Comics about software development in a small Vancouver startup.
JK I hate it.
Three Goblin Art

pixel skylines
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ

shark vs the universe

oozey mess

roma★
trying on a metaphor

Andulka
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
Show & Tell
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH
Peter Solarz
official daine visual archive

izzy's playlists!
Monterey Bay Aquarium

@theartofmadeline
sheepfilms
Xuebing Du

Origami Around

blake kathryn
seen from Germany

seen from Spain
seen from Germany
seen from Italy
seen from United States
seen from Singapore

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States

seen from Lithuania

seen from Netherlands
seen from United Kingdom

seen from Mexico
seen from Mexico

seen from France

seen from Mexico

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
@techtherapy
Comics about software development in a small Vancouver startup.
JK I hate it.
Apple CEO Tim Cook has made no secret of his disdain for online services that ask you to trade highly personal data for convenience — a trade that describes most big advertising-supported...
Lots of good things:
"If you put a key under the mat for the cops, a burglar can find it too," he [Tim Cook] said.
or, my favorite:
"Our privacy is being attacked on multiple fronts," Cook said in a speech that he delivered remotely, according to EPIC. "I'm speaking to you from Silicon Valley, where some of the most prominent and successful companies have built their businesses by lulling their customers into complacency about their personal information. They're gobbling up everything they can learn about you and trying to monetize it. We think that's wrong. And it's not the kind of company that Apple wants to be."
I like this new, scrappy Microsoft. The one that seems concerned with giving customers what they want.
These bills rationalize injustice by pretending to defend something many of us hold dear. They go against the very principles our nation was founded on, and they have the potential to undo decades of progress toward greater equality.
To say the least. How so many care so deeply to hurt others who simply wish to be equal is beyond me.
Fortune gives some insight on Tim's leadership style. Tim himself, talking about all of the flack he got early after taking the CEO role at Apple:
I’m not running for office. I don’t need your vote. I have to feel myself doing what’s right. If I’m the arbiter of that instead of letting the guy on TV be that or someone who doesn’t know me at all, then I think that’s a much better way to live.
There are several highlights that point out just how this is and isn't Steve Jobs' Apple. They maintain the culture, the high level of detail on products, the taste. But in other ways, it's quite different, and this article serves to show that with it's very existence. As Adam Lashinsky points out in the article, Tim's Apple is much more open to the press and the outside world than Steve's (although, don't expect that Apple to deviate from it's usual secrecy about stuff that matters like unannounced products).
“The standard bearer needs a good kick in the ass every once in a while.”
I'm making my way through Becoming Steve Jobs, the new biography of Jobs that hopes to set right what Isaacson got wrong. I'm enjoying it so far. It's not scathing, but it doesn't pull punches, either. Today I ran across a quote from Steve Jobs in 1991 during an interview with Bill Gates.
At the time, Steve is in the midst of his exodus from Apple. Bill and Microsoft are eating Apple's lunch. NeXT, Steve's venture at the time, is struggling and it's starting to become a real question whether or not Steve will remain relevant to the industry. Whether or not he realized it at the time, the next quote will almost form Apple's modus operandi on Steve's return, and lead Apple to where they are today:
Fundamentally, the PC industry is taking the existing and repackaging it or making it run faster. I think that's much more valuable than I used to. But I also think that what's the real trick, and the real necessity to keep our industry healthy, is to balance the incremental improvement with some big steps, and where they're going to come from. The standard bearer needs a good kick in the ass every once in a while. [Besides], it's great for the creator of the deviant innovation. If they're right, there's a big pot of gold there, and the ability to make a contribution to the world.
Given the context of Steve's history during his first tenure at Apple, the quote about seeing value in incremental improvement is a big deal. A few paragraphs earlier, Steve admits that part of the failure of the Apple III (an incremental product) was probably in part due to his stealing talent from the project to work on the Mac (a big step.)
The rest of Apple's history is easy to relate back to this quote:
Bondi-iMacs - increment
OS X - big step
iPod - big step
iPod Mini, shuffle, etc - increments
iPhone - big step
iPhones after - increment (though not without their share of arguably big steps)
iPad - big step
...etc.
If you go back and look at the increments, it also becomes clear just how much Steve came to realize the value.
This is a fundamental misunderstanding that many have had about Apple since Jobs' return, most notable after his death, when Apple is suddenly beset on all sides asking "Where is all of the innovation?" as the iPad is just leaving the crib.
Nevertheless, I'm sure John Gruber read this, took a long sip of scotch, and nodded silently to himself. In any case, there is a lot of insight in this book missing from Isaacon's, and if you're a fan of Jobs or Apple or the technology industry, you should read it.
Why hire a bunch of guys that know how to make electric cars unless you want to make an electric car?
Very comprehensive list from Jason Snell.
OS X beta program must have gone well. And this certainly couldn't hurt. They definitely need to do something.
Yep. I'm going to pop some popcorn and watch the Internet flip it's shit when the prices of the Edition come out.
Lots of smoke to this rumor.
If this is true, they are competing with Tesla, almost without a doubt. Honda Civics aren't going anywhere any time soon, and I would be very surprised to see it was a car under $40,000. Just google what Jony Ive has been driving lately.
Also, if this is true, I can't wait to see someone with software in a car that isn't a complete clusterfuck.
Also, how much is this going to screw up analogies? "The Apple car is like the BMW of cars... Wait."
