Slashdot Mirror
3 Foxconn Employees Charged For Leaking iPad 2 Design
syngularyx writes "Three employees from Taiwan-based Foxconn Electronics' (Hon Hai Precision Industry's) plants in Shenzhen, China, have been charged with leaking the iPad 2's design to outside accessory companies in China, according to a Chinese-language sznews.com report. Several online shopping retailers in China were able to sell iPad 2 protective case products before the iPad 2 was even launched, leading Foxconn to suspect that there might have been some employees leaking the design of iPad 2, which it reported to the local police."
there was a foxconn employee who lost a prototype or something .
he told several people that he was tortured.
he later committed suicide.
of course, if he had been on facebook and 'bullied', his case would be on Oprah and celebrities would be filming bizarre public service ads about 'how to stop bullying'.
but since he was just another replacable chinese worker, instead his case gets shouted down by mac fanboys who try to minimize what Steve Jobs and Foxconn are complicit in - Dickensian working conditions in a repressive police state.
'Leaking' is a bullshit phrase used to invent 'spies' when most 'leaked' information is either leaked by accident, incompetence, or higher up managers who are being payed. Every fucking case of espionage it works like this, from Aldrich Ames (ten+ years of spying, but he was a high up official so nobody got him until some old ladies at CIA decided to go after him) to Wen Ho Lee ( a low level nuclear weapons simulation programmer who was accused of 'espionage' for backing up his programs to tape... his persecution turned out to be entirely motivated by politics and the media cycle in washington, and had nothing to do with him ever leaking anything)
its all fucking PR, bullshit, and lies. do not fucking drink the fucking koolaid.
you are a free human being, and you have natural rights. one of them is to talk. another is to be free from inane prosecutions by incompetent bureaucrats and clueless officials. by drumming this idea into your head that 'leaking' is a 'crime', they are trying to destroy free speech by brainwashing you into thinking it doesnt really exist. it does exist. its as free as the air and as free as the mind god gave you.
A few months ago, China threw a girl in a labor camp for being sarcastic on twitter. BEfore that, they threw a guy in prison because he ran a website about the poisoned baby-milk scandal. Recently they have thrown artists and others in prison for similar bullshit reasons.
This is the system that is trying to make you believe that 'leaking' is a 'serious crime'.
the only thing criminal here are the systems themselves, and the nooses they keep tightening around the necks of humanity.
...three new financiers will be receiving heart transplants!
'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
I think that we now know where Steve's next donor organ will be coming from...
that van may need to change for that to work
Organ donations must be performed in hospitals and executions are held in prisons. The three-drug cocktail used in lethal injection may render organs unsuitable for transplant. And, with high rates of diseases such as HIV and hepatitis C, jail and prison inmates are considered high-risk donors by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and subject to even stricter testing and lifestyle scrutiny than typical organ donors.
http://donatelife-organdonation.blogspot.com/2011/04/killers-quest-allow-organ-donation.html
Failure to adhere up to the terms of a contract can be a crime in certain jurisdictions.
While that doesn't excuse torture or other means of extreme coercion, we do need penalties harsh enough to make potential contract-breakers really think about it beforehand.
Economic crimes should not be tolerated just because no one gets physically hurt.
"My God...it's full of trolls!"
I don't think the current spate of leaks, both government and corporate, are co-incidental. It seems to reflect a wider growing community attitude that there are no secrets anymore.
The recent manifestation of hacker-sub-culture into the mainstream seems to promote ideas such as "information wants to be free" and provided recognition and kudos for having been the leak.
Based on this, I think that business and government alike will have to find new ways to work in an environment in which their own employees are their biggest threat. Keeping the IP pool secure is going to be far more difficult in future when not only are those swimming in it poking holes in the side, they are getting positive public recognition for their efforts in many cases.
GrpA
Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
But, but, other companies use Foxconn! Go call them out instead of Apple!
Oh, how I wish I was being a smarmy ass instead of merely, accurately repeating the nonsense I've heard out of the mouths of apologists on this issue.
STFU
Sony sued Geohot - one of the claims was that he clicked 'accept' to a PSN user agreement. somehow they claim that is a contract. its total nonsense becasue 1, he claimed he never clicked it and 2. EULAs are not contracts nor should they be considered when they are 100 pages long and nobody can understand them.
again, they are trying to brainwash humanity into thinking that ordinary human behavior is a crime.
and if you think the law is fair on this, try going after some gigantic company that breaks its contract with you.
oh wait, AT&T just got a supreme court ruling that says that .... class action lawsuits can't occur anymore if you 'agree' to the 'contract' where it says you have to accept binding arbitration.
congratulations, your legal rights are being stripped away one by one by megacorporations. pretty soon you wont be able to eat, drink, or shit without signing a fucking 100 page contract where you agree that you have no rights anymore.
if michael dell ever starts telling me that he is a champion of human rights, then i will gather up a bunch of Austin homeless people and go protest in front of their call center.
(posting as AC for obvious reasons)
Dear /. owners/IT/whoever in charge...
You know it would be really easy to give users a way to report trolling, spam & such?
That's a clear *abuse* of the forum. Why don't you offer a way to flag those posts, and then report them to their ISPs so their account can be terminated? (I don't know, something like a *report* button? )
I don't know how seriously this will be taken, but then again, I've been working for more than 5 years at a *very large* ISP's abuse department and don't recall receiving that many (if any) complaints from /. ... /. is turning into 4chan...
Dear /.
Is there a way to report fucktards who want to turn /. into a nanny-state, thin skinned, politically correct retard bin?
I find the goatse stuff as distasteful as the next... and a lot more than some I'm sure. But I would rather have those moderated below my threshold than see a nanny site.
maybe leaks are occuring at the same rate they always have.
maybe what has changed is that government and corporations are trying to criminalize more behavior.
evidence: Obama has prosecuted more non-spy 'espionage' cases than the last dozen or so presidents put together.
Obama: Drake, Kim, Sterling, Leibowitz, and Manning
BushII: Ford, Franklin, Rosen, Weissman
Clinton: Lee
Bush I: none???
Reagan: Morison
Carter: none???
Ford: none?
Nixon: Russo / Ellsberg (Pentagon Papers) ...
