This creates an interesting point of failure. What happens when the private key is stolen or hacked? Because the ETF holders are holding cash with the expectations of assurances and insurances that cash comes with. But uh, that's not how Bitcoins work.
For the same reason that people lose their damn minds when the word "privilege" comes out. They don't understand the issue, they don't understand what it's like to be on the other end of it. "She should take it as a compliment", etc. It's a defense mechanism for those that realize they might be creepers.
No, that's what the people who don't understand what "privilege" is (and ironically react vitriolically to it as the headline questions) project onto others because that's all the more they're able to comprehend about this issue because "I've never seen it; must not happen", etc.
Sometimes people disagreeing have "privilege." And sometimes the people they are disagreeing with have just got it wrong. Regardless of the existence of sexism, nobody gets a free pass for all their claims or complaints just because of their gender. That would indeed be a "privilege."
Why would any self respecting blogger interested in owning their own content, brand, identity or control over those ever use any sort of platform like Medium? For one, we know their short lived. For another, just freaking why? I guess if I wrote and needed people to read it to eat or get my ego stroked.
Ha, even people here can't see the value in decentralization and peer-to-peer connection. Startups think "we'll just get enough users on our proprietary network; ???; profit!" and big companies want the lockin.
Hangouts does everything I need and it does it exceedingly well, but I hate using it knowing how locked in I am.
I use iMessage constantly, and while the lock-in bugs me theoretically, everyone I need to talk to regularly uses iOS, so it does not actually practically affect me very often.
The last time I can recall it being an issue was when I went to message someone who was SMS-only from my iPad. The whole SMS-overloading thing for iMessage is the most effective/profitable marketing decision Apple has ever made, I think.
I mean, when Hangouts finished Voice integration it will do all of that and more. It can already cross conference in VoIP and PTSN users, when they finish GV integration, you'll just text/chat with another Hangouts user and it won't matter if they're on their smartphone, dumbphone or laptop.
>so you couldn't even share your physical discs with friends?
Yeah, what assholes, instead they made it so you don't have to screw around with physical media and can instead share your games with 10 of your friends around the world without having to deal with a disc.
Also, they just removed that update fee.
Besides, bitching about the Xbox One's distribution model is kinda overdone at this point.
Yeah, what assholes, instead they made it so you don't have to screw around with physical media and can instead share your games with 10 of your friends around the world without having to deal with a disc.
Well, to be fair, there was nothing really concrete about their plans. And now that they've changed their minds they can talk big about how awesome it would have been. But I seriously doubt the end result would have amazing as everyone claimed it would have been.
I'll post this again, from an interview taken on June 10th.
[Phil] Spencer: But we're also trying to launch and we understand feature sets. We've got partners and publishers [we] want to talk to about how lending is going to work. We don't dictate pricing to our partners on our platform. We want to give them capabilities to support content and business models that they want to support with their content. It sounds like Sony is trying to do the same thing. How do we support what our partners want to do? We want to have the conversations with them and land on a plan.
We understand lending and the benefits of lending, so, funny videos aside, we get it. We want to make sure we land on the right solution that fits a digital ecosystem moving forward.
If you think about lending in digital ecosystems, it's not something a lot of other people have supported. We're going to commit... gifting, we said we're going to support that, secondary market we're going to support that even though the license is digital and it's not as trivial as just handing a disc to someone else. Lending, we want to do it, we want to work with our partners to make it possible.
Kotaku: You understand, obviously, that because these things exist on discs, it's why it seems so odd that—you're not launching until November—since I would think I can lend you this notebook and discs, surely I could do the same, but you guys are saying that you won't have the lending solution.
Spencer: We don't have a lending solution today.
Kotaku: You might have one?
Spencer: We don't have a path... I don't want to make a commitment to somebody without a plan of record on how that lands. I could over-promise, under-deliver on the features. I don't want to do that. I want to make sure. I understand how gifting is going to work. I understand how the secondary market is going to work.
From Phil Spencer's own mouth, sharing was never an actual feature of the XBox One.
That whole article that you link to is about the Share with 10 Family Members feature, leading me to conclude that "lending" in that sentence is explicitly physical lending and... you know... from the context directly around it, reselling used games.
