Apparently you didn't get the hint of my post - Apple is deliberately skirting the spirit of the 'tax rules' in order to avoid/evade paying taxes (the difference is wether what tricks they used were illegal or not - see what I did there?)
To go around and claiming "courage" for things they do while purposely keeping their hordes of cash for themselves/investors just makes them look like the jerks they are.
But of course, all the fanbois come to Cook's rescue, so why then should he bother justifying himself, it's far easier to call it 'political crap', right?
You obviously didn't try an iPhone 4S running iOS 7-9.
What makes me laugh the most is how a while back some online mags did a study of how much faster the iPhone screens were compared to all other makes; yeah they might be faster, but when the UI can't keep up with user touches, it really means nothing in the end.
Which means that you can't plug your earbuds or other listening device in while charging.... oh, unless you have a dongle that will set you back at least another $30... something that will probably *NOT* ship with the iphone.
... And break within 30 days, as do all their cables.
So what you're saying is you want a law mandating that you have to buy AppleCare? Why not... just buy it if you want it?
You're already paying a premium for products that are purposely designed to be non-repairable. Why should I be forced to have to pay an extra warranty premium for products that are basically designed to fail (MacBook Pro anyone? *) that I then can't try to fix myself (or choose who fixes it)?
(* yes, I know they 'recalled' this and will fix for free - but only after really bad PR/threats of class action lawsuits finally forced them into it)
Do Slashdot readers think there should ever be any exceptions?
If the site(s) knew something, then yes, they should have some accountability. In this regard, it should be treated similarly as someone who had participated/facilitate, unknowingly or not, in money laundering - the law won't care about actual intent/claimed innocence, only about the facts.
The TPP (or as I've seen it referred to - the "Tyrant Protection Plan") is nothing but a sham, no part of it has anything to do with 'trade', and all of it having to do with corporations ensuring their profits, at the cost of those countries' citizens.
Why else would they be permitted to sue countries/governments over alleged threats to their 'perceived potential profits' due to new laws (such as environment protections laws that might forbid those companies from operating under these new laws) passed by said countries.
Slashdot Mirror
The EU determined that a short time ago for themselves. Apparently the fanbois weren't paying any attention.
That's a weasel phrase used by people that don't like the outcome.
Kinda like "It's total political crap"?
How much (in %) do you pay. How much does Apple/Corporate America?
Therein lies the answer.
Apparently you didn't get the hint of my post - Apple is deliberately skirting the spirit of the 'tax rules' in order to avoid/evade paying taxes (the difference is wether what tricks they used were illegal or not - see what I did there?)
To go around and claiming "courage" for things they do while purposely keeping their hordes of cash for themselves/investors just makes them look like the jerks they are.
But of course, all the fanbois come to Cook's rescue, so why then should he bother justifying himself, it's far easier to call it 'political crap', right?
The moral thing to do is pay your fair share of taxes.
But instead Apple feels entitled to pay as little as possible (wether the tricks they used are illegal or not remains to be seen, I guess).
... @tim_cook.
The iPhone seemed snappier. .
You obviously didn't try an iPhone 4S running iOS 7-9. What makes me laugh the most is how a while back some online mags did a study of how much faster the iPhone screens were compared to all other makes; yeah they might be faster, but when the UI can't keep up with user touches, it really means nothing in the end.
You can't have an "adult" conversation with a child like Comey.
That IFTTT?
The QRLJacking attack is nothing more than a social engineering attack
So it's really not a flaw or bug of the system; just a lack of user education.
I'm sure he'll have something to say about this on this week's Security Now podcast
or what about computers for that matter?
Which means that you can't plug your earbuds or other listening device in while charging.... oh, unless you have a dongle that will set you back at least another $30... something that will probably *NOT* ship with the iphone.
... And break within 30 days, as do all their cables.
So what you're saying is you want a law mandating that you have to buy AppleCare? Why not... just buy it if you want it?
You're already paying a premium for products that are purposely designed to be non-repairable. Why should I be forced to have to pay an extra warranty premium for products that are basically designed to fail (MacBook Pro anyone? *) that I then can't try to fix myself (or choose who fixes it)?
(* yes, I know they 'recalled' this and will fix for free - but only after really bad PR/threats of class action lawsuits finally forced them into it)
Given that these tech firms pushed to destroy this, the alternative should have been to mandate a minimum 3-year warranty (I'm looking at you, Apple!)
"If you can prove that you have a legitimate reason to have that money it will be given back to you. And we've done that in the past,"
Yeah, and just how many decades did it take before they gave it back?
If the site(s) knew something, then yes, they should have some accountability. In this regard, it should be treated similarly as someone who had participated/facilitate, unknowingly or not, in money laundering - the law won't care about actual intent/claimed innocence, only about the facts.
You're obviously the nut job, buddy.
Better to train/pay a human then to buy robots or mechanical gateways to direct people randomly.
Check the status page
by doing this is the cause of such acts?
Self-fulfilling prophecy.
They don't want to get accused that they're "just copying Apple".... again.
You still offered nothing to counter his point, AC.
Time they read this.
Why else would they be permitted to sue countries/governments over alleged threats to their 'perceived potential profits' due to new laws (such as environment protections laws that might forbid those companies from operating under these new laws) passed by said countries.