Live Love Laugh Tattoos.
Jimmy James
May 4, 08:56 AM
just getting started...iPad 3!
Exactly. Makes it sound like it's still underdeveloped.
Exactly. Makes it sound like it's still underdeveloped.
Live Laugh Love Wallpaper by
Lurchdubious
Apr 7, 10:02 PM
http://www.jbhifi.com.au/images/apple-ipod-nano-16gb-silver-sku-60921-large.gif
LOVE IT!
LOVE IT!
Live Laugh Love-
peapody
Apr 7, 08:59 PM
Just got a bamboo plant for my desk...not the vase/pebbles...
also a red velvet whoopie pie, and a vanilla cake whoopie pie..
Both things from Reading Terminal Market in Philly...:D
I always heard it is bad luck to get yourself a lucky bamboo plant - but I guess that is only if you are superstitious!
Got myself an old school firewire ipod charger for my 3g 15gb!
also a red velvet whoopie pie, and a vanilla cake whoopie pie..
Both things from Reading Terminal Market in Philly...:D
I always heard it is bad luck to get yourself a lucky bamboo plant - but I guess that is only if you are superstitious!
Got myself an old school firewire ipod charger for my 3g 15gb!
Live Laugh Love Mixed Media
rdowns
Dec 14, 02:23 PM
But the fact remains how are they going to exactly implement two separate phones for carriers that use different cell tech, and implement them properly
Exactly why you won't see a Verizon phone until Apple decides to adopt a chip that handles GSM and CDMA/LTE. One phone for both (all?) US carriers.
Exactly why you won't see a Verizon phone until Apple decides to adopt a chip that handles GSM and CDMA/LTE. One phone for both (all?) US carriers.
more...
Live Laugh Love Art Print
GQB
Apr 15, 11:56 PM
I dislike it when people keep saying that line over and over. Does competition really make products better? Where's the truth in that? If it's truly the case, why do we still see half-baked consumer products for the end user?
.
It, like 'the free market always decides best' is simply and literally religious dogma.
Competition as often as not results in a race to the bottom, just as the 'free market' is useless regarding life necessities (e.g. water or health care.)
.
It, like 'the free market always decides best' is simply and literally religious dogma.
Competition as often as not results in a race to the bottom, just as the 'free market' is useless regarding life necessities (e.g. water or health care.)
Live Laugh Love~
MacDonaldsd
Jan 9, 04:53 PM
http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/j47d52oo/event/ has less spoiler - first post!
Don't no how you got that, but thank you !!!!!!!!!
Don't no how you got that, but thank you !!!!!!!!!
more...
Live Laugh Love Wall Art
ThePoach
Jul 21, 04:21 PM
So if another car company was hiding the same problem Toyota had, and Toyota pointed it out, that would be wrong? Why are the other companies denying it?
Yes it would.. maybe that is why Toyota was able to surpass all these claims, assuming most of them were real since everyone is trying to make a quick buck these days lol. They dealt with their own problems and I would buy a Toyota any day:)
Question for you Hovey.. Are you working for Apple????
Is that you Mr. Jobs, answering questions again? lol
Yes it would.. maybe that is why Toyota was able to surpass all these claims, assuming most of them were real since everyone is trying to make a quick buck these days lol. They dealt with their own problems and I would buy a Toyota any day:)
Question for you Hovey.. Are you working for Apple????
Is that you Mr. Jobs, answering questions again? lol
live-laugh-love
roadbloc
Apr 22, 06:07 PM
Here's the reality of this non-issue...
You'd be up in arms if Google were doing it. Or anyone else to that matter.
I like how you have, yet again, managed to turn a non-Apple related discussion, to a discussion about Apple. Grats.
You'd be up in arms if Google were doing it. Or anyone else to that matter.
I like how you have, yet again, managed to turn a non-Apple related discussion, to a discussion about Apple. Grats.
more...
live laugh love tattoos. live
Leoff
Oct 29, 05:50 AM
Apple is a hardware company.