I'm not as knowledgable about corporations. Im sure someone can fill us in. From DvdJon to George Hotz
As in a criminal prosecution?
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
thats the first step a dictatorship takes IIRC. viewing not foreigners as the enemy, but its own internal population.
China has a history of putting people on the block for pissing off foreigners. They'll give the death sentence to corporation heads or government officials who are involved with safety issues (tainted milk, tainted toys) for doing what everyone else is doing. So, did they actually find the three people responsible? Did they force or coerce confessions for the purpose of demonstrating that they always get their man in order to keep Apple happy?
Not that I'm sure they didn't get the right people, but the story had no details, and there's been nothing showing any details, which is how they would handle it if they didn't know who did what, but wanted to serve up some patsies.
Learn to love Alaska
Failure to adhere up to the terms of a contract can be a crime in certain jurisdictions.
Economic crimes should not be tolerated just because no one gets physically hurt.
Welcome to Asia, where economic crimes aren't just tolerated, they're encouraged.
My money is on nothing of note happening to this guy. He might get fired, in which case he'll just get a new job at the factory down the street. Police wont charge him because he's go no money (for "tea money").
The true economic crimes such as the harsh conditions products are made in are also ignored.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Must have been cut and paste.... Messier hasn't even played in the NHL for years, never mind Vancouver.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Yes. And that someone was a writer for the onion.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Makes me wonder how little they're getting paid or how horrible their working conditions are that every new apple product seems to get leaked. Not to mention all those suicides a while back.
My internetting is no good.
If only we had a moderation system in place... Oh wait there is, so no need to censor some jerk because we ... wait for it mr isp guy, we crowd source it to the cloud! *additional buzz words here*
to prevent the iPad 2 from leaking.
Aren't the conditions less harsh then the employees' alternatives? Would you rather them go do something else?
It may be far better for the governments to put more state funding into finding rare earth alternatives to break the Chinese monopoly on manufacturing/production. Cheap labour can be had even from India and other countries, where at least government is not itself on the IP theft scam.
so?
Why?
More important than human rights abuses.
[TWINKLE, TWINKLE, SHING]
This guy failed to do his job. Doing your job is a condition of being paid. Don't like the restrictions? Quit.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
That's so Apple. A case designer needs some basic info about the outside dimensions, like height, width, thickness, and corner radius. Maybe a bit of info about areas that need to to be uncovered for connector or button access. Only Apple would consider those to be significant trade secrets. Especially since this is Model #2 of the product, which is probably going to be a lot like Model #1.
So, what is your solution for Apple's dilemma? They're trying to release their product, and not be ripped to pieces by cheap chinese knockoffs from companies who never had to eat the costs of design and R&D. Should the government subsidise them for their losses? Should they just refrain from releasing hardware in the future? Should we allow people to voluntarily enter into contracts to not talk about certain aspects of their working life? Without some actual solution to the problems that arose to present this situation, you might as well argue that time travel is a moral imperitive; you may make a pursuasive argument, but the argument itself will produce no positive change, and the argument is practically worthless.
Also, on a more personal note, I find arguments like this leave a very unpleasant taste in my mouth. It seems that the source of pursuasion comes not from demonstration that your position is right (or that their position is wrong), but from making people feel uncomfortable for believing the opposing side. If I believe that leaking private secrets is immoral, you are trying to implant the idea that this is because I have been brainwashed by companies, thus making me feel stupid or used for that belief, instead of convincing me that the belief is wrong. Who knows? Perhaps this idea that companies are implanting in our minds is 100% correct? Nothing in your argument addresses this, rather it preys off the ad hominem fallacy: that if someone as bad as corporations want us to believe it to be true, then it must be false.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Aren't the conditions less harsh then the employees' alternatives? Would you rather them go do something else?
That's a very bad and obvious strawman, even for an AC.
It frames the argument by presenting a binary choice that is not explained. You _must_ choose between something bad or something unknown that is _worse_.
What this ignores is that there are more options, such as fair pay and conditions. However this would cause prices to rise which is why people dont like it and dismiss it as an option. A binary choice is bad as it deflects attention away from choices you find uncomfortable but may actually be better as well as alternatives you haven't thought of.
I once was asked this by a Philipina girl.
"why are Kano [American] rich and Pinoy [Philipino] poor?"
The best answer I could think of was education. I responded.
ME "how many years of school did you finish?"
HER "I didn't go to school, too expensive"
ME "who taught you to read and write"
HER "My Uncle"
Education in general is not as bad as this in the Philipines, this girl was from Samar, the poorest province of Luzon but it's nowhere near the 12 years we get at practically no cost in the west. BTW, I'm Australian not American, Kano (Americano) has just evolved into a name for all us whities.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
TFA didn't say whether the charged employees were local Chinese or foreign Taiwanese. If they were Taiwanese I wonder how this will be handled.
I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
If you don't like the conditions of China, then don't buy any products made in China. For the Chinese economy which is used by the likes of Apple, IBM, HP, Dell, Sony, Toshiba ..... are all based on Chinese factories.
And good luck with that. The switch your internet connection is based on was made in China so by posting to Slashdot, you're just as complicit in all of China's crimes that you're blaming on Apple. Accessory to murder if you will.
OR, you could simply realize that the Chinese people, without making shit for the West, would be worse off than they are making shit for you.
I just suspect that you're a racist bastard and hate the Chinese people and want them 3rd world poor and slaves rather than 2nd world poor and slaves.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
What this ignores is that there are more options, such as fair pay and conditions. However this would cause prices to rise which is why people dont like it and dismiss it as an option.
You know what is a REALLY bad strawman? To put up an alternate reality that is not possible and claim it is a "choice" that is being ignored.
Lets say magically you convinced a company to pay workers at a chinese assembly plant the same wages they would get in the U.S. Who would hire that plant? You have all of the downsides of interacting with people very far away, and for the same cost you could just build the thing at home.
So you mythical company with full pay has no customers, and goes out of business. The people with supposedly "fair pay and conditions" instead find there is no job at all.
