The problem here is not that the bot is annoying, the problem is that the bot is sexist. Responding to sexist remarks with something that signifies that those remarks are sexist is not the same as making sexist remarks. Whether or not those two bots are annoying is a different issue that is now used as an excuse to rationalize hating on the second bot.
How can you be so blind to that? I’m sitting here in disbelief.
Apple doesn‘t have a significant revenue stream from existing devices. Why does everyone think they are making lots of money by selling apps and media? They do not.
Is it really the case that someone has to pay child support for a child that is proven to be not theirs?
I did some superficial googling and found the case of one man who has to pay child support even though a DNA test proved he is not the father, because he missed all the deadlines for challenging the ruling. That seems like an unfortunate edge case to me, not some general pattern one has to be worried about.
I think you might be mistaken about the legal situation, but I’m more than happy to be proven wrong.
As far as I know Apple has yet to use its ability to pull apps from devices. Apple said it only will do it when malware appears and that has not yet happened.
Making judgement calls is a normal part of the justice system. The powers it has will let you imagine numerous slippery slopes, so that isn’t an especially convincing argument.
It’s still public speech, though, and not in any way personal. I was responding to a comment that the government reading twitter and blogs is akin to reading emails which is total bullshit.
Uhm, everyone can read tweets and blogs. They are public†.
I’m not sure how I think about this particular verdict (or whether making such comments in pubic should be illegal or not), but I do get very angry when people tell me that racism (or homophobia) is part of the game. No. No it's not. Being racist or homophobe is not being “rowdy”. It’s disgusting and no one should do it. Tradition or any other such nonsense is no valid defense.
Insulting fans and players of other clubs: Ok and expected.
Stealing and theft is often used to refer to things that are not stealing or theft in the legal sense. This is especially prevalent when talking about ideas and designs. The speakers usually do not want laws to change, they don't want to sue.
You cannot take the use of such words alone as an indication. That just makes no sense. Stealing and theft aren’t legal terms, not first and foremost. They only happen to also refer to legal concepts.
(It's obviously not ironic if he doesn’t call for or wants to use legal protections. Being outraged about something doesn't mean you want to make it illegal. That’s an important difference and I'm not sure why so many people are ignorant of that difference.)
Emphasizing speed misses qualities people actually love about Windows Phone 7 by miles. Only someone who is disconnected from or unfamiliar with the product will come up with stuff like that.
There is the stark and fresh design that (independently of whatever merits it might have) makes other mobile operating systems look old. There is the cohesiveness of the experience that even makes iOS look like it doesn’t know what it wants to be. There is the integration with Facebook that makes the phone personal without having to do anything†.
All those are things actual people praised about Windows Phone 7. Not speed in some highly constrained scenarios.
—
† If you use Facebook a lot. This might shock some people on HN, but most people who also can buy a smartphone do.
Not because of that. iTunes exists to make Apple’s hardware attractive, not the other way around. (Same with the App Store.) It’s pocket change for Apple. Just look at their quarterly reports to see what they are actually making money with.
They might want to keep the box around for the same reason there is a Mac mini (or they are still selling the iPhone 3GS and the iPad 2): To offer a low-priced entry point. They might also kill it because it clutters their product line. Or because it would be too cheap compared to a full-blown TV and everyone might just go with it instead of the TV.
I'm not sure about that. I saw articles about that on the front page of big news websites. Apple is a big deal, the press will report on them. Even worse: They will report about the scandal but likely not about steps someone takes to mitigate the problem or things that explain the problem. That way we here on HN might know very well every little detail about a scandal (including things that make the scandal less of a big deal) but the general public might not.