Apple is a hardware company.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is easy to use and works well.
The software is easy to use and works well.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
It would also not work so well.
It would also not work so well.
What's funny is, you could easily swap "Software" for "Hardware" in your little mantra and it still rings just as true.
"Apple is a Software Company"
"If they didn't sell the Mac OS they would be out of business"
"The Hardware is what makes the Software valuable"
"The Hardware is easy to use and works well"
"If they Hardware worked with any software, it would not be so easy to use"
"It would also not work so well"
Apple is not a hardware company, it is a computer company. There is quite a difference. Apple has a symbiotic relationship between it's hardware and software. One without the other, the company would be dead.
Apple is a hardware company.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
If they didn't sell Macintoshes and iPods they would be out of business.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is what makes the hardware valuable.
The software is easy to use and works well.
The software is easy to use and works well.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
If the software worked on any hardware, it would not be so easy to use.
It would also not work so well.
It would also not work so well.
What's funny is, you could easily swap "Software" for "Hardware" in your little mantra and it still rings just as true.
"Apple is a Software Company"
"If they didn't sell the Mac OS they would be out of business"
"The Hardware is what makes the Software valuable"
"The Hardware is easy to use and works well"
"If they Hardware worked with any software, it would not be so easy to use"
"It would also not work so well"
Apple is not a hardware company, it is a computer company. There is quite a difference. Apple has a symbiotic relationship between it's hardware and software. One without the other, the company would be dead.
Live, Laugh, Love Photo
sotorious
May 2, 09:44 AM
How is this going to work for Verizon users im on 4.3.7 if im not mistaken...
edit scratch that its 4.2.7 and i just went into settings and it says carrier settings update if i click not now or update now will it do it Over the Air?
edit scratch that its 4.2.7 and i just went into settings and it says carrier settings update if i click not now or update now will it do it Over the Air?
more...
Live Laugh Love RSVP Cards
DoFoT9
Jul 30, 07:00 PM
well i still have 3 main machines for folding, but none are back up to full force.
i don't have any of them running over 3.6 ghz (the fastest now is like 3.55 or so). so right now i'm just running -advmethods instead of -bigadv on 2 of them, and i'm actually using the other one, so no cpu folding right now.
more...
more...
more...
i don't have any of them running over 3.6 ghz (the fastest now is like 3.55 or so). so right now i'm just running -advmethods instead of -bigadv on 2 of them, and i'm actually using the other one, so no cpu folding right now.
live. laugh. love.
npinchot
Mar 17, 02:10 PM
He counted the cash I gave him which was $230.00
I am a reward zone member, the receipt said I paid $530.00 cash.
If he paid $530.00 total, that means the only option was the 16 GB Wi-Fi only model. He didn't mention getting any change, so is there really somewhere that has 6.2125% sales tax? Seems unlikely.
I am a reward zone member, the receipt said I paid $530.00 cash.
If he paid $530.00 total, that means the only option was the 16 GB Wi-Fi only model. He didn't mention getting any change, so is there really somewhere that has 6.2125% sales tax? Seems unlikely.
more...
Live Laugh Love - Live Laugh
LightSpeed1
Apr 10, 05:41 PM
Working on my new setup. Just ordered a Dell Ultrasharp 24" and a set of Swan M10's.
live laugh love tattoos.
snberk103
Apr 19, 01:54 PM
It's their job, we just have to deal with it. A few months back, a TSA agent groped my junk. I joked with him, "Linger any longer and you'll have to buy me dinner.";) He didn't even crack a smile.
Probably the 5th time he heard that crack that shift. :)
I wonder what comment would actually get them to crack a smile. Sort of like baiting the Guards at Buckingham Palace to crack a smile.
Probably the 5th time he heard that crack that shift. :)
I wonder what comment would actually get them to crack a smile. Sort of like baiting the Guards at Buckingham Palace to crack a smile.
more...