>Xbox One will enable new forms of access for families. Up to ten members of your family can log in and play from your shared games library on any Xbox One.
That's a concrete statement from MS and one they made numerous times. And they more or less say "yes, we don't care who the 10 people actually are".
I mean, come on, did we both read the same block of text? It is extremely explicit at the end about being physical lending.
Saying "we don't care who the 10 people are" is a world of difference from "there are no restrictions on the 10 people you can share with." It is not implementation details that are defined in a contract. It is not information.
And again, Spencer was talking about "lending in a digital ecosystem." The thing Microsoft did not have concrete plans for. Yes, he mentioned they have a plan for gifting games, they have a plan for reselling games, but he contrasted this with the difficulty of, and their lack of plan for lending games.
Yeah I guess it's moot now, but at this point I always interpret a lack of specifics when talking about a product as marketing speak. We have fact sheets, we have plenty of discreet, unambiguous information of other features; when somebody goes out of the way to hype up a feature of a product while painstakingly avoiding concrete, verifiable information about said feature, and verifiable information about said feature doesn't appear in the previously mentioned fact sheets, I assume the feature doesn't actually exist yet. Especially when an executive goes on to literally say the feature doesn't exist.
"Give your family access to your entire games library anytime, anywhere: Xbox One will enable new forms of access for families. Up to ten members of your family can log in and play from your shared games library on any Xbox One. Just like today, a family member can play your copy of Forza Motorsport at a friend’s house. Only now, they will see not just Forza, but all of your shared games. You can always play your games, and any one of your family members can be playing from your shared library at a given time."
This is so exceedingly stupid I can't believe it's honestly posted on TechCrunch. Not that there's a ton of rumor for my opinion of TC to fall further, but they'd do themselves a favor to pull this.
It's so obvious that the author has never used Google Now and/or has no idea what he's talking about in general. Painful; I honestly checked twice to make sure this wasn't a "post from the past" where we were jestfully mocking in hindsight the silly "OMG SIRI IS THE BEST THING EVER" attitude from two years ago.
Honestly I thought that was dead even before Google Now came out and sprinted laps around it...
Actually, I've used Google Now extensively, and think it's really cool.
But I think you're missing the point: Siri has major disruptive potential that isn't being realized at all (by Apple).
Google Now is kinda a half-measure, and if Google wants to really defend itself against disruption (not just from Siri, but from the task-completion engine paradigm) it has to go all out on Google Now.
Siri doesn't do much well (besides set geo-fenced reminders), but the underlying technology enables a much broader set of use cases.
When I say "half-measure" I don't mean that Google Now is worse than Siri. I mean it's not really an all-out assault on the existing model of Google Search. It's more like a complement to it, rather than a disruptor.
A real task-completion engine would be disruptive, and not a half-measure.
>Siri has major disruptive potential that isn't being realized at all (by Apple).
And Google is already doing (or it's obvious they're in progress for) all of those things.
How can anyone who has honestly used both services, in any world in our known Universe, call "Now" a "half-measure" compared to Siri? You could cut off one of its legs and it'd still lap it.
Google is going all out on Now. What are they averaging, 3 new card integrations every 2-3 weeks? EVERYTHING funnels into it. It literally knows where I'm going 90% of the time I get in my car. It alerts me when my packages are delivered. It's far more intelligent and has access to more of my data than Apple will likely ever have for any of their customers.
Here, I'll make it easy: What opportunity does Apple have with Siri that Google doesn't have or hasn't already leveraged with Now?
>But then it risks bulldozing the AdWords model.
Nah. I made a note to myself earlier today aloud "Google, note to self, pick up toilet paper". That was instantly automatically saved in Keep. Now, because Google knows I'm driving home, they can look up a retail partner that is close on my route home and automatically remind, navigate me there and then back home. There are a ton of usage stories like this. What if my partner emails me a "pick this up at the store"? They can add a filter like they're already doing for flights and shipping and they're done, they get that integration and visibility surfaced "free" through Now. There are PLENTY of opportunities for Google because of the data they have access to.