From there you have to start sliding backwards away from "fair pay and conditions" to meet reality. The reality that you ignore that for China, the amount people working at places like Foxconn get IS "fair pay and conditions", because in fact the other choices they have are far worse. By trying to raise either side of that equation you drive companies to other parts of the world and instead of helping, you are putting people out of work. Other people have noted elsewhere that the supposed suicide factory of Foxconn has a lower percentage rate of suicide than the U.S., something which should be making you re-think assumptions about what is fair, what is a good rate of pay, and how exactly you help people without screwing them over.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Well time for western companies to decide whether the savings from lower cost of production in China is worth the inevitable loss of IP that goes along as a cost of working with Chinese companies.
This is an excellent point.
For manufacturing this is not too bad a problem as long as you stay a step ahead and build up partnerships you trust.
However where your point really fits in is software. I cannot believe how many companies are handing over whole working systems to places in China, India, and elsewhere. They are handing over the systems and processes used to run huge companies oriented to a specific task, how can they imagine these systems will not be leaked and companies formed in those countries that will eventually compete with them? And with inside knowledge of exactly what they are weak at doing!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
you are a free human being, and you have natural rights. one of them is to talk. another is to be free from inane prosecutions by incompetent bureaucrats and clueless officials. by drumming this idea into your head that 'leaking' is a 'crime', they are trying to destroy free speech by brainwashing you into thinking it doesnt really exist. it does exist. its as free as the air and as free as the mind god gave you.
Cool, im going to ask your bank for all of your financial details and passwords, they have the natural right to talk and be free from inane prosecutions, leaking this information to me isn't a crime so there is no reason for them not to do it, it's free speech.
p.s. you're a fucking retard
...ripped to pieces by cheap chinese knockoffs...
Sorry for being off topic here; wouldn't Apple's core customers buy only Apple products, regardless of what knock-off was available?
You're using the same logical fallacy as the AC. Except it's even less thought out.
You're preventing other options from existing in your example by means of using loaded language. What happens if China begins a push towards workers rights. Europe as a whole did this in about 50 years. China wont even need a revolution, all they need is for the idea to be popular in government. In fact they've already planned for it, why do you think the Chines have such an interest in East African politics?
You're using the same argument that there can only be one outcome and all other options must be blanked out.
Now this is just a justification to help yourself with the decision you've already made.
This is a fallacious argument designed to alleviate yourself of guilt. Bad things are justified because a potential alternative is worse, the problem with this thinking is that you've had to deny the possibility of other options in order to accomplish this.
There are alternatives, you simply don't want to accept them because it would require you giving up or admitting something you don't want to..
Japan, South Korea and Taiwan have all got a modicum of labour rights with the ability to produce cheap stuff. Taiwan and Japan will actually hold a company to account over serious problems.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Nice elitest attitude. In effect, what you've said is, "It's alright to ship away laborer's jobs, and give them to Chinese who work cheaply. But, I can't believe that our companies are giving away the stuff that us intellectual snobs have slaved over! It's unfair, I tell you!"
You, who have no compassion for the average working Joe on the street, deserve to lose your precious Intellectual Property. I'll dance with glee when the day comes that you can't make a mortgage payment, and the bank decides to make you homeless.
"Intellectual property" my ass.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Unless the guy did something illegal to get it, he's free to do as he wishes with his money. Plus, he's obviously spending it according to your post, not even hoarding it.
My advice to you: quit being an envious whiner, and focus on your own life instead of bitching about others'.
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
Did you even read what they wrote before this crazed rant? They implied that it was NOT right to be shipping away laborer's jobs; that to do so posed a risk to IP. 'Deserving' to lose IP is ridiculous, in any circumstance.
You may not like his kind of argument, as I do not either, but I suspect we will have to come to grips with it anyway. No, there is no accounting for a "right" or a "wrong" in any framework commonly used today, and so the most important thing to address is indeed "solving Apple's dilemma" when presented in this way.
I know one thing, though -- as a Westerner, it's as easy as can be for whatever's occurring in those factories to continue to occur, and for me to never think about it. Our attention and priorities themselves can be fallacies, because the failure of human judgment is known to happen again and again in this world.
Apple has a looooong history of being a very leaky company. Doing business in China hasn't changed that in the slightest.
The upcoming headline will be "Former Foxconn Employees who leaked iPad 2 details commit suicide".
Property ownership is a social construction, ownership of fiat money doubly so.
He has all that money because society has granted him the privilege as reward for whatever he is supposed to have done to benefit society. If society considers the reward excessive, it will take some of it away - or simply stop protecting him.
If you don't like this, you can live in an alternative reality where humans are slaves who have no choice but to live by your principles - principles which seem to be based on the childish notion that any man who objects to the super-rich, especially the super-rich who got their break selling to government, is simply "an envious whiner". Until then, stop preaching and start accepting a world where society reflects the will of a sufficiently numerous and powerful group, and the best we can do is stop any single subset of special interests getting too powerful.
True. Apple's strength is in the branding. Their business isn't that different from, for example, a fashion house. People will buy $200 branded trainers even though the $30 unbranded ones are just as good. The only way an apple knockoff will compete with apple is if it's an outright counterfeit, right down to the Apple logo.
The $30 trainers in this case would be Android devices - just as good, and a whole lot cheaper.
Except in the sense one who rejects the concept of "IP" would say that everyone deserves to lose it...
(That position, while far from universally accepted even on /., is not "ridiculous" by any means.)
Let's not also forget the complete inane bullshit of the story.
It allowed accessory makers to make protective cases.
The police are involved because some guy said, "Shsssshshshshshhshshshhshhsh! come over here.... give me 10$ and I will tell you the new iPad2 is x.y.z dimensions and here is where you cut the holes."
Seriously? The physical dimensions and possibly the locations of the some fucking buttons and inputs is the lowest stupidest level of corporate espionage I have ever heard and stretches the definition thinner than a penny stretched from here to the Moon.
It's like involving the police because little Sally told everyone else on the playground that it was Bobby that farted.
It would be a different story if he gave away information that was actually trade secret, but we aren't talking about the Colonel's secret fucking spices are we?
