The internet is about finding news, sites, forums, chats, people, fun, enjoying social media or adding a comment.
If a user does not like a site, don't use it, dont return to it. Making it not easy to search for results or delisting terms won't change reality.
If the site is in the USA, having freedom of speech is protected. Having freedom after speech is protected from gov staff.
Freedom from a gov or mil, a political party or theocracy or cult is what sets the USA apart from the rest of the world.
If a company does or does not want to host material, find results or comments, thats ok too.
Just make it clear that your products or services are not going to get good results as teams have restricted all expected functionality.
Users then have the freedom to start their own sites or select from much better competing services that have embraced freedom.
Freedom does not go away after one company bans it. Freedom and fun then moves to better sites who support free speech.
If a brand wants to support SJW, governments, theocracies, cults, contractors and be a huge safe space thats their option.
In a free market of ideas and so many other great brands supporting freedom of speech to become a very boring brand is not really the best marketing position.
Censorship as branding might be great for some faiths or nations but freedom sells globally.
The term "Democracy" is an umbrella term that represents all systems of "rule by the people", including representative democracies like ours (also known as a republic). While its true that our founding fathers tended to mean "direct democracy" when speaking of "democracy", that's no longer the case. From Wikipedia:
The Founding Fathers of the United States rarely praised and often criticised democracy, which in their time tended to specifically mean direct democracy, often without the protection of a constitution enshrining basic rights
But, as we all know, language changes over time. It's worthwhile to understand the history of these terms, but really, you're pissing against the wind if you think people are not going to continue to call our government a "democracy". According to Google:
The United States has gone to war to defend 'democracy' and it has killed millions of people in the name of 'democracy' and now that just for once it is just for once inconvenient for some of you to to call yourself a democracy so that you can justify why the runner up is becoming president of your country you are falling back on playing with semantics to try and get people to accept that the United States and its crooked and corrupt electoral college is not 'democracy' but that your electoral system still somehow magically reflects 'the will of the people'? Even if you want to call yourself a representative republic or whatever the hell else, 'representation' and 'rule by the people' still implies that which ever guy wins elections should reflect the will of the people i.e. the winner should be the guy most of the people want. The winner should not be chosen by some twisted construct designed to allow the elites to manipulate election results and let's face it that is exactly how the damn electoral college came into being in the first place.
Cook up all the justifications you want about why Trump 'won' the election and why he should be president.
How about -- he won the electoral contest? You know, the one set of rules that actually counts? The one system that was perfectly okay before the election, until now that some of the losers are sore and are concocting all the justifications for a change in the outcome after-the-fact?
Democracy is a system whereby elected representatives are chosen by winning the popular vote not a gerrymandered system where you elect a group of functionaries who then vote for the runner up.
Actually, if you live in the United States, then you don't live in a pure democracy. You are in a democratically elected representative republic. This means, by design, that sometimes the majority does not get its way.
Won the electoral contest, call it anything you want just don't call it democracy and don't call it fair. Any system that results in the person who got the 2nd larges batch of votes winning is not democracy it is not 'rule by the people, for the people' nor is it any kind of democratically elected representative republic because the guy who won is not the guy who got the most votes and therefore does not represent the largest number of voters. It is quite amazing how hard it is for some people to understand that.
The middle of the country is far more important to our society than a bunch of whiny, coddled SJWs who are detached from the economics of reality.
You want a Civil War? Because, ignoring "flyover country" is how you get a Civil War.
So we should let the minority rule through an archaic and fatally flawed electoral college because otherwise 'flyover country' will throw a tantrum and threaten civil war? One hast to go back 140 years to find a guy who lost the popular vote by as large a margin as Donald Trump has and still gained the presidency (Rutherford B. Hayes in case anybody is interested). Pundits can go on and on and on about the electoral college being indispensable to the way the United States and find all kinds of ways to justify that point of view, go right ahead. Cook up all the justifications you want about why Trump 'won' the election and why he should be president. Just don't try to insult the intelligence of people who know the definition of democracy by claiming that the electoral college system results in democracy. Democracy is a system whereby elected representatives are chosen by winning the popular vote not a gerrymandered system where you elect a group of functionaries who then vote for the runner up.
If you actually do think Castro was good for Cuba, you are sadly ignorant.
Don't put words in his mouth, he actually said the exact opposite: "Castro and communism are not my choices for leaders or economic systems..."
Batista's Cuba was famous for literacy and doctors per capita...
