kalisphoenix
Sep 12, 05:51 AM
I was going to receive a (female) friend tonight, but she postponed for tomorrow...
Call me na�ve, but aren't they supposed to receive you?
Call me na�ve, but aren't they supposed to receive you?
shawnce
Oct 29, 09:35 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Apple appears to have pulled the publicly accessible Mac OS 10.4.8 Source Code (Darwin, the open-source foundation of OS X, and XNU, Darwin's open-source kernel), leaving only developers with ADC log-ins with access to the code (public link (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/), ADC link (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/tarballs/apsl/))
10.4.8 sources have never been available via the Darwin Releases (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/) page (just never linked to the web-page). They have been available via macosforge.org (http://kernel.macosforge.org/intel-build-instructions.html) (links to tarballs on Apple's site) which has been mostly offline and under-construction for the last month and they have been available via the tarball link (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/tarballs/apsl/) (10.4.8 Intel is xnu-792.13.8 (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/tarballs/apsl/xnu-792.13.8.tar.gz)).
Also the "ADC link" referenced for the tarballs is not an ADC account but the standard free open source account that anyone can create. The only requirement is that you read and agree to the open source license. You do not need any type of ADC account, no select or premier, no seed key, just a free Apple ID (create one if you need it) and click that you understand that the APSL exists. This is the same account that you need to gain access to any of Apple's open source items (been this way for years).
The articles premise is bogus, it is making a false statement about something that did NOT happen.
I strongly urge that this article be corrected since it is not true and will only serve as FUD material....
Apple appears to have pulled the publicly accessible Mac OS 10.4.8 Source Code (Darwin, the open-source foundation of OS X, and XNU, Darwin's open-source kernel), leaving only developers with ADC log-ins with access to the code (public link (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/), ADC link (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/tarballs/apsl/))
10.4.8 sources have never been available via the Darwin Releases (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/) page (just never linked to the web-page). They have been available via macosforge.org (http://kernel.macosforge.org/intel-build-instructions.html) (links to tarballs on Apple's site) which has been mostly offline and under-construction for the last month and they have been available via the tarball link (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/tarballs/apsl/) (10.4.8 Intel is xnu-792.13.8 (http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/tarballs/apsl/xnu-792.13.8.tar.gz)).
Also the "ADC link" referenced for the tarballs is not an ADC account but the standard free open source account that anyone can create. The only requirement is that you read and agree to the open source license. You do not need any type of ADC account, no select or premier, no seed key, just a free Apple ID (create one if you need it) and click that you understand that the APSL exists. This is the same account that you need to gain access to any of Apple's open source items (been this way for years).
The articles premise is bogus, it is making a false statement about something that did NOT happen.
I strongly urge that this article be corrected since it is not true and will only serve as FUD material....
Monkey194545
Dec 13, 10:31 AM
This is utter ********. The experience is key, and LTE hardware is nowhere near advanced enough to guarantee the experience that Apple would demand for a device the stature of the iPhone.
Remember: we're talking about the company that withheld phone wallpapers on the Original and 3G iPhones because the experience would have been several milliseconds too slow.
Fact: Verizon is not expecting LTE-capable hardware until mid-2011. There's no way Apple magically has an LTE phone ready to go while everyone else won't have one for 6 months.
Fact: Apple declined to integrate 3G into the iPhone when 3G was already available, because the hardware wasn't power-efficent enough. One of the main distinguishing features of the iPhone is its battery life. They're not going to tarnish that image by hacking first-generation, power-hogging LTE hardware into the phone, in ADDITION to CDMA, which is another radio tech they're only now deploying.
These sources are full of ****. QED.
On your first point: It is also the company that came out with the iphone 4 and its antenna problems.
Your second point: Don't you think Verizon would take the oppurtunity to give apple what they really want over the Android phones: The first 4g phone on Verizon network. That would be a huge advantage. Just because the network isnt fully up yet doesn't mean Verizon couldn't have given apple the tech to make a 4g iphone. Verizon see android phone sales dropping and know that an iphone would boost sales by a huge amount.