I was not prioritising Apple over anybody or anything, rather I was pointing out that Apple's position had absolutely no priority whatsoever in the OP's argument. In fact, it's not so much the fact that it's Apple's problem, rather it is the problem (whosever it is) that lead to the way things are now (specifically, regarding "leaks" and their being illegal/wrong/whatever). Nothing can change if we ignore the source of the problem. Perhaps the solution is, as I suggested, for Apple (or anyone else) not to release hardware in general? Perhaps that is the solution that is, all things considered, the least of all evils? I don't know, but I'm damn sure that nothing will get done with completely nonconstructive criticism.
As for the factories, they don't really enter into my point at all. They don't enter into my argument, nor in the specific point of the argument to which I was responding. I'm not ignoring them, I'm not making a statement that they are more or less important than anything in particular, and I'm certainly not saying the OP was wrong about them. In fact, I would say the OP made a compelling case that these factories are morally bad (partially because he actually demonstrated they were bad, not just that the people who believe they aren't bad are morally bad). I didn't mention them for the same reason you don't mention them when discussing what to cook for dinner: because the factories aren't relevant to the particular point you're trying to get across.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Yes, it's those filthy mac fanbois and that evil hobgoblin Steve Jobs who are perpetrating this! Unlike all those other manufacturers of electronic goods, who are well known for paying a living wage and making the goods in countries like the US, Canada, and -- oh, wait...
Caveat Utilitor
No, they get stuff manufactured in China too. But they don't have a very vocal group of fanboys trying to silence anyone who tells people this.
It seems to me that the whole "torturing people over the designs of completely useless consumer products" is the demonstration that he's right. 100% correct? Giving out information is worse than torturing people?
I don't know why parent got modded so high.
He's more so appealing to the "Wake up sheeple!!" argument. It's pretty common, and based on the idea that everyone is blindly accepting the propaganda of $THE_RULING_CLASSES which is necessary to maintain the unequal status quo.
Now I personally don't believe in this idea, but not because I don't think there's a status quo, but because I don't believe that a propaganda campaign is necessary to maintain that status quo. Rather the unequal and often unjust status quo is autonomically maintained by societies as a function of their existing cultures, institutions, and belief systems. There is some "propaganda" supporting ideological beliefs, but overall people and societies tend to have a lot of inertia in the way that they think.
As an example, let's return to TFA. We have this latest iDink consumer gadget being made by those wonderful slave drivers at Foxconn, and when it looks like the plans might have been leaked, there's an investigation. However, when we have actual leaks of abuse, exploitation, and criminal conditions at Foxconn during the manufacturer of the iDink, no-one notices. If they do notice, the usually don't care. If they care, they usually come up with some rationalisation about globalisation and the invisible pink market for cyan iDinks or some such drivel. It suffices to say, neither Foxconn, Apple or Taiwan are likely to investigate the latter concern before they do the former.
There's no real propaganda here (Leaving aside Cult of Mac, which is a singular case). Society simply has not structured itself in such a way as to deal with these matters in a way that most agree would be appropriate. Instead, it runs on autopilot though the clouds of history. It typically takes a revolution--industrial, social or actual--to force societies to really change the way they operate on just about every level.
May the Maths Be with you!
So you're saying it's ok to spend your money with "the evil Chinese" and support man's inhumanity to man, just so long as you publicly acknowledge it? Weird...
IRL I rarely (if ever) see this "mac fanboi" you haters are always bitching about. Also, because I'm not much on bandwagons and try to be fair I've often been accused of being a "mac fanboi" myself which tells me a lot of the applehate crowd are pretty much a bunch of morons bent on conducting an applehate fest -- IOW just a bunch of stupid, senseless trolls. I'm not at all a lover of Apple and their policies, but consider them a valid choice for non-geeks. It's called being a realist.
Those of you who use the same planet earth tech manufactured in China but try to scapegoat buyers of Apple products as somehow being worse are a bunch of disgusting hypocrites.
Caveat Utilitor
If you paid your employees a living wage they would not sell your customers info for $100.00 or a months wages.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Pepper, Salt & MSG.. the 11 spices.
If I had to guess, I'd say it had probably something to do with the mods realising that this is not even close to what I was saying. This probably stemmed from them reading my post, comprehending it, and thinking before jerking their knees (assuming they jerked their knees at all).
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Well for one it is about as retarded as it gets to expect to beat trolling. The trollers will troll you with reports. For another, exactly what is the ISP supposed to do? "Oh, you bothered some people on the internet, better disconnect you!" that's stupid and censorship and really fucking stupid. To the max.
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
The reward isn't given by society at large, its given by individuals within society, then others in society come swooping in that had nothing to do with the reward and have no way to know why such an amount was given, and take some as their own. You can live in your fantasy world where the work of others and deals between two people are subject to review by others based on how much one party gave another, but the rest of us will continue to be decent people, unenvious of those who have more because we realize money isn't everything. Oh, by the way we all got together and decided your wife was too hot for you, so we gang banged her.
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
Or, perhaps you ignore the factory workers because they're inconvenient to your point, the fact of the matter is that apples suppliers pay their workers peanuts, so there is little incentive in keeping trade secrets, secret. Apple has made their own bed, and now they should sleep in it, rather than relying on a totalitarian police state to "incentivise" their employees into obedience.
The reward isn't given by society at large, its given by individuals within society, then others in society come swooping in that had nothing to do with the reward and have no way to know why such an amount was given, and take some as their own. You can live in your fantasy world where the work of others and deals between two people are subject to review by others based on how much one party gave another, but the rest of us will continue to be decent people, unenvious of those who have more because we realize money isn't everything. Oh, by the way we all got together and decided your wife was too hot for you, so we gang banged her.
mod -1 idiot.
Now I personally don't believe in this idea, but not because I don't think there's a status quo, but because I don't believe that a propaganda campaign is necessary to maintain that status quo.
Yes, yes it is. That propaganda campaign consists of massive fraud. The corporations don't give a fuck about anyone but they spend billions giving that impression.
It typically takes a revolution--industrial, social or actual--to force societies to really change the way they operate on just about every level.
You win that one.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
iPad leaks.....
I think the term is "delicious copypasta".
If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
he told several people that he was tortured.
Chinese workers know, you DO NOT fuck with Steve.
