Live data from Hacker News

The Silencing of Maya

niederfamily.blogspot.be

81–90 of 332 posts

Re: The Silencing of Maya

#81

Where's Jobs when you need him?

What the heck does Jobs have to do with this? The man was a capitalist and hardly a philanthropist.

He was a philanthropist. He just did so privately.

Many anonymous, large donations have been attributed to him.

Re: The Silencing of Maya

#82

Best solution here would appear to be never sync that iPad again, back it up to iTunes, disable its Wi-Fi, and consider it her speech appliance. Don't update the OS, don't sync to iTunes, never do anything with it again aside from using it for this essential purpose. If you have to buy another one, restore it from your iTunes backup. These are the 'legal' avenues, clearly with jailbreaking it's simpler. Unfortunate t…

I think the best solution is to port the code over to android. You might be disallowed from selling your app on any marketplaces, but there's nothing preventing you from running it on your own device.

Re: The Silencing of Maya

#83
post #29

I've said this before and I'll say it again. One of the villains in this piece is Apple. Many of the people reading this comment are talented engineers. What Apple needs to survive, more than anything, are talented engineers. So don't work at Apple. Don't work for companies that compromise ethics in this way. There's a reason Microsoft has been failing to compete for a while. It's because its practices got so evil th…

I would definitely add Google to that list as well.

Their continued support of Motorola Mobility's behaviour in abusing FRAND rules is unconscionable and has the ability to undermine the entire industry.

Re: The Silencing of Maya

#84
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple's needlessly abusive design is the sole reason you don't have that choice. They reserved for themselves the power to obstruct the author's use of her own tools, which should be a human right second only to food and shelter.

Apple doesn't obstruct her from using Android. Again, I vote that the app stays up. But you are being silly by portraying Apple as evil.

But then Microsoft never obstructed anyone from using Macs instead. That line of argumentation didn't seem to interest the courts much.

Re: The Silencing of Maya

#85
Rand had a term, 'metaphysical justice' that covered this sort of thing. If you're a company that writes software for closed ecosystems like iOS, you can't complain if the owner of the ecosystem cuts you off.

Ditto if you buy an iOS device; the _feeling_ of security and the easy discoverability that come with a closed ecosystem come at a price, and that is that a third party (in this case Apple) really controls your device, not you.

It's just really sad that Maya's parents discovered the above in such a harsh fashion :-(

Re: The Silencing of Maya

#86

Best solution here would appear to be never sync that iPad again, back it up to iTunes, disable its Wi-Fi, and consider it her speech appliance. Don't update the OS, don't sync to iTunes, never do anything with it again aside from using it for this essential purpose. If you have to buy another one, restore it from your iTunes backup. These are the 'legal' avenues, clearly with jailbreaking it's simpler. Unfortunate t…

I wouldn't update to a major new iOS version (to avoid incompatibility issues), but there's no reason to turn off WiFi or not sync it. Like Google with Andriod, Apple has the ability to remotely remove apps from devices, but unlike Google [1] [2] I've never heard of them using it and I can't find any articles that suggest they have.

I assume that it's only for malware (given they haven't removed tethering apps, for example) so I wouldn't worry.

1. http://www.dailytech.com/Google+Uses+Its+Remote+Kill+Android... 2. http://www.neowin.net/news/google-to-remote-kill-malicious-a...

Re: The Silencing of Maya

#87
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are other alternatives. Have you ever wondered why bands are allowed to "cover" other bands music without any kind of prior permission? It is because the US Congress wrote something called a compulsory license into the copyright law. Music was thought too important to our culture to allow one person to have control over a new song. I say it is time we brought the idea of a compulsory license to patents.

It's definitely the case that Congress should take action on non-practicing entities being able to put up a tollbooth on others efforts; there is no way that qualifies as promoting the useful arts and sciences. I'm of the opinion that a patent that has not been reduced to practice should be regarded as ineligible for any enforcement action. If you can't make it work, you should not be able to tax the people who did m…

That is definitely a good idea, but what about the patents that are so blatantly vague or obvious, that many people are unknowingly violating them. It seems it's easier to prove non-infringement rather than prior art with most software patents.

Re: The Silencing of Maya

#88
If the goal is to get a working app in the hands of people that need it. Have an android app created that can be easily sideloaded (this could be done on iOS will more burden). You have a portable computer, treat it like one. There are no rules when your children's well being is at stake.

----

The ipad should be a) backed up, b) put in airplane mode.

Re: The Silencing of Maya

#89
post #34

What's so special about this application that a concerted week of coding could not duplicate? It seems like a list of icons, and when you touch an icon a word is spoken. There is a facility to add new icons. The application also seems to permanently fix the location of each "learned" icon, so that as the child grows their vocabulary consists of an expanding set of "muscle memory" movements. There is also a facility t…

Is there an android app for this? Software that allows people to speak shouldn't be patented. Or if it is, it should be licensed for $1.

Re: The Silencing of Maya

#90
post #52

The idea that we need patents to foster innovation is a self-serving lie. Most of human progress -- everything that got us to where we are now -- happens faster the more copying everyone does. America industrialized faster than Great Britain thanks to widespread copying -- and this saved countless human lives by lifting millions of people out of poverty faster than otherwise possible. Today China is industrializing f…

> The idea that we need patents to foster innovation is a self-serving lie. Most of human progress -- everything that got us to where we are now -- happens faster the more copying everyone does. This completely misunderstands the historical reason for patents. Patents do not stifle copying: they encourage copying by transforming a permanent monopoly of secrets into a temporary monopoly of open information. Patents we…

I think the main problem is that the length of protection is far too long for the IT industry - something more like three to five years would be more appropriate in my opinion given how fast it changes. And then there is also the problem that most software patents should fail the prior art or obviousness tests, but it costs so much to fight them that most companies settle...
Post reply on HN