doesn't legally mean what you imagine it does. only applies to creditors, not private businesses or individuals. Look it up, any non-creditor business can require anything they want as payment, and exclude cash.
Somehow I don't think they can require ANYTHING they want as payment...;-)
Whatever happened to "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private." I believe it is STILL on each and every denomination of "paper" (cloth) money in the U.S.
Therefore, I don't see how a merchant can FORCE someone to NOT pay with cash.
So, what happens when you go to the restaurant, and when they present the bill, you just give the server cash, claiming you didn't know about the cashless policy?
Do you REALLY think they wouldn't accept it, rather than be "out" the amount of your meal? And do you REALLY think they could call the police on you and have you arrested for "failing to pay", when you showed the cop the money for your meal?
but someone has to repair those robots and someone needs to maintain those robots and someone needs to program, and build those robots. someone needs to install those robots
Personally, I don't carry cash because cash can get stolen. That, and when I get harassed by panhandlers I can just open my wallet and show that I don't have anything.
That will work until one of them creates a Square account, and holds out one of their portable Bluetooth CC and/or NFC readers...
Yet of course, Apple Hating Slashdot won't make an Article out of THAT; nor even UPDATE the original Article...
But if we didn't "hate" on Apple then you would be bored out of your mind and would leave. And we would miss you.
Actually, when I originally joined/. In 2004, I was initially attracted by the fact that there was a generally SUPPORTIVE attitude towards Apple and OS X. As an engineer and log standing Apple supporter and user myself, I found it gratifying that other "techies" recognized the power and elegance of OS X, and so I stayed.
Then, over the next few years; something happened: With increasing frequency, posters, almost ALWAYS posting as AC, would create posts alleging the MOST ridiculous, over-the-top "Motives" on the part of Steve Jobs and Apple. I've frankly never been that big of a SJ fan; but, being an Apple enthusiast since the earliest days of the Company, and having a casual relationship with Steve Wozniak, I knew that Apple was, and still is, a VERY user-centric company, with far closer ties to hackers than stock brokers.
So, when I saw these completely-baseless attacks, I felt the need to "defend" Apple against their bald-faced lies and mischaracterizations, (which are almost ALWAYS nothing more than JUST OPINION), with FACTS and CITATIONS whenever possible (and a quick look through the/. discussion threads will bear that out); but one thing that most ACs and ALL Apple-Haters seem to have in common is the ability to conveniently IGNORE those FACTS, and keep moving the goalposts and arguments around and around, until there was nothing to do in most cases but "let them have the last word".
Which they, and their ilk, then gleefully count as a "victory"...
So why continue to come here and suffer this abuse? IDK; but I guess I just don't want the smug, karma-proof ACs to have the FINAL "last word", and feel like they were ultimately able to drive "TheFakeTimCook" to commit "Slashdor Suicide".
Actually, it wasn't changed, or at least not according to my reading of the terms and conditions. It still contains a clause saying that if you want to distribute binaries to end users, you must create an account with the App Store and comply with the policies thereof.
Just because Apple hasn't sued anybody over third-party distribution doesn't mean Apple has decided to allow it. You can bet your backside that if, for example, Steam decided to distribute via Cydia Impactor instead of through the App Store, there would be lawsuits flying.
So at this point the evidence is equivocal.
I haven't messed with this.ipa sideloading myself; but I would imagine they are bending the rules for Enterprise App Distribution, because I know it involves a User step of "Trusting" the Developer, like is shown in this tutorial:
It looks like the main issue is that Developer Certs. expire after 3 years; but other than that, it does appear to be "legal", as far as Apple is concerned.
But you might be right that this requires a full iOS Dev. ENTERPRISE license ($299/yr), rather than just the freebie one or the $99 one.
The only disadvantage with that method is that you can sign Apps for a year only (with any level(?) Dev. Cert.) or for a week with a common AppleID. I don't know if "re-certs" are possible.
No, no, no. The pre-cogs could actually see the future (mostly). This is even worse because it's just a bunch of algorithms figuring out pre-crime. Let's just hope the "intervention" stops at counselling.