Your third point: It would only be one chip, read the article for reference. How do you know how much battery it uses? It may be only a small amount more than 3g. Att's 3g sucked when the 3g iphone came out. It still sucks. Don't underestimate apple and verizon. You may be surprised!
Edit: By no means am a I acknowledging the merit or lack there of of this article
Remember: we're talking about the company that withheld phone wallpapers on the Original and 3G iPhones because the experience would have been several milliseconds too slow.
Fact: Verizon is not expecting LTE-capable hardware until mid-2011. There's no way Apple magically has an LTE phone ready to go while everyone else won't have one for 6 months.
Fact: Apple declined to integrate 3G into the iPhone when 3G was already available, because the hardware wasn't power-efficent enough. One of the main distinguishing features of the iPhone is its battery life. They're not going to tarnish that image by hacking first-generation, power-hogging LTE hardware into the phone, in ADDITION to CDMA, which is another radio tech they're only now deploying.
These sources are full of ****. QED.
On your first point: It is also the company that came out with the iphone 4 and its antenna problems.
Your second point: Don't you think Verizon would take the oppurtunity to give apple what they really want over the Android phones: The first 4g phone on Verizon network. That would be a huge advantage. Just because the network isnt fully up yet doesn't mean Verizon couldn't have given apple the tech to make a 4g iphone. Verizon see android phone sales dropping and know that an iphone would boost sales by a huge amount.
Your third point: It would only be one chip, read the article for reference. How do you know how much battery it uses? It may be only a small amount more than 3g. Att's 3g sucked when the 3g iphone came out. It still sucks. Don't underestimate apple and verizon. You may be surprised!
Edit: By no means am a I acknowledging the merit or lack there of of this article
doctoree
Apr 15, 02:51 PM
Using aluminum would hinder the cellular reception wouldn't it ?
They could employ the same trick they employ in the iPad where they have a plastic Logo in the alu back and the antenna behind the plastic logo..
This shell is still fake as Apple would never use visible, hard edges for the bevelled back but a smooth roundness. Just like the ipad
They could employ the same trick they employ in the iPad where they have a plastic Logo in the alu back and the antenna behind the plastic logo..
This shell is still fake as Apple would never use visible, hard edges for the bevelled back but a smooth roundness. Just like the ipad
840quadra
Jan 5, 09:29 AM
There is also no guarantee that the link will be active during the keynote (aka live) . I made the mistake of Digging WWDC 2006's QT link. It got to the front page, but it wasn't live..
I was :o
I was :o
Amazing Iceman
May 5, 01:14 AM
I think Apple really got it right with the iPad. The main focus won't be USB, SD card slot, HDMI or anything else like that. They have solutions for "connectivity" already. Even if it isn't your preferred solution, they won't go back and do it in a way they don't figure is the ideal way. If they eventually want to allow the additions of mice, printers, cameras, Apple would much rather all that stuff is done through Bluetooth, RFID, or WiFi.
No. The real future of the iPad is for it to become thinner and lighter and add their own cloud based syncing. The rumours are that they have a carbon fiber guy on board now. Perfect. Make everyone else look and feel even clunkier. Sure they'll improve on the cameras and processors, but the idea here is to make a magic piece of paper that can do anything.
They will add the ability to have pressure sensitivity one day (when it doesn't increase the cost of the iPad and is a real alternative to a Wacom Cintiq... which are $2k). Maybe they can find a way to put all the sensitivity in the pen and have it bluetooth that info back to the iPad.... so no pressure sensitive addition to the iPad; just a costly pressure-sensitive bluetooth pen.
Heheh! Compared to your 30" Cinema Display, the iPad looks like an iPod Nano next to a 17" MBP.
The goal of the iPad is to be lightweight and functional. Overloading it with ports would make it as desirable as a Windows NetBook, and I'm not interested in those clunky devices.
