[Quote:]

We have decided to drop the non-disclosure agreement (NDA) for released iPhone software.

We put the NDA in place because the iPhone OS includes many Apple inventions and innovations that we would like to protect, so that others don’t steal our work. It has happened before. While we have filed for hundreds of patents on iPhone technology, the NDA added yet another level of protection. We put it in place as one more way to help protect the iPhone from being ripped off by others.

However, the NDA has created too much of a burden on developers, authors and others interested in helping further the iPhone’s success, so we are dropping it for released software. Developers will receive a new agreement without an NDA covering released software within a week or so. Please note that unreleased software and features will remain under NDA until they are released.

Thanks to everyone who provided us constructive feedback on this matter.

And guess what – developers immediately start talking about interesting ways to have apps communicate.

Secrecy doesn’t work. Next up: drop the stupid limits on what gets listed in the app store.

[Quote:]

Murlene Wilkes, owner of Harbor Adjusting Services, and holder of a $1.2 million/yr. contract with the State of Alaska to handle workers compensation claims, apparently told a big fat fib. When Branchflower asked her if the governor’s office had ever asked her to deny a workers compensation claim for Palin’s ex-brother-in-law Trooper Mike Wooten (the trooper in “Troopergate”), she said no. Never. Really.

Mike Wooten, of course, is involved in a bitter custody dispute with Palin’s sister Molly. The Palins do not like him. Some say they have made a vengeful and personal sport out of ruining his career.

Problem is, that there are actually honest people in the world….and one of them works for Murlene Wilkes at Harbor Investments. This unnamed worker made a little phone call to the tip line that Branchflower set up at the beginning of the investigation. According to the tipster, yes indeed, the governor’s office DID put pressure to deny the claim.

Hard evidence contradicting sworn testimony has a certain effect on people. Murlene Wilkes, faced with this situation, decided to change her testimony according to a report in The Public Record. Now, with the little extra incentive of avoiding perjury charges, she has admitted that she was asked to deny the claim – at the direct request of Sarah and Todd Palin.

[Quote:]

Katie Couric asks her a simple question: What magazines or newspapers did you read regularly before being picked for VP? Palin can’t name one. She does say, however, that she’s “read most of them.” Most of them? What does she think, we’re talking about how many flavors of Ben & Jerry’s she’s ever tried? There are 1,422 daily newspapers in the US and 6,253 weeklies. And I can’t even begin to count the number of magazines. Sarah Palin would like us to believe that she’s read “most of them”?

[Quote:]

[Quote:]

[Quote:]

The MPAA is suing RealNetworks for making a product that will rip a DVD, crap it up with DRM, and store it on your hard-drive. The MPAA says that only their stupid DRM, and not RealNetworks’ stupid DRM, can be used to cripple DVDs. My take? A pox on both their houses.

Except this:

Lawyers for the MPAA, in a teleconference with reporters, said Kaleidesape and RealDVD are circumventing “technology designed to prevent copying.”

The lawyers, who asked that their names not be published, said they were concerned “Consumers will think this is a legal product…when in fact it is totally illegal.”

Wait wait wait wait: what? These unnamed lawyers are on a press-call with the media, as spokespeople for their company, and they “asked that their names not be published?” And journalists complied?

Truly, this is a new low in chickenshittery that has me scraping my jaw off my chest. These lawyers aren’t deep-throat whistle-blowers sneaking information out of their employers’ filing cabinets: they’re the official spokespeople for the firm. And they get anonymity?

[Quote:]

There’s two kinds of people asking me about the economy lately: people with money wanting to know how to keep it “safe,” and people without money, wanting to know how to keep safe, themselves.

Maybe it’s the difference between those two concerns that best explains the underlying nature of today’s fiscal crisis.

[..]

Bush’s tax cuts and other measures favoring the rich led to the biggest redistribution of wealth from poor to rich in American history. The result was that the wealthy—the investment class—had more money to invest, or lend, than there were people and businesses looking to borrow.

The easiest way to bring more borrowers into the system—and to create more of a market for money—was to promote homeownership in America. This is precisely what the Bush administration did, touting home ownership as an American right. Of course, they weren’t talking about home ownership at all, but rather pushing people to borrow money tied to the value of a house.If people could be persuaded to take mortgages on homes, real estate values would go up for those already invested (like land trusts and real estate funds) and banks would have a market for the excess money they had accumulated.

[..]

The bigger picture, of course, is that speculation just worked too well for too long. The disparity between the market values and real values (rich people and poor people) got too large. Every asset class, even money itself, got too expensive. We became more valuable for our borrowing power than our labor—which also meant there was no way to work off our debt. Meanwhile, the people using reality as an investment vehicle have overwhelmed the real economy on which their “structured investments” are based.

Sure, this has happened before. It’s just that, traditionally, when wealth disparity got too great and there wasn’t enough money in the right places, the wealthiest bankers temporarily suspended their greed to bail out the system. Or progressive tax policies opened corporate coffers, permitting a “New Deal” that employed people while rebuilding the infrastructure required to make real things and provide real services to citizens.

Today, however, such temporary restraints on greed are systematically untenable and philosophically unthinkable. Conservatives are still so angry about New Deal reforms of the 1930s that that they have infused politics and banking with an economic ideology that sees any regulation of worker exploitation or predatory investment as anti-capitalist, anti-American, and even anti-God.

So instead we are the beneficiaries of “wink” reform: stuff that’s supposed to make us feel good while reassuring the speculators that their interests will remain paramount. A few hundred dollars mailed to every American family creates the illusion that government is lending a helping hand, but this money is not redistributing anything. It’s being taken from the same people who are receiving it, in the hope that they’ll just pump it back into the system at Wal-Mart or the Exxon station.

[Quote:]

The servers hosting the Web sites of the House of Representatives and its members have been overwhelmed with millions of e-mails in the past few days, forcing administrators to implement the “digital version of a traffic cop” to handle the overload — for the first time ever.

“This is unprecedented,” said Jeff Ventura, communications director for the House’s chief administrator.

The tidal waves of e-mails and page views began over the weekend after negotiators announced Sunday that a deal had been reached on legislation to enact a $700 billion bailout of the country’s financial system.

[Quote:]

The days on which U.S. presidential elections are held every four years are hazardous — and not just for politicians.

It turns out that more people die in traffic accidents on those days than comparable days one week before and one week later, according to a study published on Tuesday.

Reasons for the jump in fatalities could range from increased traffic and distracted or unfit drivers on the road to people traveling unfamiliar routes or simply being in a hurry, Dr. Donald Redelmeier of the University of Toronto and Robert Tibshirani of Stanford University said.

“We hypothesized that mobilizing approximately 50 percent to 55 percent of the population, along with U.S. reliance on motor vehicle travel” might result in more fatal election day crashes, the authors said.