So...you're on the side of the megacorps against the little guy. WTF is wrong with you? On one side, Apple, on the other side some random? Why are you not on our side?
Get real.
I LIKE not having to worry about some App stealing my identity, emptying my bank account, etc.
THAT's the "side" I am on. Apple provides that. NO ONE else does, and the proof is all around you.
So you are on the side of the megacorps, and against the little guy? What went wrong with your life? Or are you just a paid shill?
Nice Try. No, Nothing, and No.
I am, however ALWAYS on the side of TRUTH, and the TRUTH is that Louis Rossman is a Fraudster, and ESPECIALLY SO, since he was OBVIOUSLY going to sell BOOTLEG BATTERIES as "Genuine Apple" parts.
Or, would you want your cellphone or laptop "repaired" with some Chinese sweatshop knockoff parts SOLD as gen-u-wine OEM replacements?
Uhm, the tariff would only apply to iPhones imported *into* the US. It would only increase the cost of iPhones within the US. Apple would probably pass the tariff on to the US consumer.
Tariffs on goods imported into US will only affect the rest of the world if they are re-exported. The rest of the World can happily keep buying iPhones from apple "assembled in China" at the same price as before.
ALL cellphones are made in China.
Why would Trump single-out Apple?
Sounds like Apple could get that reversed in a heartbeat, if Trump is actually stupid enough... Oh, never mind.
With so many things coming from China basically everything would become more expensive and this wouldn't exactly be a popular thing. Sticking it just to the elitist iPhone owners (although I fear Trump may be wrong here, but whatever) is more limited. Those who buy $200 China smartphone anyway will say "serves them right!" and love Trump even more. At least I'm fairly sure that Trump thinks this way.
Um, I'm rockin' an iPhone 6 Plus, a mid-2012 MacBook Pro, and an iPad 2.
1. Sure they can. One phone call to Customs is all it takes. You seriously think that major corporations don't have any pull with the government? With the US government being the poster child for corporate-influenced system?
How can I argue against a bald assertion like "One phone call to Customs is all it takes." It's a self-certifying statement. And with that, I am placed in the situation of attempting to prove a negative. IOW, you have employed an illegal debate tactic. Therefore, your argument is a non-sequitur.
Plus, why is it that the person CLAIMING that "Apple Stole my Batteries" JUST HAPPENS to be Louis Rossman, the "Repair Technician" who is well-known as having some kind of hard-on against Apple. His fraudulent claims are well documented in another bit of yellow journalism he was involved in, in the form of an "Expose" aired on CBC TV:
Here's what AppleInsider had to say about Rossman's fraud. Note: Be sure to read the many Comments, some of them written by posters obviously experienced in the field of computer repair:
So, since you are "backing up" your claims with the words of a know fraudster and notorious Apple-Hater, your argument is completely invalidated.
As the article in MacObserver stated:
"It sounds like Mr. Rossman got the batteries from China. He doesn’t outright say they aren’t counterfeits, he just implies it. But if they are counterfeits, then U.S. Customs is just upholding the law. If the batteries are genuine, he should explicitly state that."
So, here's the problem from Apple's point-of-view: When bogus parts are sold as "Genuine Apple", and then they either don't perform as well, or, worse, do wonderful stuff like swell up or start smoking, NOBODY looks deeper to find that the batteries are COUNTERFEIT. So, Apple's reputation suffers as a result of negative press. So, Apple CERTAINLY has an interest in keeping bootleg parts being sold as "Genuine Apple" OUT OF THE MARKETPLACE.
If you can't see the logic in that, you're simply simple.
3. NO ONE is "locked in". Don't like Apple? DON'T BUY IT!
But why? I can vote for folks who will enshrine market/appstore competition into law, so that I could (in theory) buy an Apple device. They win.. I win. We all win. Why wouldn't I vote that way?
If so, you're gonna have to provide more than a tinfoil-hat-driven allegation.