No. The real future of the iPad is for it to become thinner and lighter and add their own cloud based syncing. The rumours are that they have a carbon fiber guy on board now. Perfect. Make everyone else look and feel even clunkier. Sure they'll improve on the cameras and processors, but the idea here is to make a magic piece of paper that can do anything.
They will add the ability to have pressure sensitivity one day (when it doesn't increase the cost of the iPad and is a real alternative to a Wacom Cintiq... which are $2k). Maybe they can find a way to put all the sensitivity in the pen and have it bluetooth that info back to the iPad.... so no pressure sensitive addition to the iPad; just a costly pressure-sensitive bluetooth pen.
Heheh! Compared to your 30" Cinema Display, the iPad looks like an iPod Nano next to a 17" MBP.
The goal of the iPad is to be lightweight and functional. Overloading it with ports would make it as desirable as a Windows NetBook, and I'm not interested in those clunky devices.
puuukeey
Jan 9, 04:42 PM
Nevermind
Howmanoid
Apr 15, 10:30 PM
Apple's success is in large part driven by the ecosystem that they have built around iPod/iTunes/iPhone/iPad. Good luck to anyone breaking into that anytime soon. The day I can buy a song on Mac/PC, synch it to my Android phone, then stream it around my home to HiFi or TV then we will have a competitor. Apple knows it, the record companies and studios know it, someone needs to tell Google.
ctdonath
Sep 30, 12:42 PM
I guess you are still in the lets all commute to work and congest the highways and burn all the electricity and gas we can boat.
Some jobs are not conducive to working at/from home.
And I'd imagine that includes being the CEO of a multi-billion-dollar company.
Some jobs are not conducive to working at/from home.
And I'd imagine that includes being the CEO of a multi-billion-dollar company.
l3lack J4ck
Nov 24, 01:24 PM
could you link me on how to get the government discount? my dad works for the post office and that is federal government...could somoene tell me how to get this discount? thanks
Jethrotoe
Apr 28, 06:07 AM
I must say, I have never seen a more patient group of mentors in my life.
Hats off to ya. You are all great. I've learned volumes reading your posts.
And thank you.
Hats off to ya. You are all great. I've learned volumes reading your posts.
And thank you.
esaleris
Jan 10, 03:59 PM
I think in a world where you only get 2-3 seconds of a consumer's time as they walk by, the mental snapshot of folks turning over panels to "fix" them, regardless of what is actually wrong, is quite strong. Link that with a brand name, and you've made an indelible, if subtle, connection.
-y0-
Apr 12, 01:32 PM
Pretty sturdy.
Eduardo1971
Nov 24, 01:32 PM
could you link me on how to get the government discount? my dad works for the post office and that is federal government...could somoene tell me how to get this discount? thanks
They used to have a link, recently though I can't find it.:(
They used to have a link, recently though I can't find it.:(
Prom1
Sep 8, 12:30 PM
So much complaints about Kanye West.
If you've never listened to different artists in the HipHop/Rap world since 1979; you shouldnt comment about a) attitude of a performer (on stage) b) whether or not their performance was appropriate for a musical announcement of a product or service.
b) is just self explanatory! Musical engagement that announces big artist contractual aggreements of their wares for sale on the iTMS service. Also announcing products that has worldwide appeal to all walks of people and their choices of music!
a) Hip-Hop arrived in the 1990's, but Rap was around since 1979 (just before RUNDMC) - as a pure content not mixed with funk (Whodini).
RAP - is a definition of a lifestyle, highly competive, never succumbing to your competition, and always making moves. Somebody mentioned that the audience didnt appreciate nor is West's listenership; of course but them being shocked is mostly at the cursing; which has been around in music since day one - Rap included but not alone.
I've passed by Lawyers, Doctors, even a Judge (I know because as a youth I got schooled by her) listening to Kanye West, LL Cool J, Queen Latifah. Why? Because it gives them a motivative sense of power, a sense of "I'm above the rest" that most other genre's of music doesnt provide. Rock N Roll comes really close, but from what I've heard, I cannot pick 10 artists/groups in all their albums that brings it like Rap/Hip-Hop.