Cuba has a literacy rate of 99,7% and it would appear that despite the best efforts of the US, the Cuban govt, has managed to maintain a pretty good healthcare system: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... Much like the AC you are maligning I don't think much of communism but if you want to dump on the Castro regime at least pick something to complain about that they managed to mess up and not two things they actually seem to have managed to get right.
Maybe you are one of the who thinks Che Guevara was heroic and cannot see the irony of selling t-shirts with his picture.
First you put words in his mouth, now you are projecting thoughts into his mind.
Note that as usual Wikipedia is a poor-quality source with undisclosed bias. Here is the text of the law.
Why? It sounds to me like Wikipedia has got a pretty good translation of the gist of that law which is the paragraphs 1.1 and 1.2, the rest of what you linked to is mostly a discussion of what kind of jail sentences you are liable to get. My German may be a bit rusty but the Wikipedia translation is pretty accurate:
130
Volksverhetzung
Whosoever, in a manner capable of disturbing the public peace:
1. incites hatred against a national, racial, religious group or a group defined by their ethnic origins, against segments of the population or individuals because of their belonging to one of the aforementioned groups or segments of the population or calls for violent or arbitrary measures against them; or
2. assaults the human dignity of others by insulting, maliciously maligning an aforementioned group, segments of the population or individuals because of their belonging to one of the aforementioned groups or segments of the population, or defaming segments of the population,
Where please, is the undisclosed bias in that literal translation of the Volksverhetzungs law? Or, for that matter, the discussion of the above text on the Wiki page which sounds pretty dispassionate to me? I keep hearing you alt-right trolls dropping drive-by accusations like this but just for once I'd like to hear one of you justify it.
I am a right winger. We like Elon Musk. He produces a quality product at a decent price. He is against over regulation in his industry.
This fucking epidemic of stories about fake news this week is ridiculous. The Liberal media lost big, predicting a Hillary landslide, and they NEED a scapegoat to blame for their own idiocy. Trust in the media is at an all time low, and people aren't fooled by the MSM putting on a different hat and calling themselves "impartial fact-checkers" anymore.
So the new plan is to declare any website we don't like as "fake news" and tie them into the other demonized group we made up, the "alt right". They are the enemy and they must be stopped.
Ah yes, the liberal dominated 'Lügenpresse must be eliminated from the face of the Earth and replaced by what? Fox News? Breitbart? Both famous for being the only news organisations that always tell the truth without fail all of the time? Does the part of the media that does not agree with your world view and that your friends on the right wing call 'lügenpresse' have a liberal slant? Yes it does. Is that liberal slant any less than the right wing slant of Fox News and Breitbart? No it isn't. People are going to disagree with you. That's what freedom of speech means. I don't like either Fox News or Breitbart but I'd never dream of calling for them to be muzzled. Just because you don't agree with people does not mean that they are always lying all of the time and that their news organisations are an 'enemy' that must be 'stopped', by which you presumably mean muzzled like the opposition media in Russia? The methodology of the polls used in the recent US presidential elections tuned out to be flawed which was to be expected when one candidate in the US presidential election was flirting openly with xenophobia and racism so there was bound to be a massive Bradley effect around Trump. You can criticise MSM (by which you presumably mean MSN?) for trusting those polls just like everybody else did when there was a good chance of a Bradley effect being in play but don't try to make it out to have been some massive liberal conspiracy to try and muzzle the good god fearing people of the right wing and keep them down. Liberal news organisations deserve to be criticised for trusting those polls but conservative news outlets also deserve to be held accountable when they spread demonstrably false news. Upholding journalistic standard is a task that both right and left wing news outlets must shoulder.
That makes two retarded shit-filled idiots. Apple does not have to release the vast majority of the code that they have. Very little, if any, is released under the GPL.
I really wish people would do their homework before slinging around words like 'retarded', 'shit-filled' and 'idiot'. Slinging obscenities just makes you look like one of those cocky foulmouthed gopniks who proved to be so thick and insolent that your mother wrote you off and gave up on teaching you good manners.
As for code, it does not have to be released under GPL to be open source and modifiable. I have been told many times by all kinds of pundits that macOS open source code is released under the express condition that you are do not modify it which is complete bullshit. The Apple Public Source License was approved by the Open Source Initiative and the Free Software Foundation. I have downloaded OS X code, fixed bugs that pissed me off, compiled and installed the resulting binaries on my system more than once. The biggest problems I've had with this entire process is getting the nimrods at Apple support to take me seriously when I file a bug report complete with a roadmap of how to fix the error but that does not change the fact that you can actually fix bugs in a whole lot of macOS code yourself if you are willing to bother. The one thing Apple has not done yet is sue me for modifying the code they released under APSL.
