Apple doesn't want to sell more iPhones. They would rather you used that money to buy iWatchs/AirPods/AppleHomeSpeakers (to dominate other verticals.) Or that you bought apps (30% pure profit with zero cost). Or that you liked them more.
Frankly, Apple's #1 goal is "don't drive you to Android", #2 is "get more into the Apple ecosystem" and a distant 80th or something is "buy another iPhone".
And I understand it. Hell, selling hardware is way less fun than taking a cut of marketplaces selling other people's IP (like at Steam vs. Steambox).
They show the ads to EU citizens (in the EU). That's what conversation is talking about. Facebook saying "well then, EU citizens cannot use FAcebook." Cause, well, that's going to be bad.
It's more likely our culture having doctors (until recently?) proscribing tons of opiods, then people getting addicted, then the legal supply getting cut off. Then they turn to heroin because at least then they can get it.
I mean, sure, Facebook doesn't have to do business with the EU. It'll tank their stock price to give up their second most valuable market, but it's up to them.
China's been trying to kill the dollar for almost a decade now. It hasn't been working, because no matter how strained US/EU or US/OPEC relations get, everyone knows the US doesn't use the dollar's bully power and China would if the yuan replaced it.
I'm guessing they cannot just get rid of existing policies like that. My guess is that only new policies can have this limitation applied. Or, there will be some fun class action lawsuits coming up./p.
My understanding is that ACLU wasn't setup for social justice, it was setup to combat attacks on liberty.
True-ish. That's what they were set up to do, but they and you are defining "attacks on liberty" differently
If you convinced them that the cops were macing people because they were punks then the ACLU may have gotten involved. Because they care about the freedom to express yourself. But they aren't really involved in the "no police brutality" thing.
Then I found myself the target of a prosecutor who misused the law for his own personal gain.
While that sounds bad, it doesn't sound like the ACLU's mission. They tend to want to prevent unconstitutional actions by governmental actors, either in practice (the teacher who forces children to pray) or enshrined in law (a state law requiring students to pray.) While it's possible that the prosecutor was doing unconstitutional things, the best remedy seems like anti-corruption laws. In other words, if it's not something that could be a Supreme Court case, it's not something the ACLU will handle.
while completely ignoring the agency of women to make their own life choices.
The whole point of the laws Facebook is (accused of) violating is that women cannot make their own choices if there are a bunch of secret jobs they cannot choose to apply for because Facebook hide the job listings from them.
You're switching the definition of "discrimination" halfway through your post. That's a lie.
And most advertising is discriminatory. But certain things (housing, jobs) are regulated because the goal isn't to "reach the (single person, not group) you want to sell to" It's to offer an opportunity. And, things like housing and jobs are considered to be important to be offered uniformly.
It's mostly a Google approved HTML page only using a Google-approved list of JS libraries. This allows Google to cache the HTML page, and serve it themselves. You know, preventing their search results from even needing to hit your server to monetize your work (there is an "ads" JS library).
Because the JS is so well defined, they can just catalog the HTML/CSS/Images. Why is that better than caching the JS as well?? By knowing all that the JS can do, they don't have to run it to determine what other content they need to cache. They can do the entire AMP page.
1) Those countries tend to regulate Draft Kings. For Example, they have a gambling license for the UK. 2) Loot boxes make far more money than draft kings. Hell, you could probably point to at least 10 companies that make more than draft kings.
. I am free to sell and trade the cards I acquire, I cannot do this with the majority of lootbox or gacha games
You realize that this makes it far more like gambling, right? I mean, you are literally buying a box of things with variable value. I'm not sure why that's not gambling, but a scratch-off ticket is.
Saudi Arabia has acknowledged for many decades oil wealth won't last forever. They've been pretty good at using a large chunk of oil money to buy assets in other countries. It let's them diversify, without modifying their country too much,
Essentially, they treat the entire nation's economy like you treat your working life... have a few decades to live on/amass a nest egg, then live on interest.
Slashdot Mirror
Because their bosses said "LOL No" to their suggestion. Like, it's almost as meaningful if you emailed them a suggestion to do it.
I mean, it sounds like they're pretty low level employees from the story, but then again there are almost no details.
Apple doesn't want to sell more iPhones. They would rather you used that money to buy iWatchs/AirPods/AppleHomeSpeakers (to dominate other verticals.) Or that you bought apps (30% pure profit with zero cost). Or that you liked them more.