And this guy committed the cardinal Apple sin. He leaked the designs to a company that was able to beat Apple's own overpriced protective cover to the market--thus cutting into their bottom line. They'll probably hang him for it.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
You actually read enough to see that? Must be a slow news day where you are.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
And if you don't like China, welcome to Brazil!
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
I've never really got that. Wouldn't it be better for them if they made shit for themselves?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
SON OF A BITCH! That's how everyone knew that the iPad 2 would be a 10-inch touchscreen with a black plastic bevel and an aluminum back!
Actually that position is ridiculous. The 'concept of IP' is the same as the concept of the right to own private property. Without those concepts, you have nothing.
The idea of electronic computer tablets have been around since the 1960s - at least. They had them on the original StarTrek episodes.
PJ, at groklaw, wrote a great prior art article about this tablet device from 1992.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20110428171114719
I also like the Star7 from 1992:
- handheld wireless PDA
- 5" color LCD with touchscreen input
- color icons and kinetic scrolling
- multi-media audio codecs
- built in infrared transciever
- built in speakers
- 900MHz wireless spread spectrum networking
http://www.indyarocks.com/videos/The-Star7-PDA-Prototype-1789373
They also had such tablet devices in those AT&T "You Will" commercials from 1993.
I'm only here for the trolls.
Oh, by the way we all got together and decided your wife was too hot for you, so we gang banged her.
I realise that the free market in early southern USA was left to decide who counted as a person and who counted as a slave, but "my wife" is not "for me", not being in any sense my property. I have neither the right nor the physical power to control who she has sex with, nor am I not her bodyguard.
She isn't gang banged by you because (i) she doesn't want to be; (ii) society has decided that rape is not a good thing for society, and society at large has more power than your fantasy libertarian rape gang.
I've never really got that. Wouldn't it be better for them if they made shit for themselves?
They can't afford to design it nor buy it.
No, but an ex CEO or a former regional director is. It just takes a stroke of the pen.
What cronyism and connections giveth, falling out of favour taketh away.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Is it white with rounded corn&*-
'@*9
n o c a r r i e r
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
make it in America, and pay people enough to not bother with leaking information because their job is worth much more than the kickback
Either that or "suck it up " as they say in the US.
Why bother stealing the specs?
All you really need is a good set of calipers and micrometer, or an automated CAD machine and you could get the specs yourself in no time.....
1) Buy item as soon as it is released,
2) Dissassemble and measure dimensions,
3) Design the product to your likes using said dimensions,
4) Profit!!!
Not much thinking there. Yeah you would have to wait until the product is released, but you could avoid the legal wrangling.
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
Exactly. Moderation works to remove the goatse trolls while making it at least somewhat difficult (through meta moderation) to silence people you want to say are "trolling" because they have differing views.
A report function would also require a human being to examine a post and see if it's worth removing which, again, would lead to situations where someone simply expressing an unpopular belief could be silenced.
If people want a forum where there are some rules of conduct enforced from on high, there are plenty of them. For all the flaws in the /, mod system, I'd much rather trust in the community than some underpaid, overworked misanthrope who comes to hate humanity because his or her entire job is wading through toxic posts and determining their relative merits.
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
You arbitrarily say that she can have sex with whoever she likes, but you say that right comes from society deciding rape is bad? That's a shitty view of the world. I say rape is bad even if society condones it. I also think that deciding a trade of one resource (money) for another (a good or service) is a right, and post-facto analysis of a deal you had nothing to do with to get yourself something more is bad even if society condones it. You can defend taxes and high taxes but you can not defend looking at somebody's reward, deciding it is too much, and taking the rest. That line of thinking is dangerously stupid and selfish and smacks of jealousy.
Hordes of stupid people of a specific school of thought (such as creationists, racists, birthers, and fascists) do not become right when they have enough numbers. Your fundamental argument of society knows best is complete bullshit and you know it. All progress is based on reversing failures of society at large by a minority of brilliant people. You're advocating pillaging the brilliant for the benefit of society because society knows best. Fah, look around you. I bet more than 50% of the people you see are the same people you wouldn't want to be making decisions for you.
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
That's not what they're saying. That comes up because people put down Apple customers for 'supporting sweatshops' whilst being completely unaware that they're doing it, too.
In other words: Until this topic comes up with the many other companies that use Foxcon, You're demonstratably being biased against Apple and are not any better than the 'apologists' that bug you so much.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
It's called trade. They make shit for us. They have about 2 1/2 trillion US dollars in foreign reserves that they can use sometime down the road to buy shit from us.
You arbitrarily say that she can have sex with whoever she likes,
I didn't say that at all. Re-read to find out what I actually said.
I say rape is bad even if society condones it.
That's fine, but it's society's general opinion on rape which counts. And you're onto a winner with this one.
I also think that deciding a trade of one resource (money) for another (a good or service) is a right,
But with this one you're pretty much in a minority. Very few societies regard unrestricted trade as a "right". More fundamentally, few societies agree with the assumption you're making: that you have a right to exclusive control of the money / the good / the service in first place. Society gave you so much to allow you to get to the point of making the trade and is offering you protection while you perform the trade; it will protect your enjoyment after the trade. You will be allowed some benefit from the trade if you trade well because your actions benefit society, but any "right" is reserved to society for its own good.
you can not defend looking at somebody's reward, deciding it is too much, and taking the rest. That line of thinking is dangerously stupid and selfish and smacks of jealousy.
If society decided that it made a mistake then it is able to correct its mistakes and should do so. It would be dangerously stupid to not correct its mistakes out of some pathological stubbornness.
Also, please look up "envy" and "jealousy". The libertarian idiots who like to argue along your lines rarely know the meaning of the words they employ.
Hordes of stupid people of a specific school of thought (such as creationists, racists, birthers, and fascists) do not become right when they have enough numbers.
We're not discussing disputes over facts which can be determined by some scientific method. We're discussing how rights, being temporary privileges protected through force, are defined. You think that you get to define them. I think that society defines them.
Your fundamental argument of society knows best is complete bullshit and you know it.
"And you know it"? Your rhetorical style is poor and you should stick to presenting your argument.
All progress is based on reversing failures of society at large by a minority of brilliant people.