Man, if I had a nickel for every time some kind of sensory saturation forced a premature release...
Then you'd still be broke. This is Slashdot; you're not fooling anyone.
Visit the lair of any Slashdot poster, buried deep in the basement of his parent's house, and you will find that the height and majesty of the tissue mountain on the nightstand next to his bed thoroughly discredits your hypothesis. If you need further confirmation, shine a black light at his laptop and prepare yourself to be blinded by the glow.
Not that many failed.. Samsung recalled them early enough. Whereas with Apple devices, they simply pretended issues like antenna gate never existed
They had to, your phone blowing up is a bit more hazardous to your health and less suited to being ignored than 'antenna-gate'. Samsung seemed to be perfectly happy to ignore less explosive FUBARs surrounding their products such as complaints from their customers when they orphaned the early Galaxy Tab line. Samsung is not exactly the angel of innocence when it comes to stiffing their customers over the flawed products they sold them.
So please carry on. Shriek the word far and wide that Trump is taking credit for things that he didn't do while he is working to take the White House over from a man that brags about the fantastic recovery (that never happened) and who claims to have improved race relations (they're worse)
I don't think we'll have to. Churchill said once that in politics antisemitism is a good starter but a bad sticker, replace antisemitism with xenophobia and you have a summary of what will eventually happen to Trump, Bannon and the alt-right. You don't whip up so much hate against so many sections of American society and blame them for things that aren't their fault without suffering some major blowback sooner or later. Trump and the alt-right will self-destruct sooner or later and burn up on a bonfire of their own hate.
It comes from cuckold, a derogatory term for the husband of an adulteress, and from Cuckoo, a bird which lays eggs in others' nests to be raised and supported by unsuspecting parents.
The alt-right started calling moderate conservatives 'Cuckservatives', claiming that there were like the Cuckoo, sitting in the 'nest' of the Republican party and feigning conservatism to win votes, but voting for progressive policies while in office.
It was later abbreviated to 'Cuck' and took on more connotations as it spread through the alt-right, most to do with some kind of perceived emasculation, submissiveness, or 'selling out': Men who allow women to hold too much power ('feminazis', 'SJWs', etc.), people who are accepting of foreigners (to 'steal our jobs' and leech off our social services), globalists who sell America out to the Jews, socialists who would turn the country over to freeloaders, etc, etc.
Is there anybody they don't hate? Just the fact that they hate women and want to muzzle them and chain them to a stove already means they already hate half the human race. That covers Jews, Muslims some of them also hate Christians. Add to that Asians, Africans, Latinos, Middle Easterners, in short anybody who is not white and male. They hate any white people who are not alt-right and surely they hate the portion of the alt-rigth that they consider rivals or betrayers of the one true way of hate. I think that covers most of the human race. Being alt-right activist must be a lonely existence. These guys are beginning to sound like the bloody Sith. Do they hold meetings at Breitbart HQ where a pale, hunch backed and prune faced Steve Bannon dressed in a black hooded robe preaches to his acolytes, waiving his withered hand: "Use the hate my minions, let it flow through you, It will make you strong!" ???
According to this article. The $649 iPhone 7 costs around $220 to make meaning that Apple gets roughly around $400 in profit.
That assumes that Apple has $0 development costs, $0 shipping costs, $0 distribution costs, $0 marketing costs, they have $0 related to sales, $0 costs due to keeping an adequate inventory of iPhones on hand to supply distributors and of course there is $0 wastage (theft, etc.). Also, because we all know iPhones never break down, Apple has $0 costs related to returns and warranty repairs. Methinks that the your formula:
retail price - manufacturing costs = Apples profit per iPhone sold
According to teardowns, component and assembly costs for phones like the Samsung Galaxy S7 and Note 7 are in the same $250-ish price range and Samsung doesn't do their own system software R&D.
So either Samsung is also gouging their customers... or perhaps there's just a little bit more to phone costs other than the price of a chip, case, battery, and screen...
