story in a nightclub into a dance floor where it was promptly trampled), backed over it accidentally because it fell out of my pocket as I got into the car and left it in my pocket and washed it 3 times (it stayed on the whole time). The 4th washing was the one that finally killed it.

But I guess that's not as much fun as stock-piling guns and ammo for a zombie apocalypse.

Don't forget limitless quantities of beer and jerky.

You're thinking of circumnavigating but yet you're not psychologically prepared to push back against a boarding party ? Doesn't that mean even a small skiff could overtake you ?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CYeVTzPWYAAQuTl.jpg

I suspect you're blatantly trolling, but I'm going to answer you for the sake of completeness

Pirate activity is most often limited to certain parts of the world. I have no desire (or real need) to visit the Gulf of Aden anytime soon to respond to that image you posted as that is one of the hotspots. Another hotspot is the Straight of Malacca, where it occurs against shipping and less against smaller pleasure craft.

Circumnavigations adhering to WSSRC rules typically dictate that each circumnavigation needs to be 21,600 nautical miles and crossing antipodal points. To stay within these guidelines, I can quite easily plot courses that avoid most pirate hotspots, since most of the time will be spent in the Southern Ocean.

I'm more concerned about colliding with whales, squalls and suffocation from leaky gas hoses than I am with pirates.

To me that's not paranoia

And I don't consider firearms as a broad subject paranoid. It's when talking about the use of firearms to injure other human beings alongside the best way to store flour is where I draw the line.

I'm just looking at food storage. I'm not interested in surviving apocalyptic-level events via good old wild-west justice.