It sounds like you secretly dream to be a world-renowned titan. A precondition of your fantasy is that you convince yourself of the myth that our progress depends on a few shining lights in an ocean of obscurity. Grow up. All progress by some man depends on the sum of man's achievements before and alongside him, the right environment, and a certain amount of pot luck. Understanding the importance of context (vs quasi-religious superheroes who achieve something out of nothing) is a fundamental principle of any historical analysis.
You're advocating pillaging the brilliant for the benefit of society because society knows best.
Any man who stands out only continues to exist because society allows him to, whether that man stands out because he is particularly talented or because, like you, he goes around impotently condemning everyone as a stupid failure. The fact that you continue to exist while speaking as you do serves to destroy your own argument. And even if you're a coward who only argues like this behind a computer screen, the fact that society has created a system which allows you to express yourself so obnoxiously so anonymously counters your argument.
I bet more than 50% of the people you see are the same people you wouldn't want to be making decisions for you.
They do make decisions which affect me all the time. Even if I didn't want them to, they still would. Same applies to you. What are you trying to say?
Too bad the troll masters known as the GNAA haven't posted here lately. Adolf Hitroll hasn't been trying that hard lately either.
And most great artists aren't appreciated until they're dead.
Like watching a slow train wreck.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Property ownership is a social construction, ownership of fiat money doubly so.
The heavens opened and a brilliant blast of TRUTH blazed upon me. Oh wait, no, it was just someone stating the obvious.
Oh, please then, explain to everyone how the existence of factory workers is even the slightest bit "inconvenient" to either of my points. No really, go ahead. Come on internet tough guy, make my day.
I swear, we've gotta be more careful when talking about China, or someone is going to put an eye out with all this knee-jerking. I come out talking about bad logic (as I often do), and so many idiots manage to somehow conclude that I'm prioritising ipads over human rights atrocities. The irony would be funny if it weren't so depressing.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Remember, China pretty much is the owner of the US today. Should they choose to exercise their power the US only has the options of fighting them off militarily, trying to negotiate a settlement and utter capitulation. My vote right now is that we end up negotiating and have China replacing a good part of the Federal Government with some new unelected "ministers".
Certainly, China can get whatever legal changes they want made right now.
It's interesting the difference in viewpoint here. We read the same argument (with ill-defined premises and conclusions), and came up with two distinct reasons why it was supposed to be convincing, which reveal two distinct ways of looking at the argument. The way that I see it, it's not a very constructive argument. It's purpose is to ridicule the opposing side and the neutrals so that the only respectible side to take is the same side as the OP. The way that you see it (to the best of my ability to guess what that way actually is from your comments), it's supposed to be something constructive; to spark people to make a change in the world beyond their opinion. You don't find it convincing because you don't think that it fulfills its purpose, whereas I don't think that it's convincing because I don't believe he's successfully demonstrated that the other side is wrong.
I suppose that multiple interpretations is not the worst thing you get when your arguments based more on emotional appeal, rather than rationale.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Your line of argument, where people benefit from society so society is entitled to that persons benefits, seems to me to be double dipping. Property taxes are an extremely just and reasonable tax. I believe we can both agree on the fact that the original "rights" to a piece of land and its resources is basically a gift from society, in return society gets property taxes from the person they gave the rights to. However, when I take the benefits of living in society (such as electricity to power my computer) I pay for that. I did something to help somebody else in society (developed software that people sell to other people so they can do their jobs so society can benefit from their work), took the payment for that, and exchanged it for something from a member of society.
Now lets just say I get super rich writing software. Presumably the people I sold to got their money from providing value to somebody else in society who got their money from either welfare or providing value to somebody else in society. For me to get rich I have to be providing more value than I am using as evaluated on a trade by trade basis. That is to say it was worth it for another person to give me their software for $2000 I got by selling my software, but I sold my software for $4000 because somebody else valued my software more than I valued the $2000 software. Suddenly "society" (as expressed through government I assume?) decides that I got rich off the backs of society without giving enough back. How can that be? I'm creating value, things people want, taking that value and increasing my ability to make value until I am super rich.
"Society" capriciously decides they need to take more of my money because the individual deals I made with the people that make up society weren't right. Society wants to override the decisions of individuals under the guise of "we didn't get ours and you benefit from us." Well guess what, that sword cuts both ways. If the rich benefit from society, society benefits from the rich through the same network that the rich benefit from society. The only thing up for debate is how much value was assigned to each trade and this is why I brought up the mouthbreathers that surround you every day: Would you rather be in charge of valuing the things you trade for, or would you rather a majority of other people evaluate that? I would rather be able to evaluate that myself as if I judge wrong I'm the one who lost too much, nobody else except a hypothetical person who could have also gotten that money if I decided to not spend so much or not to purchase that particular thing.
Just as an example lets assume that I have two friends, and we live in the same apartment. We split up the identical bedrooms amongst ourselves, but I decide I'm going to pay Friend A $20 in rent every month so I can use his closet space. Friend A then uses that $20 to buy some nice stuff, and suddenly Friend B complains that I should have to pay more in rent because I have more space than he does, and Friend A should have to pay more because he has more money. Money that he got from exchanging part of this apartment that he wouldn't have been able to afford without Friend B's help. That is how I view the opinion that the rich got rich from society so all of their things truly belong to society. Friend B in reality does not have any claim to extra money from either party as they had a deal worked out amongst themselves.
The role of taxes, especially a progressive tax structure, should in no way be about rights to a benefit, it should be about funding the government. Now, of course a progressive tax structure is nice since we can get more funds for the government without destroying people with little to no value. In other words I think a flat tax only works in times of prosperity, and a progressive tax would work a little better in leaner times (but should be eased temporarily in disasterous times in an effort to stimulate jobs, and your definition of lean probably won't match mine). On the other hand a system where we have a consumpt
If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
You must be american. Depriving people of their Internet connection just because they post stuff you don't like.
(Note the capital I in Internet. I own your noob ass)
Sorry, but you can't stop the movement of labor out of the US to cheaper places.
The WTO (that the US signed on to) will block any attempts to put tariffs or protectionist surcharges onto any sort of outsourced labor. Trying to make foreign-made products more expensive isn't going to work - Bush tried that move once and got slapped for it. Obama can't do anything about it either.
