> Those darn left turns. A true menace for pedestrians and other drivers, too. I’ve always said that getting around any city would be far more efficient and safe if people limited their left turns to one or two per trip. Seriously. There is seldom good reason to turn left more than a few times on any given route from point A to B in a grid city like New York. And if you choose your left turns wisely, say at four-way stop signs instead of traffic lights, where people tend to gun it just as it turns red, or on streets with dedicated lights and lanes for left turns, you’ll be far better off, too.

Not surprising that taxis are less likely to kill you. Taxi drivers are professionals, and driving around New York is a skill that gets honed over many years of practice.

Also not surprising that more men are killing people than women. We do tend to be overly aggressive behind the wheel. Especially when we get impatient with all the pedestrians getting in our way. And we also tend to have a higher opinion of our driving skills than is realistic.

Lastly, note that inattention caused far more accidents than intoxication. Oh, and jaywalking causes far fewer accidents (though the ones that do happen as a result tend to be more deadly) than crossing legally at an intersection. I’ve been trying to get Californians to understand that one for years.

> So what financial situation would make men more likely to be faithful? > > Men in relationships with women who made about 75 percent of the men’s income were the least likely to cheat, said the study, which was released at the American Sociological Association’s 105th annual meeting in Atlanta, Georgia. > > The study, “The Effect of Relative Income Disparity on Infidelity for Men and Women,” examined married and cohabitating people between the ages of 18 and 28, who were in the relationship for more than a year. The study uses data from the 2002 through 2007 waves of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. > > Munsch points out that in the overall study, very few couples surveyed had experienced cheating during the six-year period studied. Only an average of 3.8 percent of male partners and 1.4 percent of female partners cheated during that period. Jesse James didn’t cheat on Sandra Bullock because she made more money than him. He cheated on her because he’s an idiot.

Looking at arbitrary factors like income might be interesting, but I doubt it would lead to anything very conclusive on this subject.

The most interesting part of this study, as far as I’m concerned, is the relatively low number of people who cheated in general out of the sample. Either the sample is skewed, or cheating is one of those many things that the media and literature make seem more commonplace than it is.

Having said that, I do believe that there are a small group of people, male and female, for whom monogamy is not the ideal state of being. Those people should admit that to themselves, and society should accept them, rather than pressure everyone on earth into believing that being in a lifelong committed relationship is the only way to lead a satisfying life. I think a lot more people would be happy if they stopped trying to be someone they are not, or trying to make their partner into someone he or she is not.

As always, a little more transparency and honesty would go a long way to avoiding pain.

> Apple’s “slow” turnaround time doesn’t come without rewards, though; Nissan told the *WSJ* that iAd “has driven exceptional results to date.” This sentiment is mirrored by some members of the Mac developer community (who can now take advantage of Apple’s “iAd for Developers” program); several developers told Ars that they have generated impressive income through iAd so far. Of course, the developers don’t benefit from weeks’ worth of Apple’s creative efforts, but it’s clear that the ads are making an impact—once they run. Once again, there’s some disparity between an Ars Technica headline and the story’s conclusion.

The headline for this piece should have been “Apple takes advertisers to school on how to make effective ads.” But that wouldn’t have generated as many clicks.

This is the classic Apple agenda at work. Rather than dumping hundreds of crappy ads on users and failing to make any real impact, Apple is shaking up the whole industry. If they anger some clients in the process, so be it. If they fail to gain enough support for their new platform, so be it. They do it right, or they don’t do it. That’s how Apple rolls.

My guess is that Apple isn’t interested in entering this market just to add a bullet point to a marketing presentation. They literally want to change ads on mobile devices for the better—something that Google hasn’t managed to do, by the way, despite the fact that Google’s entire future rides on mobile advertising.

> The phone is said to be running [Gingerbread](http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2010/06/leaked-android-30-details-hint-at-tablet-potential.ars) with a custom, phone-specific skin, and will be able to play a variety of classic PlayStation and PlayStation Portable games digitally. It makes sense, in a way: this would give Sony another way to monetize its existing portable gaming content, and Google’s mobile platform would get a powerful portable gaming boost. Apple is known for its iPhone games, but thus far the Android platform has not enjoyed the same level of support for gaming. It makes sense, I guess, if you want Android to be even more fractured than it already is. So this one Android phone out of the hundreds of models available will run Playstation portable games. Great. How does that help Android get a better reputation as a gaming platform? It’s not like all those PSP games are suddenly going to run on your Nexus One, or Droid X, or Droid Eris, or Incredible, or the G1, etc. These are two different platforms, with very different hardware requirements, being slapped together with some Elmer’s glue and rubber bands.