Apple has been, well fighting the power since day one! Most people forget that. Think Different may not be Apple's slogan anymore, but its still part of their existence. They dont follow the status quo.
I enjoyed the first GarageBand announcement, even though I dont prefer the music of god I forgot his name. Still all music artists are creative; except those 1 hit wonders.
If you've never listened to different artists in the HipHop/Rap world since 1979; you shouldnt comment about a) attitude of a performer (on stage) b) whether or not their performance was appropriate for a musical announcement of a product or service.
b) is just self explanatory! Musical engagement that announces big artist contractual aggreements of their wares for sale on the iTMS service. Also announcing products that has worldwide appeal to all walks of people and their choices of music!
a) Hip-Hop arrived in the 1990's, but Rap was around since 1979 (just before RUNDMC) - as a pure content not mixed with funk (Whodini).
RAP - is a definition of a lifestyle, highly competive, never succumbing to your competition, and always making moves. Somebody mentioned that the audience didnt appreciate nor is West's listenership; of course but them being shocked is mostly at the cursing; which has been around in music since day one - Rap included but not alone.
I've passed by Lawyers, Doctors, even a Judge (I know because as a youth I got schooled by her) listening to Kanye West, LL Cool J, Queen Latifah. Why? Because it gives them a motivative sense of power, a sense of "I'm above the rest" that most other genre's of music doesnt provide. Rock N Roll comes really close, but from what I've heard, I cannot pick 10 artists/groups in all their albums that brings it like Rap/Hip-Hop.
Apple has been, well fighting the power since day one! Most people forget that. Think Different may not be Apple's slogan anymore, but its still part of their existence. They dont follow the status quo.
I enjoyed the first GarageBand announcement, even though I dont prefer the music of god I forgot his name. Still all music artists are creative; except those 1 hit wonders.
takao
Sep 8, 01:27 PM
I've passed by Lawyers, Doctors, even a Judge (I know because as a youth I got schooled by her) listening to Kanye West, LL Cool J, Queen Latifah. Why? Because it gives them a motivative sense of power, a sense of "I'm above the rest" that most other genre's of music doesnt provide. Rock N Roll comes really close, but from what I've heard, I cannot pick 10 artists/groups in all their albums that brings it like Rap/Hip-Hop.
luckily not all rap/hip hop (especially the non US ones) gives this sense of "i'm above the rest" .. since they are nowhere as good as the funny,more language acrobatic ones IMHO
but i'm 22 and not 15 and didn't grew up in the gettho or something
(thankfully my younger brother(13) jumped straight to rammstein ;) )
luckily not all rap/hip hop (especially the non US ones) gives this sense of "i'm above the rest" .. since they are nowhere as good as the funny,more language acrobatic ones IMHO
but i'm 22 and not 15 and didn't grew up in the gettho or something
(thankfully my younger brother(13) jumped straight to rammstein ;) )
applefanDrew
Apr 25, 12:00 PM
Doesn't the status bar look taller? I remember a thread on here talking about how they overheard engineers discussing iOS 5 and that was one of the things that would be different. It was going to allow for an SBSettings type of thing and maybe a place for notifications to scroll? Anyways, cool. But I think this is fake.
CalBoy
Apr 14, 10:50 PM
I understand the point you are trying to make (re: enhanced security measures] but technically those two incidents had nothing to do with the TSA since they both flew from non-USA airports - that is, the TSA didn't screen them at all.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
I guess that depends on how you define "not much trouble". We can't know the actual number, since we will never know many actually get through. But they are catching over half the weapons that their own agents try to smuggle through on test/training runs. So that counts as being "some trouble". How much "trouble" is enough? Read my post above about how much risk a "bad person" organization is willing to take on 50/50 odds. My late father made his career "gaming" situations, so I have a bit of a passing knowledge of it. I am certain that the TSA has "gamed" the odds, and the TSA believe that they have reached a reasonable balance between costing the public time, money, and indignities - and - ensuring a reasonable level of safety for the flying public. They may be wrong.... but I would bet money that, to the best of their ability, they believe they have reached a balance.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent. What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
If this is the TSA's best effort and what it believes is the best balance, I want a new TSA.