(Cynical hackers forget that advertising works because in some cases it ADDS VALUE for the consumer. That's what Ad Words have always been about. If they're not intelligently targeted, they're useless.)
I don't see any reason that Google Now has to obliviate AdWords. And in fact, funneling data to/through Now gives huge, huge advantages when we already know that Google is work on Glass and Watch.
It sounds like you're angry because you don't feel I'm giving enough credit to Google Now.
But the piece itself wasn't about Google Now; it was about how Apple is screwing up the opportunity to do something really awesome with Siri, for reasons that I don't really understand.
For the record: I think Google Now is really interesting, but it's more like a "pre-emptive search" engine than a "task completion engine." If Google really builds a task-completion engine (and they certainly have the talent to do so), it would change the search paradigm.
But they make tons and tons of money on the existing search paradigm, so they have an innovators' dilemma.
>I think Google Now is really interesting, but it's more like a "pre-emptive search" engine than a "task completion engine."
It's both? Is there some "task" that Siri can do that Now can't? Because it has intuition, it's bad?
>it was about how Apple is screwing up the opportunity to do something really awesome with Siri
And my point is that they have none of the data necessary to do the real smart, amazing things that Now already does and will be able to. Even now, I guarantee (okay, not really, I can't say this as inside fact) that the Bing team isn't giving Apple query data unless it goes through Siri, so they're still never, ever going to have the full picture of their user like Google has.
I guess my point is, why would Siri try to fight Google on this, they have no unique leverage or technical or data advantage, it seems like any money spent trying to compete with Now's intelligence would be foolish unless they're really just going to go full-frontal on all Google services which would be utter insane suicide based on iCloud.
I mean, when you say "task based", what is more task based than a service that automatically notifies you about tasks like flights or shopping lists or package shipping notifications or directions to your destination, all without you never lifting a finger, based purely on your email and search habits (this already exists, today, with Now). That's as "task" driven as I can imagine. Each "card" is basically a task.
A classic example of Apple trying to fix this is a Maps app for Mavericks that has a "send to phone" feature. Something Google had and already retired in favor of Now and that works amazingly well.
If I use Google Maps on my desktop, search for directions, then choose public transportation, that's what goes to Now. If on another day I choose bike directions, that is what goes to Now.
Same goes for open tabs in Chrome, searching for flights and more. You perform the task on your computer and your Android phone, with Google Now, "just knows" what you are/were looking for.
One cool feature that I think came from ITA Software purchase is that, if the flight you looked for is delayed, Now lets you know it's delayed and change your directions to fit the new flight arrival if needed. When I first saw the delayed info on Now I didn't believe it, so I dismissed. Upon arrival on Heathrow, the arrival board was showing the exact same delay as Now. I was blown away.
I'm happy to provide humor. Cool links, bro. Nice how they all refer to the same old, stale data, but you list them so nicely in a list as if there's some obvious conclusion that is somehow relevant to this discussion.
Siri's a gimmick and everyone knows it. I'm baffled by the attribution of some magic to it that is going to allow people to stop using Google. If anything, those ridiculous links would indicate that Google's not going anywhere, anytime. I want to know how Siri is going to do all of this magical nonsense when Apple hasn't done any of the work to make themselves available to the data necessary to do so. As I've mentioned basically from the beginning. Sigh.
Oh and several of those are "total mobile revenue". We all know people buy through the App Store more.
So they're already implementing uPnP or some sort of MAC address identification to make a mental map of the devices and media devices in your home and can already make recommendations for your actions/tasks/behaviors based on that. Nuts, that code is in place, waiting to be leveraged in cool ways.
Yeah, I'm sure Google's fucked.
>What is it you don't understand?
Actually, any of what that garbled mess was at the beginning of that reply? Custom app/searchbox, wtf does that even mean? The article actually goes out of it's way to talk about how Siri sucked when it was used as a standalone app. >_<
Apple can customize the UI and the search results on iOS devices if they want. Apple can take Google's search results (without Google's ads) or Bing/Yahoo, format it, add information from Yelp, Wikipedia, Facebook, Twitter, WolframAlpha, etc. Make this format the default "search results" and make it universally accessible from Siri, the browser, apps, and so on...