So Tim Cook can get a US Congressman on the phone or likely in person any time he chooses but you don't think that ability offers him any more influence of our government than a small business or any of us?
So, if you're right, the problem really comes down to how any potential "greater influence" is used.
The big difference is that Apple's SDK terms and conditions make it nearly impossible (and maybe actually impossible) to legally distribute app binaries outside of the App Store. If Apple runs into trouble legally, it will probably stem from that limitation.
Again, this was changed five or more years ago, with iOS 8.
How else would there be repositories of.ipa files (compiled iOS App Binaries), the files therefrom being LEGALLY installable on NON-JAILBROKEN iOS devices, using Cydia Impactor?
Slashdot Mirror
Well this is Slashdot, we need a reason to rage against Apple for something.
THIS!
doesn't legally mean what you imagine it does. only applies to creditors, not private businesses or individuals. Look it up, any non-creditor business can require anything they want as payment, and exclude cash.
Somehow I don't think they can require ANYTHING they want as payment... ;-)
Whatever happened to "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private." I believe it is STILL on each and every denomination of "paper" (cloth) money in the U.S.
Therefore, I don't see how a merchant can FORCE someone to NOT pay with cash.
So, what happens when you go to the restaurant, and when they present the bill, you just give the server cash, claiming you didn't know about the cashless policy?
Do you REALLY think they wouldn't accept it, rather than be "out" the amount of your meal? And do you REALLY think they could call the police on you and have you arrested for "failing to pay", when you showed the cop the money for your meal?
I think not.
but someone has to repair those robots and someone needs to maintain those robots and someone needs to program, and build those robots. someone needs to install those robots
For now...
Personally, I don't carry cash because cash can get stolen. That, and when I get harassed by panhandlers I can just open my wallet and show that I don't have anything.
That will work until one of them creates a Square account, and holds out one of their portable Bluetooth CC and/or NFC readers...
I've been waiting for THAT to happen.
Yes, Akamai published the list of manufacturers and models in their whitepaper: https://www.akamai.com/us/en/m...
Another reason to bemoan the discontinuance of Apple Routers: They are NOT on that list!!!
Its an algorithm developed by Brian Eno.
LOL!
Yet of course, Apple Hating Slashdot won't make an Article out of THAT; nor even UPDATE the original Article...
But if we didn't "hate" on Apple then you would be bored out of your mind and would leave. And we would miss you.
Actually, when I originally joined /. In 2004, I was initially attracted by the fact that there was a generally SUPPORTIVE attitude towards Apple and OS X. As an engineer and log standing Apple supporter and user myself, I found it gratifying that other "techies" recognized the power and elegance of OS X, and so I stayed.
Then, over the next few years; something happened: With increasing frequency, posters, almost ALWAYS posting as AC, would create posts alleging the MOST ridiculous, over-the-top "Motives" on the part of Steve Jobs and Apple. I've frankly never been that big of a SJ fan; but, being an Apple enthusiast since the earliest days of the Company, and having a casual relationship with Steve Wozniak, I knew that Apple was, and still is, a VERY user-centric company, with far closer ties to hackers than stock brokers.
So, when I saw these completely-baseless attacks, I felt the need to "defend" Apple against their bald-faced lies and mischaracterizations, (which are almost ALWAYS nothing more than JUST OPINION), with FACTS and CITATIONS whenever possible (and a quick look through the /. discussion threads will bear that out); but one thing that most ACs and ALL Apple-Haters seem to have in common is the ability to conveniently IGNORE those FACTS, and keep moving the goalposts and arguments around and around, until there was nothing to do in most cases but "let them have the last word".
Which they, and their ilk, then gleefully count as a "victory"...
So why continue to come here and suffer this abuse? IDK; but I guess I just don't want the smug, karma-proof ACs to have the FINAL "last word", and feel like they were ultimately able to drive "TheFakeTimCook" to commit "Slashdor Suicide".
> By the time this article posts, Apple will probably be back on top.
a quick check on google shows apple is up by $6 billion right now.
Yet of course, Apple Hating Slashdot won't make an Article out of THAT; nor even UPDATE the original Article...