OK, then why are hijackings down? I have my working hypothesis. I cited some evidence to support it. If you don't agree, then it is up to you to state an alternative one that is supported by more than unsupported statements.
I am not saying the TSA (or in my case CATSA) is perfect or haven't mucked things up sometimes. I'm just saying that I believe that they have been mostly responsible for a dramatic drop in airline hijackings. I cited some statistics. Now it's your turn.....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time. I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were. Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
ps there is no proof that it wasn't Lisa's rock. There are some very weird causal relationships in the world. Like shooting wolves causes the Aspen to die off in Wyoming. Or .... overfishing the Salmon in the Pacific changes the mix of trees along the rivers of the BC coast.....
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock. Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation. That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes. Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
Xenc
Apr 5, 05:55 PM
Looks good. Is there an ad-free version?
Killyp
Jan 10, 04:09 PM
The first few times was mildly amusing, but to do it multiple times is just stupid...
That looks really bad. I honestly though Gizmodo were professional reporters, but evidently not.
That looks really bad. I honestly though Gizmodo were professional reporters, but evidently not.
TequilaBoobs
Jan 12, 08:45 AM
Wow, I just watched the keynote and my god this guy is hard to stand. I've watched previous keynotes and he never seemed this bad. The charisma he's displayed in the past has been replaced with smugness. He acted like the iPhone was the second coming of christ and we were so lucky that he existed to bring it upon us.
When really, this is probably the single worst keynote for Mac users that he has ever given. No hardware updates. No 10.5 preview. Not even iLife and iWork '07! Plus, very people I know are going to be interested in spending $600 + $60 a month or more to use this phone while plenty of us would love to spend $300 or $400 or even more on a full-screen video iPod. God, I wish this keynote was all some nightmare and in the real one Apple actually gave us something we wanted.
wow jamr u have big balls, coming to macrumors to call Steve Jobs an SOB. that's like going to a kkk rally and saying david duke is retarded. just be prepared to be flamed!
When really, this is probably the single worst keynote for Mac users that he has ever given. No hardware updates. No 10.5 preview. Not even iLife and iWork '07! Plus, very people I know are going to be interested in spending $600 + $60 a month or more to use this phone while plenty of us would love to spend $300 or $400 or even more on a full-screen video iPod. God, I wish this keynote was all some nightmare and in the real one Apple actually gave us something we wanted.
wow jamr u have big balls, coming to macrumors to call Steve Jobs an SOB. that's like going to a kkk rally and saying david duke is retarded. just be prepared to be flamed!
ozred
Mar 17, 06:18 PM
iPhone 4's are everywhere here in CA. They used to be unique, now the only comment is... "oh you have the one with a bad antenna."
Steve's denial might work for him and his lemmings, but the general public is more aware than any Apple enthusiast would care to admit. Me? I simply reach into my other pocket and show them my new HTC Inspire, those are the popular phones where I live.
Public perception overrides how the phone actually performs every time. It's human nature.
Steve's denial might work for him and his lemmings, but the general public is more aware than any Apple enthusiast would care to admit. Me? I simply reach into my other pocket and show them my new HTC Inspire, those are the popular phones where I live.
Public perception overrides how the phone actually performs every time. It's human nature.
Tears Apart
Mar 24, 04:07 PM
Best way to celebrate this: just received my new shiny 17'' i7 2.3 mbp!
Happy birthday OS X!
Happy birthday OS X!
flopticalcube
Apr 21, 12:24 PM
I now agree with skunk's assertion there is no room for apathy. After you vote you cannot retract it to a neutral or apathetic stance, you can only choose to move to the other side of the fence.