I’ll hang my head as I didn’t read the updated terms whilst updating, mistakenly thought it was just a name and logo change.

Have you found a suitable replacement for Android? I’m self-confessed twitterholic…

–Andrew Waite

One way is to have a gatekeeper who checks every single application against a set of criteria.

The second way is to use the ‘market’ and provide ratings on applications. Let the market decide what is good and what is bad. This is like Amazon, shopping sites and most other review sites.

On the Android Market the rating system and comments system work well in providing information on the good and bad applications. It also works well on Amazon.

Thus for Apple to choose to control the app store, to me, implies that it’s not necessarily about controlling the quality of the apps, but rather controlling what people can do with the platform.

This is a far cry away from the days of turning an Apple II on and being in BASIC … or creating your own HyperCard stack on a Mac SE/30. This is how I learnt to program. Seems ironic.

That said, I think the overall quality of apps in the iTunes Store speaks volumes. Maybe the approval process boosts consistency and quality, particularly when it comes to user experience. To most users, who don’t care about the beauty of the SDK, rubbish third party apps reflect badly on the platform on which they run. If someone thinks the iTunes Store is full of rubbish… they’ll just love the Android Market.

Perhaps I’m just brainwashed. I’d like to think not thou…. ooh, look – something shiny.

There is a term that medical ethicists use to describe this kind of data handling, which is pseudonymised. That’s the term they should have used. Anonymised is just wrong.

Apparently they got my name, address, and date of birth from the NHS.

Excuse me?

I don’t remember giving the NHS my permission to share that kind of data with third parties. I shall be finding out who the NHS data controller is and having a word. They claim that it’s compliant with the data protection act, but I find that hard to believe.

Sorry, this may be a worthy research project, but they have just totally destroyed any chance they may have had of my trusting them.

However, in the same family there might be 3 or 4 generations still living. Whilst the structure of the family tree is complicated, the behaviour of the members of the family would almost certainly be complex. i.e. the behaviour of the members of the family as a system emerges as a consequence of their interactions.

Looking at any single member and their direct relationships or even individual behaviour would not provide sufficient information or analysis to understand the behaviour of the family system as a whole. To study the whole family you have to study it at a system level and not at an individual member level. In this case, it is even more complex because no single member can have a full perspective and understanding of the family system as a whole. Each brings their own experience, prejudices, partial perspectives and motivations to the mix resulting in behaviours that only emerge due to the interactions between the family members.