581–590 of 667 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because lots of people still think that if you own a piece of hardware, you should be able to run whatever code you want on it.
Of course you should. It's my device, I should be able to do what I want with it. The default should be protected but root should be available.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The web makes things interesting in that OP's hypothetical company only has that data because Facebook willingly gives it to everyone who asks. It would be obviously wrong if they were using some exploit to trick Facebook's servers into divulging secrets.
> gives it to everyone who asks Yeah nah, that's where the concept of agreements comes in. You walk up to Fes Boock and say: ― I want to have business with Fes Boock. ― Fes Boock will have business with you if you promise to not stab Fes Boock in the back. ― I give my word to not stab Fes Boock in the back. Turns out, this thing is so valuable, it's supported by law everywhere that I know of, in multiple forms, inclu…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But Apple isn't a monopoly, and it never will be. You're talking like the EU has one set of rules for companies from its members and another for others, but that isn't the case. The EU treats all monopolies equally; Apple isn't close to a monopoly. Of the actors involved here, Google is the one that the EU is most concerned about. Apple is only acting on their own turf, their services. Their reach is not far spread o…
There are not only monopoly rules. It seems plausible to me that there could be a rule that mobile phone/computer ecosystems above a certain threshold must grant access to the platform (under reasonable conditions).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Android has 85% of the worldwide smartphone market I think a mistake to make here is thinking that Apple gives a toss.
Publicly, Apple will say that it doesn't care about Android market share for all the usual reasons John Gruber repeats. But privately, if there was one thing that would keep me up at night as an Apple executive, that number would be it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because lots of people still think that if you own a piece of hardware, you should be able to run whatever code you want on it.
You're not wrong, you're just in the wrong place. Apple is the sysadmin and the phone holders are the users. They WANT apple looking out for them. Anyone who says otherwise stupidly wasted $1000 when they could have bought any number of unlockable devices for that money. I say this with an unlocked and de-googled android phone next to me, and several hacked arm devices at home. I OWN THEM, with no doubt, so I agree w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> (Yes, when Netflix agrees to provide you with something in return for your payment, you've entered a contract with them, and they are your contractor. If somehow you were an US entity with 50+ netflix subscriptions for different offices, and thus paid them more than $600/year, you technically might be on the hook to file a 1099.) Source. Now. Because I highly doubt this is accurate. I have never heard of someone ha…
I forgot that all payments to C-Corps or S-Corps are exempt from 1099 filings, so yes, as long as Netflix remains a C-Corp, there's no need to file. (That's a matter of 1099 tax law, though - it's still a contracted relationship. And so while it is uncommon to think of them as a 'contractor', that's what Netflix is, when delivering a service for payments under the terms of a contract.)
You're using what is known as a "cute trick".
Judges are rarely amused by "cute tricks". Like a Sovereign Citizen believer you can keep claiming to be correct all the way to a loss in court, followed by denied appeal after denied appeal.
Let’s say you’re using a Google API like Maps, and you violate terms by snapshotting sections of their maps and storing them on your severs so you can serve static maps without making API calls. They’d shut down your API access immediately Google and Facebook both knew the terms. They both knew that the Enterprise Distribution Program was for internal use only. They still put ads out in the wild to recruit regular co…
I scraped google API exactly like this in grad school, but sometimes when you're building, you take a calculated risk to build something better. For my thesis, I was trying to load two Street View photos side by side in a browser to compare people's perceptions side-by-side. Google maps at the time required you to load a javascript viewer for each image you requested. Think Hot-or-Not for cities. The experience neede…
I find the trick, when you're worried about this, is to use the regular API normally, but save the data that comes in from the normal usage of the API. i.e. Use the Google maps viewer and after the image is loaded, grab it however you have to, and post it to another API you've created that allows you to save the image. You're scraping their site, but you're not doing it in an automated way, and it should be undetectable.