Slashdot Mirror
The internet is about finding news, sites, forums, chats, people, fun, enjoying social media or adding a comment. If a user does not like a site, don't use it, dont return to it. Making it not easy to search for results or delisting terms won't change reality. If the site is in the USA, having freedom of speech is protected. Having freedom after speech is protected from gov staff. Freedom from a gov or mil, a political party or theocracy or cult is what sets the USA apart from the rest of the world. If a company does or does not want to host material, find results or comments, thats ok too. Just make it clear that your products or services are not going to get good results as teams have restricted all expected functionality. Users then have the freedom to start their own sites or select from much better competing services that have embraced freedom. Freedom does not go away after one company bans it. Freedom and fun then moves to better sites who support free speech. If a brand wants to support SJW, governments, theocracies, cults, contractors and be a huge safe space thats their option. In a free market of ideas and so many other great brands supporting freedom of speech to become a very boring brand is not really the best marketing position. Censorship as branding might be great for some faiths or nations but freedom sells globally.
*Sigh* ... No, the internet is for porn!
The term "Democracy" is an umbrella term that represents all systems of "rule by the people", including representative democracies like ours (also known as a republic). While its true that our founding fathers tended to mean "direct democracy" when speaking of "democracy", that's no longer the case. From Wikipedia:
The Founding Fathers of the United States rarely praised and often criticised democracy, which in their time tended to specifically mean direct democracy, often without the protection of a constitution enshrining basic rights
But, as we all know, language changes over time. It's worthwhile to understand the history of these terms, but really, you're pissing against the wind if you think people are not going to continue to call our government a "democracy". According to Google:
The United States has gone to war to defend 'democracy' and it has killed millions of people in the name of 'democracy' and now that just for once it is just for once inconvenient for some of you to to call yourself a democracy so that you can justify why the runner up is becoming president of your country you are falling back on playing with semantics to try and get people to accept that the United States and its crooked and corrupt electoral college is not 'democracy' but that your electoral system still somehow magically reflects 'the will of the people'? Even if you want to call yourself a representative republic or whatever the hell else, 'representation' and 'rule by the people' still implies that which ever guy wins elections should reflect the will of the people i.e. the winner should be the guy most of the people want. The winner should not be chosen by some twisted construct designed to allow the elites to manipulate election results and let's face it that is exactly how the damn electoral college came into being in the first place.
Cook up all the justifications you want about why Trump 'won' the election and why he should be president.
How about -- he won the electoral contest? You know, the one set of rules that actually counts? The one system that was perfectly okay before the election, until now that some of the losers are sore and are concocting all the justifications for a change in the outcome after-the-fact?
Democracy is a system whereby elected representatives are chosen by winning the popular vote not a gerrymandered system where you elect a group of functionaries who then vote for the runner up.
Actually, if you live in the United States, then you don't live in a pure democracy. You are in a democratically elected representative republic. This means, by design, that sometimes the majority does not get its way.
Won the electoral contest, call it anything you want just don't call it democracy and don't call it fair. Any system that results in the person who got the 2nd larges batch of votes winning is not democracy it is not 'rule by the people, for the people' nor is it any kind of democratically elected representative republic because the guy who won is not the guy who got the most votes and therefore does not represent the largest number of voters. It is quite amazing how hard it is for some people to understand that.
The middle of the country is far more important to our society than a bunch of whiny, coddled SJWs who are detached from the economics of reality.
You want a Civil War? Because, ignoring "flyover country" is how you get a Civil War.
So we should let the minority rule through an archaic and fatally flawed electoral college because otherwise 'flyover country' will throw a tantrum and threaten civil war? One hast to go back 140 years to find a guy who lost the popular vote by as large a margin as Donald Trump has and still gained the presidency (Rutherford B. Hayes in case anybody is interested). Pundits can go on and on and on about the electoral college being indispensable to the way the United States and find all kinds of ways to justify that point of view, go right ahead. Cook up all the justifications you want about why Trump 'won' the election and why he should be president. Just don't try to insult the intelligence of people who know the definition of democracy by claiming that the electoral college system results in democracy. Democracy is a system whereby elected representatives are chosen by winning the popular vote not a gerrymandered system where you elect a group of functionaries who then vote for the runner up.
If you actually do think Castro was good for Cuba, you are sadly ignorant.
Don't put words in his mouth, he actually said the exact opposite: "Castro and communism are not my choices for leaders or economic systems..."
Batista's Cuba was famous for literacy and doctors per capita...
Cuba has a literacy rate of 99,7% and it would appear that despite the best efforts of the US, the Cuban govt, has managed to maintain a pretty good healthcare system: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... Much like the AC you are maligning I don't think much of communism but if you want to dump on the Castro regime at least pick something to complain about that they managed to mess up and not two things they actually seem to have managed to get right.