Wow! A WHOLE 3 Billion?!?
Color me completely unimpressed.
By the time this article posts, Apple will probably be back on top.
Plus, the entire stock market is extremely volatile right now.
Non-News.
Actually, it wasn't changed, or at least not according to my reading of the terms and conditions. It still contains a clause saying that if you want to distribute binaries to end users, you must create an account with the App Store and comply with the policies thereof.
Just because Apple hasn't sued anybody over third-party distribution doesn't mean Apple has decided to allow it. You can bet your backside that if, for example, Steam decided to distribute via Cydia Impactor instead of through the App Store, there would be lawsuits flying.
So at this point the evidence is equivocal.
I haven't messed with this .ipa sideloading myself; but I would imagine they are bending the rules for Enterprise App Distribution, because I know it involves a User step of "Trusting" the Developer, like is shown in this tutorial:
https://www.goodbarber.com/blo...
It looks like the main issue is that Developer Certs. expire after 3 years; but other than that, it does appear to be "legal", as far as Apple is concerned.
But you might be right that this requires a full iOS Dev. ENTERPRISE license ($299/yr), rather than just the freebie one or the $99 one.
https://medium.com/@Intersog/d...
There's some interesting ideas near the end of this thread:
https://stackoverflow.com/ques...
But since the real rub is "signing", that's where Cydia Impactor may get around all of the above limitations:
https://www.shoutpedia.com/use...
The only disadvantage with that method is that you can sign Apps for a year only (with any level(?) Dev. Cert.) or for a week with a common AppleID. I don't know if "re-certs" are possible.
Who says prisons have to be non-profit?
Problem solved.
You apparently have never heard of THESE guys:
http://www.correctionscorp.com...
https://www.motherjones.com/po...
No, no, no. The pre-cogs could actually see the future (mostly). This is even worse because it's just a bunch of algorithms figuring out pre-crime. Let's just hope the "intervention" stops at counselling.
Oh, it will.
At least for now...
So...you're on the side of the megacorps against the little guy. WTF is wrong with you? On one side, Apple, on the other side some random? Why are you not on our side?
Get real.
I LIKE not having to worry about some App stealing my identity, emptying my bank account, etc.
THAT's the "side" I am on. Apple provides that. NO ONE else does, and the proof is all around you.
So you are on the side of the megacorps, and against the little guy? What went wrong with your life? Or are you just a paid shill?
Nice Try. No, Nothing, and No.
I am, however ALWAYS on the side of TRUTH, and the TRUTH is that Louis Rossman is a Fraudster, and ESPECIALLY SO, since he was OBVIOUSLY going to sell BOOTLEG BATTERIES as "Genuine Apple" parts.
Or, would you want your cellphone or laptop "repaired" with some Chinese sweatshop knockoff parts SOLD as gen-u-wine OEM replacements?
Didn't think so.
That wouldn't just be iphones you plonker, it will be any phone that is built outside the US. It really is an idiot tax if you don't understand that ;)
Citation? Because ALL I have read says "iPhone, iPhone, iPhone".
I live in Europe. If the US wants to charge more for iphones I'll happily buy direct from China. Bye bye Apple, Hello Xiaomi
And you thought GOOGLE spied on you...
Just wait.
Uhm, the tariff would only apply to iPhones imported *into* the US. It would only increase the cost of iPhones within the US. Apple would probably pass the tariff on to the US consumer.
Tariffs on goods imported into US will only affect the rest of the world if they are re-exported. The rest of the World can happily keep buying iPhones from apple "assembled in China" at the same price as before.
ALL cellphones are made in China.
Why would Trump single-out Apple?
Sounds like Apple could get that reversed in a heartbeat, if Trump is actually stupid enough... Oh, never mind.
With so many things coming from China basically everything would become more expensive and this wouldn't exactly be a popular thing. Sticking it just to the elitist iPhone owners (although I fear Trump may be wrong here, but whatever) is more limited. Those who buy $200 China smartphone anyway will say "serves them right!" and love Trump even more. At least I'm fairly sure that Trump thinks this way.