And I really fail to see the advantage for Sony. If this is their reaction to the popularity of the iPod Touch as a gaming device, they’re pretty much doomed. At least Nintendo tried to differentiate themselves with some interesting, if not cliché, 3D screen technology. This offers no advantage whatsoever over the current PSP or the iPod Touch.

This seems like something a PSP enthusiast dreamed up as his personal Utopia machine. But will it appeal in the general market? I seriously don’t think so.

If this rumor is real, which I’m still not certain it is, my guess is that it was cobbled together without any real thought or investment, which means the entire experience of using it will be as schizophrenic as you might imagine.

For instance. I want to buy a new game for my new device. Where do I go? Do I go to the Android Marketplace, or a special Sony Store? Well, depends on the game, I guess.

Hey, a new software update came out today. Okay. Where do I download it? From Sony or from Google? Or from the carrier? Will Verizon be in charge of whether or not the game portion of my machine gets updated? How is Sony going to feel about that?

Put this one on my “I doubt if it even exists, but even if it does, it’ll be DOA” list. Unless I’m missing something.

> There have been isolated cases of spyware programs that run on the Android platform, an open-source mobile operating system created by Google. But the fake media player application, which Kaspersky dubbed “Trojan-SMS.AndroidOS.FakePlayer.a,” is the first one believed to specifically target Android, Kaspersky said. > > “Kaspersky Lab recommends that users pay close attention to the services that an application requests access to when it is being installed,” the company said. “That includes access to premium rate services that charge to send SMSes and make calls.” > > The application is simply called “Movie Player,” according to Lookout, a company that makes mobile phone security and management software. The malware does apparently warn users they may be charged for SMSes if they install it. The SMSes costs “several dollars,” Lookout’s [blog](http://blog.mylookout.com/2010/08/security-alert-first-android-sms-trojan-found-in-the-wild/) said. > > Lookout suggested that Android users check the permissions of the media player applications and revoke any that mention charging for SMSes. The malware may not spread far, however, for a couple of reasons. > > “So far this has only affected Android smartphone users in Russia and only works on Russian networks,” Lookout said. “As far as we know, there is no indication that this app is in the Android Market.” > > Google said in a statement that users see a screen after downloading an application that explains what information and system resources that application can access, such as their phone number or the SMS function. > > “Users must explicitly approve this access in order to continue with the installation, and they may uninstall applications at any time,” Google said. “We consistently advise users to only install apps they trust. In particular, users should exercise caution when installing applications outside of Android Market.” This is the point where most of my readers will expect me to blast Android and praise the iPhone. But to be honest, I’m much more concerned at the increase of malicious software targeting mobile devices in general lately. No platform is completely safe from this stuff.

Apple just released a patch for the iOS (iPad and iPhone/iPod Touch versions) that fixes a gaping hole in mobile Safari that made jailbreaking the device as simple as visiting a web page. (I suggest if you have an iPhone, iPad, or iPod Touch that you install that update immediately.) While some will report this patch as Apple “locking down” people who want to install their own hacks, it would be simply irresponsible for Apple not to plug that hole. What one site uses for a jailbreak, others with more malicious intentions could have used to steal credit card information, run up phone bills, spam contact lists—you name it.

We put our entire lives on our smart phones. It’s an intensely personal device. Which makes it all the more valuable to a thief, or in this case, a hacker. We as users are going to have to take steps to ensure that we protect ourselves as much as possible, which means paying careful attention to what we download, install, etc.

And, yes, I personally believe that Apple’s policy of secure signing ALL software on the iPhone is a bit safer in general than Google’s “install anything you want, even if it’s not from our store” philosophy. But that doesn’t mean iPhone users should be completely oblivious to the possibility of someone slipping something past Apple’s approval system. It’s nice to know that Apple could probably track down anyone who puts malware on the App store, and could not only remove the offending app from the store, but from everyone’s iPhone with the push of a button. But that’s a small consolation once your bank account has already been compromised.

I dread the day when installing virus protection becomes the norm on a mobile device. Most of the time virus scan software does little more than drain battery life and eat processor cycles and can only protect you from known quantities, anyway. I really hope we can avoid that sort of nonsense with better and better built-in security. In the meantime, we’ll all have to practice some common sense if we want to avoid getting hit by these kinds of attacks.