Maybe you are one of the who thinks Che Guevara was heroic and cannot see the irony of selling t-shirts with his picture.
First you put words in his mouth, now you are projecting thoughts into his mind.
Note that as usual Wikipedia is a poor-quality source with undisclosed bias. Here is the text of the law.
Why? It sounds to me like Wikipedia has got a pretty good translation of the gist of that law which is the paragraphs 1.1 and 1.2, the rest of what you linked to is mostly a discussion of what kind of jail sentences you are liable to get. My German may be a bit rusty but the Wikipedia translation is pretty accurate:
130
Volksverhetzung
Whosoever, in a manner capable of disturbing the public peace:
1. incites hatred against a national, racial, religious group or a group defined by their ethnic origins, against segments of the population or individuals because of their belonging to one of the aforementioned groups or segments of the population or calls for violent or arbitrary measures against them; or
2. assaults the human dignity of others by insulting, maliciously maligning an aforementioned group, segments of the population or individuals because of their belonging to one of the aforementioned groups or segments of the population, or defaming segments of the population,
Where please, is the undisclosed bias in that literal translation of the Volksverhetzungs law? Or, for that matter, the discussion of the above text on the Wiki page which sounds pretty dispassionate to me? I keep hearing you alt-right trolls dropping drive-by accusations like this but just for once I'd like to hear one of you justify it.
I am a right winger. We like Elon Musk. He produces a quality product at a decent price. He is against over regulation in his industry. This fucking epidemic of stories about fake news this week is ridiculous. The Liberal media lost big, predicting a Hillary landslide, and they NEED a scapegoat to blame for their own idiocy. Trust in the media is at an all time low, and people aren't fooled by the MSM putting on a different hat and calling themselves "impartial fact-checkers" anymore. So the new plan is to declare any website we don't like as "fake news" and tie them into the other demonized group we made up, the "alt right". They are the enemy and they must be stopped.
Ah yes, the liberal dominated 'Lügenpresse must be eliminated from the face of the Earth and replaced by what? Fox News? Breitbart? Both famous for being the only news organisations that always tell the truth without fail all of the time? Does the part of the media that does not agree with your world view and that your friends on the right wing call 'lügenpresse' have a liberal slant? Yes it does. Is that liberal slant any less than the right wing slant of Fox News and Breitbart? No it isn't. People are going to disagree with you. That's what freedom of speech means. I don't like either Fox News or Breitbart but I'd never dream of calling for them to be muzzled. Just because you don't agree with people does not mean that they are always lying all of the time and that their news organisations are an 'enemy' that must be 'stopped', by which you presumably mean muzzled like the opposition media in Russia? The methodology of the polls used in the recent US presidential elections tuned out to be flawed which was to be expected when one candidate in the US presidential election was flirting openly with xenophobia and racism so there was bound to be a massive Bradley effect around Trump. You can criticise MSM (by which you presumably mean MSN?) for trusting those polls just like everybody else did when there was a good chance of a Bradley effect being in play but don't try to make it out to have been some massive liberal conspiracy to try and muzzle the good god fearing people of the right wing and keep them down. Liberal news organisations deserve to be criticised for trusting those polls but conservative news outlets also deserve to be held accountable when they spread demonstrably false news. Upholding journalistic standard is a task that both right and left wing news outlets must shoulder.
That makes two retarded shit-filled idiots. Apple does not have to release the vast majority of the code that they have. Very little, if any, is released under the GPL.
I really wish people would do their homework before slinging around words like 'retarded', 'shit-filled' and 'idiot'. Slinging obscenities just makes you look like one of those cocky foulmouthed gopniks who proved to be so thick and insolent that your mother wrote you off and gave up on teaching you good manners. As for code, it does not have to be released under GPL to be open source and modifiable. I have been told many times by all kinds of pundits that macOS open source code is released under the express condition that you are do not modify it which is complete bullshit. The Apple Public Source License was approved by the Open Source Initiative and the Free Software Foundation. I have downloaded OS X code, fixed bugs that pissed me off, compiled and installed the resulting binaries on my system more than once. The biggest problems I've had with this entire process is getting the nimrods at Apple support to take me seriously when I file a bug report complete with a roadmap of how to fix the error but that does not change the fact that you can actually fix bugs in a whole lot of macOS code yourself if you are willing to bother. The one thing Apple has not done yet is sue me for modifying the code they released under APSL.