Heart-Live Laugh Love
snberk103
Apr 15, 12:29 PM
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
Live Laugh Love- Washer Charm
MacRumorUser
Nov 26, 05:33 PM
It's excellent not only in 3D but as a game in general. Levels are just about as varied and as long as they need to be that it never feels like a chore.
3D truly adds to the immersion. You enable it in the options menu (stereoscopic support).
3D truly adds to the immersion. You enable it in the options menu (stereoscopic support).
more...
Live Laugh Love Chinese Symbol
rhett7660
Apr 28, 08:10 PM
How long are you going to test this before it becomes official and stays?
Live Laugh Love Framed Print
pkson
May 3, 09:39 PM
Nice ad!
live laugh love tattoos.
SevenInchScrew
Mar 11, 04:43 PM
Transition.
The industry is undergoing a massive paradigm-shift, thanks to Apple.
I thought they "redefined" computing? How can it be definite if it is still in a "transition" phase?
The industry is undergoing a massive paradigm-shift, thanks to Apple.
I thought they "redefined" computing? How can it be definite if it is still in a "transition" phase?
longofest
Oct 19, 09:51 AM
I would love to know what the worldwide figure is for Apple market percentage. I know it says here that its not in the top 5, hence no available data, but it would be interesting to see, particularly here in the UK, as the amount of people I know who have switched in the last year has been huge!!
I know Apple is doing well, but the problem is the Asian companies that are doing extraordinary in their markets continually kick Apple out of the numbers. You want to buy Gartner's report for MacRumors when it comes out :cool:
I know Apple is doing well, but the problem is the Asian companies that are doing extraordinary in their markets continually kick Apple out of the numbers. You want to buy Gartner's report for MacRumors when it comes out :cool:
BBA
Nov 24, 07:32 PM
apple's canada store is also down...
It is up now. I just ordered 2 iPod nano's off of it.
It is up now. I just ordered 2 iPod nano's off of it.
toke lahti
Jan 15, 06:22 PM
To all of you saying Blu-Ray, do you really think Apple is going to put that in their computers if they are trying to get digital distribution to work? I just don't see it happening.
Apple also claims to be pro choise for pro video content creation.
Can you imagine pro video without blu-ray in 2008?
Once again pro choise is no choise...
Next dissapointment time will be wwdc at summer?
Maybe they don't update xraid to make demand for TimeCapsule also ;)
Apple also claims to be pro choise for pro video content creation.
Can you imagine pro video without blu-ray in 2008?
Once again pro choise is no choise...
Next dissapointment time will be wwdc at summer?
Maybe they don't update xraid to make demand for TimeCapsule also ;)
NAG
Jan 12, 09:07 PM
So gizmodo is responsible for this how? Questioning what makes an online a journalist a journalist and not just a fan site has been going on for some time (aka: before gizmodo turned off a bunch of TVs). You're just scapegoating an easy target. If you have a problem with the conferences and expos limiting press to only a few big names go after that. Not after guys who like to prank people. You'll change nothing by attacking gizmodo.
DoFoT9
Jul 30, 07:00 PM
well i still have 3 main machines for folding, but none are back up to full force.
i don't have any of them running over 3.6 ghz (the fastest now is like 3.55 or so). so right now i'm just running -advmethods instead of -bigadv on 2 of them, and i'm actually using the other one, so no cpu folding right now.
Source URL: https://ngejogg.blogspot.com/2011/09/live-laugh-love.html
Visit ngejog tambak for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
i don't have any of them running over 3.6 ghz (the fastest now is like 3.55 or so). so right now i'm just running -advmethods instead of -bigadv on 2 of them, and i'm actually using the other one, so no cpu folding right now.
Source URL: https://ngejogg.blogspot.com/2011/09/live-laugh-love.html
Visit ngejog tambak for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
.jpg)