The choices for the US are pretty limited at this point. The people aren't going to stand up and say they want to pay more for US-produced items - they are going to buy the cheapest stuff they can. Maybe some rich people can choose stuff based on quality or customer service, but the rest of the people are going to use the Internet, find the lowest price and buy the cheap, Chinese made stuff. We can't pass laws blocking imports of cheap stuff made with outsourced labor or cheap stuff made in Chinese factories. Even discounting the fact that China owns the US now, there is that little thing called the WTO that we signed onto. Sorry, it is free trade all the way to the bottom.
So what happens to all the unskilled labor in the US? Well, they aren't going to have any jobs, that much is clear. There is no room in the economy for these workers anymore. We have probably 30% of the people now without jobs and without any hope of ever getting a decent paying job ever again. Is the government going to just support these people? That is something that is going to have to be addressed sooner or later.
As for stuff that can't be outsourced right now, well, every move that is made to give more and more capability to the foreign factories means fewer and fewer jobs in the US for what today isn't being outsourced. And all that means is a bigger pool of workers that the government has to pay forever. No, the jobs aren't coming back. Outsourcing is here to stay because nobody in their right mind wants to pay more than they have to whether it is for labor or finished goods.
Would you rather be in charge of valuing the things you trade for, or would you rather a majority of other people evaluate that?
Well, even if there was "small government" (in itself impossible: power will always fill a vacuum), I wouldn't be in charge of valuing the things I trade for: the person I'm trading with would get a say. His perception of value would depend on the wider society in which he sits.
What's up for debate is how the buyer determines the value of something he wants. It could be influenced according to centrally perceived need. It could be influenced according to labour value, such as through labourers controlling their means of labour. It could be influenced by regulatory models which optimise competition. It could be influenced by the ability of individuals to hoard the means and fruit of production. In every case it's determined by the buyer's relationship with and understanding of wider society. IOW, "How much do I need that and how else could I reasonably get it?" The only individual input from the buyer comes from his inability to be perfectly knowledgeable and rational. Otherwise, all we have is a function of the buyer's role in society. Society determines value.
The solution for Apple's, possibly even America's dilemma, is the one NASA is taking with the JWST.
Zero dealings with China. Only way for things to not get stolen...just don't feed the trolls.
But then again it's also using alot of the most advanced military satellite technology from Northrop Grumman.
"So what happens to all the unskilled labor in the US?"
Correct - but the problem is even worse than that. Skilled labor is drying up. Try to get an apprenticeship in any skilled trade today. Carpentry, masonry, iron working, plumbing and/or pipefitting - you name it. I am a journeyman carpenter, among other things. Today, journeymen are working for less than carpenter's helpers worked for in 1990. At least here, in my area, this is true. Blame most of that on the influx of illegal aliens, blame part of it on the outsourcing of other jobs, and apportion the rest of the blame wherever you will.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
when Steve Jobs fucking straight out balls up stole XEROX's GUI not to mention its basic design elements.
did i mention he got his start selling blueboxes, illegal telephone system hacking equipment?
i dont have proof of 'brainwashing' because nobody is sure what the word even means.
i used it for dramatic effect after pulling a near-double shift which blowed
blew
anyways.
i do not have proof as regards corporations trying to make people think any kind of 'leaking' is a huge crime.
you can start with the history of the espionage act, especially 18 USC 793(e), which has been used against everyone from Russo and Ellsberg to Wen Ho Lee to the AIPAC case.
then go and read about Barry Seal, Oliver North, and etc. don't stop there. read about how presidents and congress 'leak' information all the time to get stories going in the media.
now read about Lehman Brothers: Erin Callan leaked a deal they were planning to the media, to influence public perception. her plan failed, she was fired. she did not go to jail, she did not get excoriated by the police and get a 'crime' tag on financial blogs. she just got fired.
1. corporations don't have a right to privacy
2. governments don't either
3. people do. thus, HIPPA, and various laws about stealing my info from a bank
The basic idea here is that the individual person has rights, and corporations and governments cannot usurp those rights.
they have a right to free speech, and a right to privacy.
everything is de-facto becoming open source, with all the automatic tools that do reverse engineering.
Hmmmmm.... well if I recall the math I learned in my formative years that is only 3 out of the 11 spices....... If you really know the secret post it here.
Seriously.
I think actually leaking the 11 secret herbs and spices is like the WikiLeaks and Playstation key leak combined.
OK, I will say it again, you are trying to impose western ideas and expectations on a place where they are complete fantasy.
Imagine a western worker, struggling for years in a dangerous and shitty workplace, coming home to a 6 person dorm room with a three tier bunk bed on two sides of a shotgun room, exhausted after 14-16 hours of work, 7 days a week, year after year. He finally saves enough money to start his own business and looks back on his experience, his friends, the grinding suffering of that life and decides to make a small difference by giving his employees some small considerations for their hard work. His employees work harder, make a better product, reward him for his reward of them. A resonant (?) system grows that benefits everyone.
But here in China (Asia in general in fact) this will not happen. The workers don't care about their fellows, they are all looking for a "lucky" break. If you want a better job you quit the old one and try to find a new one that will be better. There is absolutely no interest or care to produce anything "better" or "faster" because then that will become the standard and everyone will have to meet those expectations, for the same money they were getting before. The resonance actually works the other way since both the workers and the equipment are not maintained and quickly run down and achieve the Peter Principle of maximal inefficiency from upward mobility ( to put it another way: as a company is successful they achieve better performance from their workforce and therefore generate higher expectations that eventually result in an unsupportable level of efficiency which crashes into inefficiency which becomes a new standard.)
The idea of a "lucky break" is of great importance here. Lotteries and gambling is rampant. Everyone sees no escape from their current bind without good luck. Hard work never got anyone anything here, except for more hard work of course. We have a secretary here who works in one department. Her boss, the head of department just got a "promotion" (no, NOT what you think, she had made some high level trouble and said some ... interesting things about the president and so was also given the task of being the "Head" of the president's office.) Now the secretary is looking feverishly for a new job. ????? Her workload just doubled or more, only by quitting can she get away from this situation which means that for $120/ month she would have to handle two secretarial positions.