Man, if I had a nickel for every time some kind of sensory saturation forced a premature release...
Then you'd still be broke. This is Slashdot; you're not fooling anyone.
Visit the lair of any Slashdot poster, buried deep in the basement of his parent's house, and you will find that the height and majesty of the tissue mountain on the nightstand next to his bed thoroughly discredits your hypothesis. If you need further confirmation, shine a black light at his laptop and prepare yourself to be blinded by the glow.
He's getting very good at emulating a pancake.
The iPhone is not American. It's designed by Indian rental employees and manufactured by Chinese slaves.
And the profits go to an Irish company.
...and there in a nutshell we have capitalism at work. Now stop bitching about it and get over it. The system is working as intended.
Not that many failed.. Samsung recalled them early enough. Whereas with Apple devices, they simply pretended issues like antenna gate never existed
They had to, your phone blowing up is a bit more hazardous to your health and less suited to being ignored than 'antenna-gate'. Samsung seemed to be perfectly happy to ignore less explosive FUBARs surrounding their products such as complaints from their customers when they orphaned the early Galaxy Tab line. Samsung is not exactly the angel of innocence when it comes to stiffing their customers over the flawed products they sold them.
So please carry on. Shriek the word far and wide that Trump is taking credit for things that he didn't do while he is working to take the White House over from a man that brags about the fantastic recovery (that never happened) and who claims to have improved race relations (they're worse)
I don't think we'll have to. Churchill said once that in politics antisemitism is a good starter but a bad sticker, replace antisemitism with xenophobia and you have a summary of what will eventually happen to Trump, Bannon and the alt-right. You don't whip up so much hate against so many sections of American society and blame them for things that aren't their fault without suffering some major blowback sooner or later. Trump and the alt-right will self-destruct sooner or later and burn up on a bonfire of their own hate.
It comes from cuckold, a derogatory term for the husband of an adulteress, and from Cuckoo, a bird which lays eggs in others' nests to be raised and supported by unsuspecting parents.
The alt-right started calling moderate conservatives 'Cuckservatives', claiming that there were like the Cuckoo, sitting in the 'nest' of the Republican party and feigning conservatism to win votes, but voting for progressive policies while in office.
It was later abbreviated to 'Cuck' and took on more connotations as it spread through the alt-right, most to do with some kind of perceived emasculation, submissiveness, or 'selling out': Men who allow women to hold too much power ('feminazis', 'SJWs', etc.), people who are accepting of foreigners (to 'steal our jobs' and leech off our social services), globalists who sell America out to the Jews, socialists who would turn the country over to freeloaders, etc, etc.
Is there anybody they don't hate? Just the fact that they hate women and want to muzzle them and chain them to a stove already means they already hate half the human race. That covers Jews, Muslims some of them also hate Christians. Add to that Asians, Africans, Latinos, Middle Easterners, in short anybody who is not white and male. They hate any white people who are not alt-right and surely they hate the portion of the alt-rigth that they consider rivals or betrayers of the one true way of hate. I think that covers most of the human race. Being alt-right activist must be a lonely existence. These guys are beginning to sound like the bloody Sith. Do they hold meetings at Breitbart HQ where a pale, hunch backed and prune faced Steve Bannon dressed in a black hooded robe preaches to his acolytes, waiving his withered hand: "Use the hate my minions, let it flow through you, It will make you strong!" ???
According to this article. The $649 iPhone 7 costs around $220 to make meaning that Apple gets roughly around $400 in profit.
That assumes that Apple has $0 development costs, $0 shipping costs, $0 distribution costs, $0 marketing costs, they have $0 related to sales, $0 costs due to keeping an adequate inventory of iPhones on hand to supply distributors and of course there is $0 wastage (theft, etc.). Also, because we all know iPhones never break down, Apple has $0 costs related to returns and warranty repairs. Methinks that the your formula:
retail price - manufacturing costs = Apples profit per iPhone sold
...does not quite hold water
According to teardowns, component and assembly costs for phones like the Samsung Galaxy S7 and Note 7 are in the same $250-ish price range and Samsung doesn't do their own system software R&D.
So either Samsung is also gouging their customers... or perhaps there's just a little bit more to phone costs other than the price of a chip, case, battery, and screen...
Stop ruining his hate session with 'facts'.
Quantity is how they get the price down I guess!
Then let's tack onto their low price per unit the price of cleaning this crap out of orbit and see what effect that has on SpaceX's bottom line.