patgarner

That's what they're saying, but the timing...

I genuinely don't understand what the value is of actually applying the Turing Test as an evaluation of machine learning systems.

This is the worst argument in my opinion. People can record you in private spaces using cell phones and watches without you ever knowing. Not to mention security cameras.

Why do you take this article so personally? I feel like your comment is way overblown. My personal impression is that this person felt affected by what happened and that this blog post is one way of expressing that. I think it's natural when someone dies this way for someone who feels that loss to question why it happened. I certainly felt that way about Aaron Swartz and I didn't know him at all. That's all I see here and I have a hard time understanding why you are so offended.

It looks way more like an iPhone than what I have generally associated with the name Blackberry where half the device is a landscape screen and half of it a keyboard. I also think it's fair to say that the iPhone popularized the look of having the general shape and design of an LCD panel. While the comparison is certainly not black and white, I don't think it's fair to snarkily claim OP is pretending. I do think it's fair to say the new device has a similar overall shape and design as the iPhone. Watching the video review on the Verge I was also struck that they had chosen to go in a visual direction similar to iOS and Android rather than strike off in a new direction like Microsoft.

The impression I got at some point was that the reason for the absence of nudity or porn in apps sold on the iOS app store was not to nanny what users do with the device, but rather that Apple/Steve Jobs did not want to be the purveyors of nudity or porn in the same sense that if I owned a news stand I wouldn't want to sell magazines that promoted racism. I can see where the strictness of the current app store in that regard might be in line with the uplifting side of spirituality. Having said that, I'll add that I think there are things about the app store that don't fit with that quest for spiritual enlightenment.

If you do, you are likely to be waiting until June or July.

Completely intentional.

Then why do all the hardware buttons (sleep, mute, volume, home) exactly match the layout of the buttons on the iPad? It looks exactly like a stretched out iPad with a mocked up screen shot.

"Mac users were always defending the boutique, specialist, quality over quantity arguments on the desktop and then suddenly it was all a numbers game for a while there.".

The truth is, that the kind of people who say things like that are the kind of people who look for opportunities to argue about that kind of stuff and your statement reads like you have a clear bias. That's not a very objective perspective to my mind.

-sent from my iPad

My apologies, I wasn't clear. I was speaking specifically about the company itself.

For one, Apple Computers.

From information found around the web it sounds like you are stretching the truth a little bit.

According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic_Pro), Emagic and Logic weren't around until the 90's, even though Logic was based on ideas from previous software. It's stated there that Emagic and Logic, as software named "Logic" didn't exist until '93. Then Emagic was acquired by Apple in 2002 at which point the Windows version was discontinued. The information there, if factual, would mean that Logic was only being developed by Emagic for about 10 years before they were acquired by Apple.

Information here implies (http://www.tweakheadz.com/history_of_notator_and_logic3.html) that the Mac version came in '93 followed by the PC/Windows version in '95 or '96 which would mean that Logic wasn't being used on PC/Windows for more than 6 or 7 years or so before the Windows version was discontinued by Apple. Logic and all the previous software whose ideas it was based on were also originally on Atari.

Both this list, particularly #1, and his email response to the guy who resigned reek of resentment to me. Jason Calacanis doesn't present himself as someone who is truly comfortable and happy, in my opinion, which seems ironic given the level of success he appears to have achieved.

The great people I have worked for, one of whom I still work for, would never react that way. I admire those people, but I could never admire someone who acts like Jason Calacanis and I go out of my way never to work for people like him.

At it's most cut and dried a job is an agreement between you and someone: you give them your work, they give you money. They don't own you and beyond your obligation to fullfil your side of the work/money bargain you don't owe them anything in my opinion.

That being said, however, I do think it's important to do work that fullfils and inspires you and benefits you in more ways than just getting money for work you do.

I won't condemn him, but I won't vindicate him either. At this point there is no proof either way, but the circumstances as presented so far do seem fishy to me.

Scheme

I would agree with you if the platform we were talking about was something like the web, but it's not. It's a proprietary platform owned by Apple. It's not the 'progress of a platform,' it's the 'progress of their platform.' The progress of a platform created and owned by Apple. I may wish that I could develop and release applications for the iPhone using some other methods or languages, but I do believe that it is Apple's prerogative to control their platform.

Fortunately, it's just their platform and there are a myriad of other platforms out there not controlled by Apple that do allow me to develop for them however I see fit. I don't believe that developers are 'degraded to do what Apple pleases.' Even with the new SDK restrictions, there is still an infinite number of ways to express yourself developing applications for the iPhone.

I also think that as much as restriction may stifle innovation in some ways, placing limits on how something is done can also force you to be more creative and innovative in other ways.

We should just take your word for it?

You're being overly dramatic. This has nothing to do with the normal use of layers of abstraction in your in architecture.

That's a nice pipe dream, but nope.

How do you know that?