And, of course this is what the admin wants because in that way the new head gets punished by having her secretary leave and dumping all the work on her assistant while they try to hire a new secretary for $120 a month. Now maybe this goes on in the west as well, but I find the whole thing very Asian.
Subversion of spatial scale luxury decoration ideas.
And I'll say it again, no I'm not. I'm not talking about China. It doesn't even enter into the points I was making. The only one that comes close is my berating the OP for his imposing of his views upon the west.
Now I'm sorry, but I'm kind of sick of people trying to convince me of a point that I don't contend about a subject that doesn't particularly interest me, so I'm not going to read the rest of your comment.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
So, what is your solution for Apple's dilemma? They're trying to release their product, and not be ripped to pieces by cheap chinese knockoffs from companies who never had to eat the costs of design and R&D. Should the government subsidise them for their losses? Should they just refrain from releasing hardware in the future?
With the prices they charge and the excessive margins they place on products maybe they should consider manufacturing in the States as they could clearly afford it..... local laws would be more protective (of both Apple and employees - remember we are comparing with China here), more jobs would be available to Americans, tighter control over 'leaks' could be implemented and the US economy could get a bit of a boost.
But I guess from your point of view on the argument it's just cheaper to keep a few chinese labourers in fear of their lives. You must be congratulated though on your high level of intelligence to evade being 'brainwashed' by companies like Apple as the rest of us are still getting duped into believing Apple products are actually different and far superior to others. As for Apple not trying to get ripped to pieces by cheap 'chinese knock offs from companies who never had to eat the costs of design and R&D' lets just spare a thought for the guys who really did create the mouse and GUI, and more recently those still hammering away on FreeBSD.
By the way, I've been an Apple user for 13 years but my last generation Macbook Pro will be the last product I buy from this company now I've taken my anti-brainwashing tablets. I'm also not American, don't live in the States, have no involvement with American companies but just get really pee'd off with companies that use other countries to do their dirty work for them because it's cheaper and easier to abuse their employees.
I always post anonymously when talking about China or Apple because my tin-foil hat got battered while it was on my head the last time I wrote something with my name on it.
Actually, the questions posed are more rhetorical than anything. I was more generally talking about the OP's argument, rather than simply responding to it. The OP was claiming that leaking is only considered wrong because of corporate 'brainwashing'. I didn't present arguments as to why this is not the case, but I did outline why I thought that his arguments on that particular point were worthless.
As for what Apple actually should do, I think the discussion is pointless. We should be discussing what we should do. Apple responds to the shareholders, who respond generally to what we will and will not pay for. Their purpose is to make money, and we are the ones who provide it. Should we boycott goods made in China? I don't think it's feasible to expect a full boycott, since so much of what we use is made in China. Rather, given a choice between goods, try not to choose the one made in China.
On the other hand, is it morally justified to attempt to wound a large country's economy, and kill the jobs of a people who are already suffering, just because of the behaviour of their government? I haven't really made up my mind on that one yet.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
You mean in the unlikely event that "we" actually decide to get our hands dirty and make something that they might want? I wouldn't call that trade, I'd call it gambling.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
If anyone can't afford to buy it, it's the US, which is why the trade balance is the way that it is. Money is a proxy for goods[1], which means goods[2] are a proxy for money. The workers in Apple's sweat shops could meet up with those from Nike's and trade iPods for shoes if they wanted to[3].
As to not being able to afford to design things, bravo! That's the funniest thing I've read in a long time.
[1] and services
[2] and services
[3] they probably already do, a bit. Enter "ghost shift" in YFSE
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
So, what is your solution for Apple's dilemma?
No solution needed. Apple needs to protect their trade secrets without resorting to violence or to the courts. If they can't do that, they need to hang it up and go home.
Should the government subsidise them for their losses?
No.
Should they just refrain from releasing hardware in the future?
Whatever, fine by me. If they can't handle internal security according to the non-agression principle, they need kill that part of their business. This means violence is allowed to counter violence or trespassing, not to protect trade secrets. Note, I'm not accusing them of employing violence.
Should we allow people to voluntarily enter into contracts to not talk about certain aspects of their working life?
Not unless they're in the military, no. Private parties should never have the privelege of hampering speech, and government should only be able to do so in certain military matters. Btw, yes, this implies the abolition of intellectual property.
If I believe that leaking private secrets is immoral, you are trying to implant the idea that this is because I have been brainwashed by companies, thus making me feel stupid or used for that belief, instead of convincing me that the belief is wrong.
If you believe that leaking private secrets should be illegal, unless you're talking about military secrets, then you're an enemy of freedom, and you are immoral.
You asked to be convinced that your belief that divulging trade secrets is immoral is wrong. I'm not going to touch immoral, but if you believe that it should be illegal, then how can you justify someone being able to waive their right to freedom of speech for a non-military matter?
Interesting. What would be your solution to medical research, i.e. something that's a little less frivolous than consumer electronics? Would you be fine with them packing up and going home if they can't continue their research? Even at the expense of human lives?
What's an "enemy of freedom"? Is it someone who opposes some forms of freedom? Is someone who is opposed to murder an "enemy of freedom", since he is opposes the freedom to murder? Or is it freedoms that you approve of?
Certainly freedom of speech appears to be on the "don't touch" list. Is it evil to protect privacy? To protect bank accounts and credit cards? I am highly sceptical that you truly believe that we are better off in a world that highly discourages medical innovation and that considers the protection of privacy immoral.
Freedom of choice, you evil enemy of freedom! Some speech rights should definitely be inalienable, but taking that principle to its hyperbolic extreme is both impractical and oppressive. What is freedom, if not the ability to act, harming only those who consent, without fear of reprisal? By making it impossible to temporarily and voluntarily waive certain non-essential rights, you are, by definition, curtailing their freedom.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
This isn't about companies copying the iPad design, it is about them creating compatible accessories. Apple want only their iPad 2 cases to be on sale from launch day because they make big margins on them, but if the design is leaked much cheaper Chinese cases will eating in to that.
I don't think it is really necessary to go to these lengths. Amazon sell a lot of overpriced Kindle covers because they are the best ones, despite many cheaper models also being available on Amazon's own web site. Apple like to keep everything secret so Steve can do one of his trademark "and one other thing..." too I suppose.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC