Accusing people is one way of engaging with them to verify if they have unspoken allegiances, if you are in the privileged position of being able to communicate with google ? perhaps you can communicate to them on mine and others behalf then ? The silence of a majority of users cannot be interpreted as complicity or agreement, as only a minority will ever have the energy for vocalised complaint ? most will accept what is put upon them regardless of its merit. Now that some time has passed my major issue is this google plus login is predominant across all their services if you use chrome, google almost imply you cant search for anything on the web without first logging in to google plus, certainly the average user would perceive it that way? thats is an orwellian invasion of privacy the NSA could only dream of, want internet access ? first you MUST login so we can track everything you do and further its becoming predominant that users must use their actual name for a google plus identity to make any comment online? hence my inability to rate an app now on the google play store ? because google accuse me that my google plus identity … that they created from my youtube identity … is not a real name !? and have suspended certain uses of my google plus identity, the forcing of users to publish under their own name, does have huge potential identity theft and privacy issues attached to it imo ? Also google are trying to associate every identity and account with every other I have, driving me spare ? also I appear to have about 3 youtube derivative identities now, two of which google magically created by themselves and a legacy one making logging in to youtube more of a nightmare to select the right identity as they are all beingatliberty ?, secondarily they are attempting to weave clients of mine’s > google accounts/email whom i support, into my own google+ identity ? super messy and irritating … to have to delete them back out from association to my account …pass that on to the drones in googles ivory towers, as they promote listening but i can get no sense of them listening from my end as a user.

her deep faith … was the necessary personal mental aberration, which served as a conduit for something more important, her desire to see the people of her country break free from the ironically norman descended English kings yoke. especially as the region from which she came had been overrun by the english, after all what care does the bible display for national struggle ? it took a young women of humble origin to inspire the fervent grit necessary, to defend a culture, 20 years later her vision was achieved, and her successes and allegiance to the identity of her culture saw the king crowned before her own death, a necessary step on that road,. Most will not remember the name of the king. Killed for political reasons … she was indeed … but it was a trial by an elite self serving class of corrupt religious fools., who didn’t like the idea of an outsider claiming intercession or direct communication with their fictional god bullshit outside of their control. Who worried about protecting their imagined position in relation to their fictional god, that no lowly maid might however delusory, be allowed to publicly express a more direct relationship with her falsely perceived maker, external to the hierarchy of catholic religious control, for this … she did burn, though the names of those who condemned her are recorded, non but historians wish to remember them, As an Icon of the people … martyred … she will always be remembered.

one commenter wrote re the video >

I respect Joan of Arc so much, as an Englishman, but the war against France began when the Normans and French decided to inflood England in 1066. Until then there was no quarrel between our two lands. Fuck the Norman Invasion!!

I replied

Indeed one vile act begets another, you might extend that thinking to say, we should condemn those who defile an established peaceful border, and claim lands not their own – for selfish greed and benefit, wherever and whenever in history it may occur.

F-Apple, shareholder investor profits driven behemoth, leading a field of rubbish profiteering design choices, is not making the world a better place, god don’t you hate pointless greed ? with a passion ? this 7 for 1 move is just to make investors and stockholders wet, steve would never have approved, their recent profits are mainly driven by china mobile sales, and a whole new market of 1 billion asian people eager for shiny walled garden – overpriced tech rubbish, who don’t yet realise the bad things apple are doing to open standards tech and civility in general, underdog company – has so fully turned into investor class filth preserver. They’re like a disgusting undemocratic law unto themselves.

Corporate manipulation of the markets, if ever ive seen it.

Apple deciding to bast**d-ise and make their own proprietary version of a perfectly good standard like USB2 is astounding, the lightning connector isn’t even USB3 speeds capable?, and the majority of the costs in its production revolves around apple installing unnecessary protection chips into the cable so they can if they wish turn on cable style peripheral/DRM protections to prevent you using 3rd party cables or bring up a warning to threaten you with the idea that your cable is generic so as to force its customers pay £25 for an overpriced USB2 variant that should basically be generic USB3 by now, We need to get the european parliament on this this sort of thing , so they can do something useful for a change rather than waste our money. This is just price gouging and corporate interest style protectionist racketeering in my opinion. I Mean if they want to create a new connector at least make it USB3 capable and magnetic attach like the mag connector, so that docking doesn’t involve physical insertion, just resting style magnetic attach, everything in this world, design wise now seems to be so heavily compromised by greed and stupidity ? Open standards people thats whats in human interest.

I posted this review to the apple UK store … does it appear there ? you must be f**king joking ;) apple doesn’t mind reviews as long as they are positive ? ie apple are a massive censor – who censor everything that makes them look bad, basically apple websites are fantasy land where only promotion of apple can appear, certainly 1 star reviews no longer seem to make it through the apple censor.

general review of lightning cables out there

dissection of lightning cable revealing peripheral digital rights chips no doubt making the cables pointlessly expensive

If anyone would like to argue apple have historically made good connectors please argue with this photo below >

when a forum member asks is lightning connector USB3 based i write for the poor soul >

“Yup I know its hard to believe that lightning connectors are USB2 based but I’m afraid … they are, the first USB3 products were released in Nov 2009, and then apple goes and releases a highly proprietary USB2 based connector standard in september 2012 ? But that is the Apple approach for you, make something average then market the hell out of it, thats why cable based iphone backups or restores are so awfully slow when it comes to gigabytes of data, I’d blame apple, if I were you, sooner or later wireless AC maybe quicker than physical cables, the speed at which apple are adopting reasonably priced cable standards.”

does apple allow this to be published ? NO !

so I alter it to this >

“Yup I know its hard to believe that lightning connectors are USB2 based but I’m afraid … they are, the first USB3 products were released in Nov 2009, and then apple goes and releases a highly proprietary USB2 based connector standard in september 2012 ? But that is the Apple approach for you, make something average then market it to the high heavens, thats why cable based iphone backups or restores are so awfully slow when it comes to gigabytes of data, thank apple, if I were you, sooner or later wireless AC maybe quicker than physical cables, the speed at which apple are adopting reasonably priced cable standards.”

and yes that is publishable. Apparently the words “hell” or “blame” must be excluded in the apple censorship book, didn’t realise theyre believers in fictional post life punishment realms ? or they think blame isn’t something that should be allowed to exist ? especially no doubt when it might be directed at apple.