After a while, you've got a good library of images from normal use. So you code up a switch that you can toggle that changes it from loading from the Google maps viewer to using your API to get images.
If you want to grow your image library, randomly assign some percentage of people to using the Google viewer (and save them they download), and the rest to your library of images you've accumulated. Or use a cookie or JS localStorage variable to track whether they are a returning person, and the first time always give them the quick library version, and if they return give them the Google maps viewer version (or just switch the percentages from 90/10 to 10/90, etc).
If they're willing to give you the data free within their ToS, there's very little technologically they can do to stop you from easily (or moderately easily, in the harder cases) storing the data. Worst case for someone looking to save it would be if they generate an image for the content and just serve the image, and that's not that hard to work around either, if the data is structured.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> Apple should not have the right to enforce those conditions to begin with Apple is not a state-owned company. They can do whatever they like, and you can choose to support them by purchasing their stock and/or their products. You can choose not to support them by purchasing neither their stock or their products. There are several federal and state laws that define what they "can not do", and this isn't one of them…
Laws can be changed. I argued that they should be changed in order to limit Apples power. I mentioned Microsoft b/c of their importance then, Android/Apple is the same (but duopoly) now. We limit what business owners can do for 'greater good' in quite some areas. I think it is necessary here too. Apple: enforce access, Android: limit data snooping.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree to disagree. Messenger and WhatsApp are more advanced and combine the social dynamic to chats. They’ve also made a lot of headway in competing with FaceTime. Which apps would Apple have a distinct advantage of it loses iMessage and FaceTime? Edit: to elaborate I don’t mean a direct bridge to android, rather a substitute for iMessage that’s available on iOS and Android which makes switching relatively painless.
In my experience, it is not a tech problem. Equivalents absolutely exist. They may even be superior, although us tech folk tend to focus on features and not usability, and then we are surprised why regular folk don't like what we've built. In any case, when I switch out of the iPhone world, a solid half my contacts are unavailable to chat with except by old-school texts, and no equivalent for FaceTime. Some family me…
But what happens when Facebook continues to enhance its messaging platform and people slowly find themselves in a hybrid situation where they are communicating with a mixture of WhatsApp, iMessage, and Instagram?
Anecdotally, I probably use iMessage for 80% of my texts with my girlfriend but we still regularly use Instagram and WhatsApp for chatting, depending on the situation. I could foresee us ending up swinging the other way and using Whatsapp for texting and then getting used to it. Sound unlikely?
Suppose we are discussing what we want to order for dinner and WhatsApp has our favorite delivery places and their menus available and we can order and pay through the app. Now instead of texting back and forth and then opening Grubhub to look at a menu and order and pay we can do it all in one place. Pretty soon we are using WhatsApp to communicate and haven’t used iMessage in months. I find myself using WhatsApp so much I replace iMessage in the dock with WhatsApp.
Six months later I’m in the market for a new phone. Since I use third party software for just about everything now, all these devices are on a level playing field and maybe I try a Pixel this time and find I like it just as much as my iPhone. This may sound far fetched but this is how disruption happens and is pretty much how Facebook destroyed MySpace- users finding themselves using two services for the same purpose and eventually scrapping the one they use the least.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I scraped google API exactly like this in grad school, but sometimes when you're building, you take a calculated risk to build something better. For my thesis, I was trying to load two Street View photos side by side in a browser to compare people's perceptions side-by-side. Google maps at the time required you to load a javascript viewer for each image you requested. Think Hot-or-Not for cities. The experience neede…
> "I'm a small operation. Surely they won't know." I wrote a server side screen scraper to load the Street View images and exposed the scraped images with an API. I find the trick, when you're worried about this, is to use the regular API normally, but save the data that comes in from the normal usage of the API. i.e. Use the Google maps viewer and after the image is loaded, grab it however you have to, and post it t…
And while that’s not conclusive, they can just look at how your application functions to see what’s going on.