>Apple can take Google's search results (without Google's ads)
LOL. Why I bothered even reply to this comment is a mystery. Yeah, I'm sure they can just sprinkle in that stuff and it will magically be great right? Just like Maps blew our mind as soon as they finished that very last strategic partnership, right?
BTW: Google already does all of those things. Kthanx
>Google doesn't have a monopoly on quality data when it comes to search.
>lol it's funny how upset you are about all these.
Nah, I'm laughing at how clueless and misinformed you are on basically everything in the thread so far.
"U mad" is the standard response for trolls that can't help themselves. I don't even see how what I wrote is construed as "mad".
Here, tell me more about how Apple can just screen scrape Google. I want to laugh some more.
>Another wannabe-knee-jerk-lets-copy-Apple product from Google. Why am I not surprised.
Wow. Just read through your comments, I shouldn't even be typing out these letters. You're obviously a little shit troll. Accusing a company of copying a product that hasn't even been leaked or announced or hinted at by the company. What a fucking poor persecution complex you've got.
A sad little troll that pines for Apple, laments that geeks can't get girlfriends and runs circular logic about "big government"; just shoot me.
Thanks for the link to up to date stats, so 'majority' is no longer correct according to those graphs, that was misleading. However the fragmentation picture still isn't pretty, even if improving - more than 30% are still on Android 2.x. This compares really badly with iOS where > 90% are on the latest and < 1% on 2 versions behind, so that's one area I really feel Android is lagging Apple on - mostly because of their more open nature, customisation, and the upgrades not going through google exclusively.
Ubuntu OS looks interesting but has no traction right now, I'll be keeping an eye on that though. I'm afraid WebOS is dead at the moment - choice of which platforms to target is more political than technical unfortunately, which is why it'd be great to see Google pushing a more open system which lets people use any language they want for development. They have enough clout to make that happen and not many do. I'm aware it's very unlikely as I said in the post above - There's no chance they'll do this for their current API, so they'd need to have a radical rethink of just what a mobile OS should provide.
Please don't take this as some sort of attack on Google or Android.
What more do you want, sounds like your needs are being met. Take the android kernel and write a new UI. Then you can run it on one of the what, hundred different devices that CM supports?
That is of course a huge amount of work for one person and likely doomed to failure. To be clear that I'm not blaming Google or demanding that they change, just agreeing with the OP that I'd like to see more options, but pointing out that that requires a fundamental rethink of the entanglement between UI and API. I've written a few iOS apps which use HTML views extensively and make little use of the UI toolkits using urls etc to pass actions and move screen, so I'm well aware this is possible using the current system, but it's currently a pain to try to use another language as your core language for an app.
Yeah, but what's it matter? Those people buy cheap Android phones. There are several options for up to date Android phones that are either Nexus, I mean, many of them if you're a GSM user. And many more if you want to use AOSP or CyanogenMod.
And devs get backporting of most apis via the Play Store so it's not like fragmentation is an issue very often at all.
The hardware is out there. The software is out there. You could port Firefox OS to the SGS4, you would have basically /everything/ on your checklist, and you can buy a 100% unlocked GSM SGS4 from Google and put Firefox OS, or port webOS, or whatever OS you want.
Are you simply lamenting that you can't walk into a store and buy that combo? I guess I don't care when I can follow the steps to do it myself (of course, now I'm starting to download stuff to play around with porting Firefox OS to my SGS4)
>requires a fundamental rethink of the entanglement between UI and API
Heh, I actually know of a platform that allows you to write web apps and from them invoke native code that conforms to their spec. And their vision is to have that platform spread across all device sizes. Do you know who it is? :)
It's more that I'm lamenting that as a mobile app developer for commercial clients I am forced to use the platforms which have traction, which leaves me with the unenviable choice of iOS or Android, both of which have significant warts, and neither of which leave much choice for experimentation in languages for writing apps or UIs.
Cut cable, save the money, buy a projector after a year, hook it up to your computer, subscribe to Hulu/Netflix and enjoy some media when you want without TV. I hate TV anymore, mostly because when I do watch media, I watch comedies and commercials diminish my enjoyment.