Um, I'm rockin' an iPhone 6 Plus, a mid-2012 MacBook Pro, and an iPad 2.
Hardly "elitist" fare, Slashtard.
Trump needs to pick his words more carefully.
Just because HE thinks ALL Cellphones are "iPhones" (nice for brand-recognition), doesn't mean he should be SAYING that in a Public Statement!
Obviously, this has ALREADY caused great economic harm to Apple (stock down 2%), JUST because Trump can't be BOTHERED to choose his words correctly.
And if he DID mean just iPhones, then Apple has a good cause to sue to get the action reversed.
1. Sure they can. One phone call to Customs is all it takes. You seriously think that major corporations don't have any pull with the government? With the US government being the poster child for corporate-influenced system?
Here's one man's story of how Apple caused his Mac-compatible batteries seized at the border. It's not a joke or an exaggeration, this is really happening. For the entire story, see the sequel which goes into depth.
How can I argue against a bald assertion like "One phone call to Customs is all it takes." It's a self-certifying statement. And with that, I am placed in the situation of attempting to prove a negative. IOW, you have employed an illegal debate tactic. Therefore, your argument is a non-sequitur.
Plus, why is it that the person CLAIMING that "Apple Stole my Batteries" JUST HAPPENS to be Louis Rossman , the "Repair Technician" who is well-known as having some kind of hard-on against Apple. His fraudulent claims are well documented in another bit of yellow journalism he was involved in, in the form of an "Expose" aired on CBC TV:
https://www.macobserver.com/li...
Here's what AppleInsider had to say about Rossman's fraud. Note: Be sure to read the many Comments, some of them written by posters obviously experienced in the field of computer repair:
https://appleinsider.com/artic...
So, since you are "backing up" your claims with the words of a know fraudster and notorious Apple-Hater, your argument is completely invalidated.
As the article in MacObserver stated:
"It sounds like Mr. Rossman got the batteries from China. He doesn’t outright say they aren’t counterfeits, he just implies it. But if they are counterfeits, then U.S. Customs is just upholding the law. If the batteries are genuine, he should explicitly state that."
So, here's the problem from Apple's point-of-view: When bogus parts are sold as "Genuine Apple", and then they either don't perform as well, or, worse, do wonderful stuff like swell up or start smoking, NOBODY looks deeper to find that the batteries are COUNTERFEIT. So, Apple's reputation suffers as a result of negative press. So, Apple CERTAINLY has an interest in keeping bootleg parts being sold as "Genuine Apple" OUT OF THE MARKETPLACE.
If you can't see the logic in that, you're simply simple.
3. NO ONE is "locked in". Don't like Apple? DON'T BUY IT!
But why? I can vote for folks who will enshrine market/appstore competition into law, so that I could (in theory) buy an Apple device. They win.. I win. We all win. Why wouldn't I vote that way?
Sorry. The world doesn't work that way.
If so, you're gonna have to provide more than a tinfoil-hat-driven allegation.
So Tim Cook can get a US Congressman on the phone or likely in person any time he chooses but you don't think that ability offers him any more influence of our government than a small business or any of us?
So, if you're right, the problem really comes down to how any potential "greater influence" is used.
The big difference is that Apple's SDK terms and conditions make it nearly impossible (and maybe actually impossible) to legally distribute app binaries outside of the App Store. If Apple runs into trouble legally, it will probably stem from that limitation.
Again, this was changed five or more years ago, with iOS 8.
How else would there be repositories of .ipa files (compiled iOS App Binaries), the files therefrom being LEGALLY installable on NON-JAILBROKEN iOS devices, using Cydia Impactor?
That's not "Using a government agency". Sorry.
Congress is not a government agency, nor has the power to influence other government agencies? Do tell.
Ok, that's not what you meant by the term "using". You implied that Apple said "Jump", and unnamed "government agencies" said "How high?"
If so, you're gonna have to provide more than a tinfoil-hat-driven allegation.