Unlike the usual crapware that comes pre-bundled on most Windows PCs, this opens your machine to a variety of very bad things. The short of it - that lock on your browser bar that makes you think that your bank is really your bank - can't trust that on machines compromised by this software.
Bummer. I've been buying and advising purchase of Lenovo for some time now.
On a side note, is there a PC laptop that you can get that doesn't have horrible out of the box experience?
This is probably the piece to read about Jony Ive. Very long, worth the read. As Gruber said, we'll likely be referring to this piece for years to come.
Remember when download.com was *the* place to go to avoid this kind of crap? How far we've fallen.
A Quick Word on Social Media and Privacy
There has been a recent trend on Facebook of posting a legal-sounding disclaimer that is supposed to prevent Facebook from using stuff on your profile (posts, video, pictures, etc) for their own profit without your permission. On most of the posts that I've seen, it starts off with something like "Better safe than sorry..." followed by:
Due to the fact that Facebook has chosen to involve software that will allow the theft of my personal information, I state: at this date of January 4, 2015, in response to the new guidelines of Facebook, pursuant to articles L.111, 112 and 113 of the code of intellectual property, I declare that my rights are attached to all my personal data drawings, paintings, photos, video, texts etc. published on my profile and my page. For commercial use of the foregoing my written consent is required at all times.
I'm impressed to see that people I wouldn't normally expect trying to exercise some form of digital privacy, but we should all be aware that this doesn't really do anything. Snopes explains:
In any case, Facebook users cannot retroactively negate any of the privacy or copyright terms they agreed to when they signed up for their accounts, nor can they unilaterally alter or contradict any new privacy or copyright terms instituted by Facebook, simply by posting a contrary legal notice on their Facebook walls.
The Snopes article hits on an important point that most simply aren't aware of: You agreed to all of that stuff when you signed up. You are effectively giving Facebook all of those things every time you post a picture, or a poem, or whatever you put on your wall.
Though EULAs1 can be invalidated by pre-existing laws or court cases, nothing of a sort has happened like this with Facebook to date. Even had it, in your particular case you'd probably be forced to go through a costly court proceeding to get the law to side with you anyway, standing against Facebook's army of lawyers.
What you can do
You still can maintain some control over your digital life on the web, however it's usually through careful management or personal policy about what and how you post. Some personal rules that I use:
Everything on the internet is public, regardless of what you expect or the site claims. Through hacking or carelessness of the developers, information you expect to stay private can and often does become public. Much of what you post on Facebook that you think is private is easily accessible by the public at large, let alone Facebook themselves. For this reason, I never post anything that I wouldn't be comfortable being read or shown to my boss, prospective employers, clergy, grandma, or whatever else. Particularly post-Snowden, it's no longer a conspiracy theory - the stuff you think is private on the internet isn't.
Anything that's "free" should be viewed cautiously.2 Free internet companies often operate by using your data to sell you targeted ads (Google, Gmail, Facebook), selling your data (Facebook), or by hoping to convert you to a paying customer (Dropbox, Google Drive, etc). In some of those cases, you may be comfortable with those terms. I use all of the aforementioned services, but I use them with the knowledge of how they make their money, and therefore what is safe[ish] to do with those services. Follow the money, make your decision based on that. If you can't easily figure out how a company or service makes it's money, you should look for something else.
Where possible, your privacy is generally better served using services you control on your own hardware. This gets past the scope of this article, but things like Owncloud, Bittorrent Sync, Firefox, arkOS, and so on. It's more work and less convenient, but privacy and personal liberty generally is.
Most of us will continue to use these services. Though I personally don't like Facebook's product, I can't get around the allure of using that thing that everyone I know uses and connects with. However, I use Facebook with a knowledge of how they make their money, and how to control my digital privacy while doing it to a level I'm comfortable with. I don't have illusions that Facebook can't scrape my feed and figure out a lot about me, or that I might run into one of my photos posted on a stock photo website. That greatly affects how I use Facebook, and it should affect how you use it, too.
Finally, if this type of thing is important to you, one of the best things you can do is follow and donate The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which I would probably call the foremost authority and advocate for privacy on the web.
End User License Agreement: that thing you agree to every time you start a new service, open your new phone, buy a new computer, break the seal for on a DVD... ↩︎
Though I use a lot of FOSS software, I still do view it with a certain amount of skepticism and prefer to stick with projects that have been tested and have a lot of community backing. It's still not fool-proof though (see: Heartbleed.). ↩︎
Facebook, Google and a host of other companies have undoubtedly changed the way we interact with the Internet. This has given us the luxury of enjoying tons of free Web and mobile services. However, we need to remember that if we aren’t buying something from a site or app, we (or our personal data) are likely the product being sold. At the end of the day, almost no one can truly control the use of their own identity information — in exchange for these “free” services, our identities are being traded without us being a part of the value chain.
Always know where the company gets their money. It will help you align your motivations to other companies. Gives you a much better idea whether your ideals line up with theirs, especially in regards to privacy.1
Which is one of the reasons why I am nervous about Tumblr: I don't know exactly where their money comes from, aside from VC funding. ↩︎
Another good step towards privacy.