Frankly, Apple's #1 goal is "don't drive you to Android", #2 is "get more into the Apple ecosystem" and a distant 80th or something is "buy another iPhone".
And I understand it. Hell, selling hardware is way less fun than taking a cut of marketplaces selling other people's IP (like at Steam vs. Steambox).
Quantum computers will be slower for most tasks. There are some tasks for which they will be much faster.
That the NSA, CIA, FSB, Chinese Intelligence, and MI6 don't give a shit about blockchain, it's not something that governments really care about, etc.
I guess my point was that there aren't "these people" in this case. Overprescription crosses race/wealth/education lines.
They're not the same, but they are correlated. A lot of arrogant people just don't care enough to learn social grace
Sure they will. Look at 2007-8.
Being arrogant makes you more likely to do something big.
They show the ads to EU citizens (in the EU). That's what conversation is talking about. Facebook saying "well then, EU citizens cannot use FAcebook." Cause, well, that's going to be bad.
It's more likely our culture having doctors (until recently?) proscribing tons of opiods, then people getting addicted, then the legal supply getting cut off. Then they turn to heroin because at least then they can get it.
I mean, sure, Facebook doesn't have to do business with the EU. It'll tank their stock price to give up their second most valuable market, but it's up to them.
Crystal meth is no longer trendy among teenagers/20-year-olds. It's an old person drug. Heroin is the new choice.
Good lord, I wish I was joking.
I should point out this is based on statistics of people arrested, not personal experience
China's been trying to kill the dollar for almost a decade now. It hasn't been working, because no matter how strained US/EU or US/OPEC relations get, everyone knows the US doesn't use the dollar's bully power and China would if the yuan replaced it.
And Russia... isn't a big economic player.
I'm guessing they cannot just get rid of existing policies like that. My guess is that only new policies can have this limitation applied. Or, there will be some fun class action lawsuits coming up./p.
You really went with "you don't need privacy if you have nothing to hide?"
True-ish. That's what they were set up to do, but they and you are defining "attacks on liberty" differently
If you convinced them that the cops were macing people because they were punks then the ACLU may have gotten involved. Because they care about the freedom to express yourself. But they aren't really involved in the "no police brutality" thing.
While that sounds bad, it doesn't sound like the ACLU's mission. They tend to want to prevent unconstitutional actions by governmental actors, either in practice (the teacher who forces children to pray) or enshrined in law (a state law requiring students to pray.) While it's possible that the prosecutor was doing unconstitutional things, the best remedy seems like anti-corruption laws. In other words, if it's not something that could be a Supreme Court case, it's not something the ACLU will handle.
The whole point of the laws Facebook is (accused of) violating is that women cannot make their own choices if there are a bunch of secret jobs they cannot choose to apply for because Facebook hide the job listings from them.
You're switching the definition of "discrimination" halfway through your post. That's a lie.
And most advertising is discriminatory. But certain things (housing, jobs) are regulated because the goal isn't to "reach the (single person, not group) you want to sell to" It's to offer an opportunity. And, things like housing and jobs are considered to be important to be offered uniformly.
It's mostly a Google approved HTML page only using a Google-approved list of JS libraries. This allows Google to cache the HTML page, and serve it themselves. You know, preventing their search results from even needing to hit your server to monetize your work (there is an "ads" JS library).
Because the JS is so well defined, they can just catalog the HTML/CSS/Images. Why is that better than caching the JS as well?? By knowing all that the JS can do, they don't have to run it to determine what other content they need to cache. They can do the entire AMP page.
It sounds like you're using Google as your search engine.Just, don't do that. Google points at their cache for AMP pages.
1) Those countries tend to regulate Draft Kings. For Example, they have a gambling license for the UK. 2) Loot boxes make far more money than draft kings. Hell, you could probably point to at least 10 companies that make more than draft kings.
You realize that this makes it far more like gambling, right? I mean, you are literally buying a box of things with variable value. I'm not sure why that's not gambling, but a scratch-off ticket is.
Saudi Arabia has acknowledged for many decades oil wealth won't last forever. They've been pretty good at using a large chunk of oil money to buy assets in other countries. It let's them diversify, without modifying their country too much,
Essentially, they treat the entire nation's economy like you treat your working life... have a few decades to live on/amass a nest egg, then live on interest.
Assuming you are personally a billionaire willing to invest everything you own in electric cars, yes.