Lord Blackadder
Jul 28, 12:54 PM
Series-Hybrids have no need for transmissions at all, the wheels are driven by electric motors only.
This is a new type, therefore high price until economies of scale kick in.
True on the economies of scale bit - although the batteries are always going to be pricey.
I keep hammering the same point here, but the Volt would see a quite significant fuel economy boost by switching to a diesel engine to charge the batteries and run the motors. Sort it out, US car companies...it's not like we don't sell diesel here.
This is a new type, therefore high price until economies of scale kick in.
True on the economies of scale bit - although the batteries are always going to be pricey.
I keep hammering the same point here, but the Volt would see a quite significant fuel economy boost by switching to a diesel engine to charge the batteries and run the motors. Sort it out, US car companies...it's not like we don't sell diesel here.
lmalave
Oct 3, 02:43 PM
I�m guessing we�ll see iTV coupled with iPod Hi-Fi wireless + iPod Hi-Fi mini satellites.
Hmm...interesting. Adding wireless capability directly to the iPod would make it more similar to the Zune. I wonder if they could add Bonjour technology to really go head-to-head. Except instead of the stupid (play 3 times) thing that the Zune has, you could actually browse and play shared playlists from other people's iPods (work exactly the same as shared playlists from iTunes now do...).
Hmm...interesting. Adding wireless capability directly to the iPod would make it more similar to the Zune. I wonder if they could add Bonjour technology to really go head-to-head. Except instead of the stupid (play 3 times) thing that the Zune has, you could actually browse and play shared playlists from other people's iPods (work exactly the same as shared playlists from iTunes now do...).
techfreak85
Apr 21, 10:48 PM
Personally, I like how Personality Cafe (http://personalitycafe.com/forum/) does it. But that is a psychology forum, not a tech forum. I'm not sure if it fits for a tech forum.
MattQiu
Jan 9, 04:41 PM
apple has posted the keynote, but the link doesn't work
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/guide/appleevents/
edit: it's working now
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/guide/appleevents/
edit: it's working now
more...
snberk103
Apr 15, 08:03 PM
Well actually we know the TSA methods don't work because both of the incidents were from European airports that mirror what the TSA does. Added to the number of weapons that make it through TSA checkpoints, it's easy to see that the TSA does in fact not work to the extent that it is expected to.
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
Happy Face
more...
funny happy face pictures.
funny story or about
more...
Get this smiley face taggable
happy face clipart.
more...
face Super funny smiley
Evil Happy Face Vinyl Sticker
more...
It#39;s Why People Are Happy
funny happy face pictures.
more...
Description : happy Christmas
Nice Smiley Face
more...
Funny Jokes middot; smiley-face
funny happy face pictures.
All we know is that increased security screening is not perfect. Perhaps you can extrapolate the European experience (in this case) to the TSA... but that's as far as you can go.
I understood your rather simplistic attempt at game theory just fine. The problem remains that one side is not a rational actor. The command portion of terrorists have virtually nothing to lose with a botched attempt, and neither does the fanatic patsy. A 50/50 ratio isn't good enough for our security because the downside for both command and patsy are much smaller than the upside (from their perspective). The chances of failure need to be much higher in order to effectively deter terrorists.
Do you always start with the insulting tone (see bolding) when the debate isn't going your way? I would argue that both sides are rational actors, though both sides may also employ non-rational players. The higher echelons of terrorist organizations have shown themselves to very worried about being captured by the fact that they are so hard to catch. If they didn't care, they wouldn't be going to a great deal of trouble to avoid it. Therefore, to my mind, they are rational actors. That 50/50 number is one that I threw into the argument as an "for argument's sake". Please don't rely on it for anything factual. The TSA in fact catches more than 50% of their training/testing planted weapons. And yes, I think even if the the number was as low as 50/50 a rational actor would do everything... oh heck... I've already written all that - you've not presented anything else of substance in it's place, so I'll just save my typing finger....
Sacrificing these things is appropriate when there is a tangible gain. There hasn't been much of a tangible gain with TSA, and this is coming from the head of Israeli Security. We're paying a lot and getting almost nothing in return. Every year there's a new "standard" put out there to make it seem like TSA is doing something, but time and again security experts have lambasted TSA and its efforts as a dog and pony show.
Your own opinion of flying should be an example of how ridiculous things have gotten. If people now become disgruntled and irritated every time they fly, for perhaps marginal gains in security, then our methods have failed.
That's the funny thing. I've never actually said that the TSA is the best thing around. All I've said is that the TSA is doing something. That's all - that the TSA is doing something right. Not everything. Just something. Go back and look it up. Even the head of the Israeli security never said they were useless (as in doing nothing right). Just that it wasn't the best use of resources. Oh, and if you know Israelis (and I do), then you'll also know that there is another Israeli who knows just as much as that first fellow, and she thinks the TSA is doing things just fine.
It is difficult to prove, but you can make an educated guess about what the cause is. Other than the correlational evidence, there is no other good data to suggest that TSA has actually been effective. In no field is correlation enough to establish anything but correlation.
That's the problem with 90% of the decisions Governments make. All they have is correlational connections. Or incomplete causal relationships. Or... basically the best they can do is make an educated guess, and hope for the best.
No, that's not how it works. If you want to assert your idea as correct, the burden is on you to show that it is correct. I am going to try to poke holes in your reasoning, and it's up to you to show that my criticisms are invalid on the bases of logic and evidence.
No, on two counts. 1) You asserted "Our attempts at security are at best as good as Lisa's rock...". I countered your assertion by saying that the TSA must be doing something right, and used the stats on hijackings. I (to paraphrase you) "poked hole in your reasoning". You've presented nothing that counters my evidence, except to try mocking it as simplistic. If it is, then show how it is.... If my argument doesn't convince you. Then say so, and then leave it at that. I have my opinion, you have yours. But if you want me to change my opinion you had better do better. 2) I've forgotten - cr*p.
So far you've only cited correlation, which is not sufficient evidence for causation. You ignored my criticism based on military intervention, changing travel patterns, etc, and only want to trumpet your belief that correlation is enough. It's not. If you don't want to do more on Mac Rumors, then don't post anymore on this topic concerning this line of discussion.
You are right correlations don't show causation. But they are evidence for it. If you have evidence that shows otherwise, present it.
inkswamp
Oct 3, 04:00 AM
Ug, I can't believe I just defended a monopoly.
Bear in mind, there is nothing inherently bad in a company having a monopoly, not even Microsoft. What's bad (and illegal) is when a company in such a position abuses its monopolistic power. I have to remind MS defenders of this fact as many of them don't seem to grasp the nuance here. MS wasn't in trouble for being a monopoly (rightly so--being one is not illegal.) MS was in trouble for abusing that power.
Speaking of MS defenders, is it my imagination or are there an awful lot of Macrumors newbies on the board now who seem to bash Apple pretty quickly and at every turn? What's that all about?
Bear in mind, there is nothing inherently bad in a company having a monopoly, not even Microsoft. What's bad (and illegal) is when a company in such a position abuses its monopolistic power. I have to remind MS defenders of this fact as many of them don't seem to grasp the nuance here. MS wasn't in trouble for being a monopoly (rightly so--being one is not illegal.) MS was in trouble for abusing that power.
Speaking of MS defenders, is it my imagination or are there an awful lot of Macrumors newbies on the board now who seem to bash Apple pretty quickly and at every turn? What's that all about?
more...
WestonHarvey1
Jul 21, 11:13 AM
- The call loss issue is 1/100 or less, worse for the new 4 model than the prior 3GS model.
This is key. If the iPhone 4 isn't dropping calls any more often than the 3GS, then there is no real issue at all. Either almost no one is dropping additional calls because of the antenna, or if the issue is more widespread, it is made up for by antenna performance improvements elsewhere. The net result? Same performance as 3GS which no one complained about.
You can either accept that or accuse AT&T and Apple of faking that 1/100 number, in which case your argument is standing in the tinfoil hat section.
This is key. If the iPhone 4 isn't dropping calls any more often than the 3GS, then there is no real issue at all. Either almost no one is dropping additional calls because of the antenna, or if the issue is more widespread, it is made up for by antenna performance improvements elsewhere. The net result? Same performance as 3GS which no one complained about.
You can either accept that or accuse AT&T and Apple of faking that 1/100 number, in which case your argument is standing in the tinfoil hat section.
rkahl
Mar 17, 10:14 AM
LOL, has anyone copied and forwarded this thread to their local FBI? I'm sure they have already obtained the court order to get his ip address. Then a few weeks will pass before he gets served!
more...
fastlane1588
Sep 12, 07:47 AM
i thought the event started at 7est
DevinPitcher
Apr 15, 01:07 PM
Has no one noticed that the camera switches sides in the third image?? LOL
FAKE!!!!!
No it doesn't.
It's in the same spot in all 3.
FAKE!!!!!
No it doesn't.
It's in the same spot in all 3.
more...
Whistleway
Oct 11, 07:54 PM
I am pretty sure Apple has to refresh its iPod line for holiday sales or it is bye-bye stock prices and holiday sales.
The question is what will or can they do by november 14th. And it is very unlikely that it will be large video iPod. Heck, Zune has the same resolution as the iPod and i am not sure what the big deal is. It is not like adding 1" or 2" will make it all the better.
The question is what will or can they do by november 14th. And it is very unlikely that it will be large video iPod. Heck, Zune has the same resolution as the iPod and i am not sure what the big deal is. It is not like adding 1" or 2" will make it all the better.
MacsRgr8
Jan 5, 06:37 PM
Maybe I'm missing something, but doesn't the idea of a spoiler-free experience sort of run completely opposite to the purpose of this site? You sit around all year reading rumors and then don't want to be spoiled three hours before they post the keynote? Huh?
IMHO candidate for best post of 2007. :cool:
IMHO candidate for best post of 2007. :cool:
more...
brepublican
Nov 16, 12:38 PM
Digitimes = wrong, always wrong.
Indeed, this should be taken with the dash of salt it deserves... i.e. a tablespoon full
Indeed, this should be taken with the dash of salt it deserves... i.e. a tablespoon full
DeSnousa
Apr 29, 01:04 AM
Thanks for posting, looks scary but I like it! You planning on getting GPUs for the AMD systems? How do AMD processors go at f@h? Imagine if you got some GT260s on the 4 AMD systems :eek:
more...
Balli
Sep 12, 02:44 AM
Does anyone know what time this even will be in GMT?
MacRumors
Sep 25, 10:57 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Apple held their Photokina Media Event (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060914090209.shtml) today and announced Aperture 1.5.
Aperture 1.5 provides more iLife inegration, plug-in support for Internet services, and advanced library and editing features. An early summary of features are listed:
• More flexible use of storage. Photos on DVDs and other storage.
• Offline media can be "edited"
• iLife, iDVD, iWork, Keynote integration<
• Plug-in API offered. Plug Ins for Gettyimages, iStockPhoto, and Flickr available, with more coming
• New Loupe, Magnification no longer tied to specific settings/steps.
•*Loupe shows color information
• Improved Meta-data support, allowing meta data assigned to several images.
• XMP format is supported
• Better sharpening tool
• New full-screen comparison mode for several images at once
• iPod/iTunes integration. Transfer photos to your iPod
It is a free update to existing Aperture owners and should be available later this week.
Please keep discussion on topic. If you are disappointed with the media event for lack of other announcements, discuss it in the Media Event thread (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060925104838.shtml). Otherwise, this thread is for Aperture
Apple held their Photokina Media Event (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060914090209.shtml) today and announced Aperture 1.5.
Aperture 1.5 provides more iLife inegration, plug-in support for Internet services, and advanced library and editing features. An early summary of features are listed:
• More flexible use of storage. Photos on DVDs and other storage.
• Offline media can be "edited"
• iLife, iDVD, iWork, Keynote integration<
• Plug-in API offered. Plug Ins for Gettyimages, iStockPhoto, and Flickr available, with more coming
• New Loupe, Magnification no longer tied to specific settings/steps.
•*Loupe shows color information
• Improved Meta-data support, allowing meta data assigned to several images.
• XMP format is supported
• Better sharpening tool
• New full-screen comparison mode for several images at once
• iPod/iTunes integration. Transfer photos to your iPod
It is a free update to existing Aperture owners and should be available later this week.
Please keep discussion on topic. If you are disappointed with the media event for lack of other announcements, discuss it in the Media Event thread (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060925104838.shtml). Otherwise, this thread is for Aperture
more...
underblu
Apr 20, 02:17 AM
I use both OSX and Windows.
Apple has it right: simplicity and robustness. Why change the OSX UI, it's straightforwd, lacks unesesary adornments and most importantly doesn't get in the way.
I don't get the whole OS thing anyway. To me it's all about the apllications anyway.
Having been a diehard Windows fan for years they lost me with Vista and not being able to buy a powerful lightweight aluminim Laptop with good battery life made the choice of a MBP overwhelming. I really grown to like OSX and hope they keep the look and feel.
You know to this day you can look at a Porsche 911 from 1967 and see the continuity of design through the years. Because why fool with desingn perfection when refinement is all that's needed.
Apple has it right: simplicity and robustness. Why change the OSX UI, it's straightforwd, lacks unesesary adornments and most importantly doesn't get in the way.
I don't get the whole OS thing anyway. To me it's all about the apllications anyway.
Having been a diehard Windows fan for years they lost me with Vista and not being able to buy a powerful lightweight aluminim Laptop with good battery life made the choice of a MBP overwhelming. I really grown to like OSX and hope they keep the look and feel.
You know to this day you can look at a Porsche 911 from 1967 and see the continuity of design through the years. Because why fool with desingn perfection when refinement is all that's needed.
ChazUK
May 3, 09:37 PM
Of course it does, right from Settings as well:
ttp://web.mac.com/jzuena/IMG_0020.PNG
As soon as you try to use it (and I'm sure anything built-in on Android will have the same "feature"), the carrier has the option to charge extra before allowing it to work.
That isn't the case for the Nexus S/Nexus One AFAIK. You just tick the box, setup the SSID and if you want WPA activated and off you go.
This might be a little off topic but the following comment:
"One of the main promotional points of Android as its popularity has soared has been the unregulated nature of the app marketplaces for the platform."
reminded me that I have some degree of comfort that Apple screens apps so that I don't inadvertently download something which is actually a virus, steals passwords and other personal information, or does something else nasty.
Perhaps I am unduly comforted and there is some iTunes fine print that says they don't check for that sort of stuff. Otherwise I would have thought Apple could have used the "safety" aspect in it's marketing, and created some fear for Andriod users around they really know what they are getting.
In that way iTunes aspp store is sort of a big condom for your iPhone - pure protection.
The "permissions" screen upon installing an app is your friend. Upon installing any app, you know what it has access to.
http://blog.mylookout.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Screen-shot-2010-07-29-at-12.16.01-PM.png
If an app has more access then you are comfortable with, you can cancel installation. Say for instance a simple tic tac toe game that wanted location and contact access. You would be warned before installation that it is requesting such access and if that was the case, I would cancel installation and not bother with the app.
Lion this is my happy face.
ttp://web.mac.com/jzuena/IMG_0020.PNG
As soon as you try to use it (and I'm sure anything built-in on Android will have the same "feature"), the carrier has the option to charge extra before allowing it to work.
That isn't the case for the Nexus S/Nexus One AFAIK. You just tick the box, setup the SSID and if you want WPA activated and off you go.
This might be a little off topic but the following comment:
"One of the main promotional points of Android as its popularity has soared has been the unregulated nature of the app marketplaces for the platform."
reminded me that I have some degree of comfort that Apple screens apps so that I don't inadvertently download something which is actually a virus, steals passwords and other personal information, or does something else nasty.
Perhaps I am unduly comforted and there is some iTunes fine print that says they don't check for that sort of stuff. Otherwise I would have thought Apple could have used the "safety" aspect in it's marketing, and created some fear for Andriod users around they really know what they are getting.
In that way iTunes aspp store is sort of a big condom for your iPhone - pure protection.
The "permissions" screen upon installing an app is your friend. Upon installing any app, you know what it has access to.
http://blog.mylookout.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Screen-shot-2010-07-29-at-12.16.01-PM.png
If an app has more access then you are comfortable with, you can cancel installation. Say for instance a simple tic tac toe game that wanted location and contact access. You would be warned before installation that it is requesting such access and if that was the case, I would cancel installation and not bother with the app.
Jpog
Apr 16, 04:35 PM
Hello everybody :),
I'm the autor of these pictures. I've made this with 3dsmax and Vray render. Photoshop has been just use to create the noise and resize the pictures.
For the perspective problem on the third pics, it's just a lens distortion of my camera.
Stop search, it's just a 3D render exercise.
I'm happy to see that my work unleashed passions but it's A FAKE.
To have more information, see : http://iphone4fake.over-blog.com
Now we have just to wait June to see the real truth.
(Sorry for my english, i'm french ^^ )
I'm the autor of these pictures. I've made this with 3dsmax and Vray render. Photoshop has been just use to create the noise and resize the pictures.
For the perspective problem on the third pics, it's just a lens distortion of my camera.
Stop search, it's just a 3D render exercise.
I'm happy to see that my work unleashed passions but it's A FAKE.
To have more information, see : http://iphone4fake.over-blog.com
Now we have just to wait June to see the real truth.
(Sorry for my english, i'm french ^^ )
MacTraveller
Oct 4, 08:15 AM
If I were CES management, I'd ban them for life. Can't imagine Apple will let them anywhere near Moscone.
It's not up to Apple. It's up to IDG. They manage the expo, they administer the expo on behalf of Apple.
It's not up to Apple. It's up to IDG. They manage the expo, they administer the expo on behalf of Apple.
nicroma
Apr 29, 01:51 PM
What stage will this be stable enough to use as your main OS? :apple:
10.7.1 or .2 is the rule I go by.
10.7.1 or .2 is the rule I go by.
pudrums
Apr 10, 08:53 AM
Kalter Hauch
http://www.filmempfehlung.com/_bilder/_cover/kalter_hauch.jpg
http://www.filmempfehlung.com/_bilder/_cover/kalter_hauch.jpg
�algiris
Mar 24, 03:54 PM
Ten years, and TheWormyFruit� still hasn't FTFF (http://tinyurl.com/66wkbe3)!
Don't be ridiculous.
Don't be ridiculous.
triceretops
Sep 29, 03:20 PM
Oh i'm sure there will be LOTS of technology in the house.
I bet he'll be able to control everything via an app on his iPhone.
The house itself doesn't need to be HUGE. He can still apply a lot of technology into the house making it worth millions!
5000 square feet isn't small.
I bet he'll be able to control everything via an app on his iPhone.
The house itself doesn't need to be HUGE. He can still apply a lot of technology into the house making it worth millions!
5000 square feet isn't small.