Spotify, why Apple would want to make things easier for you?
I suspect Netflix is next, since Apple is set to launch its competing streaming app.
While I think Apple's 30% tax is extortionate, Apple should get a swift kick in the nuts from a judge over that, but I cannot blame Apple for wanting a cut. If you had a brick and mortar electronics store would you sell Google/Apple streaming boxes without being compensated?... spend your resources on flogging a product for somebody else for free? If Spotify thinks any app vendor is in the business of handing out their app for free to their users without getting some form of compensation then Spotify is delusional. Apple has also no business preventing Spotify from being able to spam its users on Apple platform to its hearts content through their app if they are really dead set on annoying users off their service, but requiring Apple to handle their e-mail traffic is a bit much.
It is more that time that Europe start to understand that the US are not ally
It's not that Europe does not understand that the US is a sucky ally (and unusually so at the moment), it's that they understand that being the ally of Russia and China is way worse.
In the FOSS community it's called forking, it's done all the time and there is nothing wrong with it. In fact Android uses the Linux kernel under the hood so in that sense the Android core systems themselves are a fork (a.k.a. 'copy') of Linux.
Nuclear is going under because the MARKET isn't viable anymore, mainly because renewable are cheaper and less involved.
Wind is cheaper, as long as it is subsidized. However, since it IS subsidized AND it requires expensive storage to be useful just for a day, nuclear becomes MUCH MUCH cheaper. And even subsidized solar remains more expensive than Nuclear. And yes, I am a supporter of both.
Horse shit, wind is cheaper than coal un-subsidised and so is solar and both are giving natural gas a hard time. The LCOE of (advanced) nuclear in the US is 90 $/MWh, for conventional coal 100 $/MWh, for advanced natural gas plants was 40 $/MWh, onshore wind is at 42 $/MWh, Photovoltaic solar 48.8 $/MWh. These figures are according to the EIA, adjusted for inflation, without any subsidies. Onshore wind and solar are beating everything except natural gas.
Actually, this is favourable for Cisco: it shows that the NSA actually has to break into things to get access. They've also intercepted shipments and tweaked the firmware.
If Cisco was in bed with the NSA, these types of steps would not have to be done. If the NSA has had to intercept physical boxes, it goes to show that the default stuff is (relatively) secure.
No. it is a lose-lose for Cisco because it means that no matter how hard they work to make their equipment secure, the US government will hack it and spy on you. In the case of non-US businesses this means that the NSA will be handing your trade secrets over to your American competitors which is something Airbus for one found out the hard way. There is a very real possibility that if this sort of behaviour continues for too long many non-US businesses will begin to eliminate all Cisco boxes they can at the earliest possible opportunity and this trend is likely to be irreversible even if the NSA stops it's bugging operations because the trust in Cisco simply isn't there anymore. It would be really ironic if the US government obsession with surveillance actually turns out to be what bankrupts Cisco. Needless to say, it would be pretty dumb of the Chinese government to follow the NSA's example with Huawei since when they would inevitably get caught it would likely destroy Huawei just like NSA meddling with their products could easily destroy Cisco.
Nah, they'll send Mike Pence over....the Germans response will be, "Hey, how come you sent us door stop, we have door stops."
Not like this one you don’t, our doorstop has Genuine People Personality tech courtesy of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation. When he is approached by a female of any sentient species our GPP doorstop let’s out a shrill scream and runs away in panic.
Warning of an erosion of confidence in the products of the U.S. technology industry, John Chambers, the CEO of networking giant Cisco Systems, has asked President Obama to intervene to curtail the surveillance activities of the National Security Agency.
This is why they went with a 3D ultrasonic fingerprint scanner. With facial recognition software, you don't need fakes. You just need to wave the phone in front of their face and presto, unlocked! At least with a finger, you have a chance at resisting.
I went with an iPhone 8 rather than one of the X models because of the fingerprint scanner. I can unlock the iPhone 8 without looking at it, whereas with the face recognition I have to hold the thing in front of my face which is annoying.
If you wanted to divide, weaken, and destabilize the US you could hardly improve on AOC and Ilhan Omar.
Bullshit, most of the people outraged at Ilhan Omar for pointing out that AIPAC uses money to **GHASP** lobby!!!!... because it is supposedly anti-semitic to point out that jewish people are not above buying political influence with money like everybody else. However, the people most outraged over Omar's utterances are also the same people who have been deriding George Soros, Michael Bloomberg and other jewish people more liberal than themselves which they don't like for buying political influence with money. Of course that is a steaming pile of hypocrisy since that means that it's OK to sling around anti-Semitic tropes about jews and money if you are, white, Republican and a Trump supporter but not if you are a little brown woman in a Hijab.
So was Hillary a Russian troll when she declared a quarter of America a "basket of deplorables"?
She was trolling for the same people Mitt Romney was trolling for when he effectively called 47% of Americans a bunch of enitled moochers and his entire Republican audience clapped their approval. Hint: most of those 47% are dirt poor minimum wage workers who don’t pay income taxes because the tax code explicitly exempts them due to them being dirt poor. According to the Republicans these Walmart slaves are simply to lazy to be millionaires.
Unions are an inferior substitute for having laws which protect all workers. They don't protect workers in professions which are difficult or impossible to unionize, and they depend on good management — unions with poor management don't protect their workers, either. They're a lot better than nothing, but they're a lot worse than just having a living minimum wage, health care for everyone, etc. Having UBI and national health makes them largely unnecessary.
How is it that the only participants in the truly free market who, according to free market evangelist (not accusing you of being one but you know the type of person I refer to), are not free to consolidate or otherwise use the freedom of the market in whatever way seems best to them, are workers? Now you are talking about regulation and laws which are the exact antithesis of everything the free market stands for. In a truly free market workers are allowed to consolidate and organise to get a better deal from corporations in any way they want. I'm not necessarily a fan of a completely free unregulated market ruled by raw predatory capitalism but if we are going to have such a system workers should be as free as anybody else to consolidate or otherwise freely participate in that market. I don't really think it matters what you try to do to work around worker consolidation (a.k.a. unions), the corporations always win. If we go for the route you propose and which the US currently tries to implement, all that happens is that the corporations buy the politicians, and the abuse of workers continues. While there are better theoretical alternatives to unions, de-facto they are the best solutions.
Chances are, a job in an Amazon warehouse is no worse than a similar vocation at Walmart or Dollar General, and orders of magnitude better than workers at Ali Express or Foxconn.
Off the record, for fear of reprisal, we interviewed four or five migrant ditch diggers and farm workers who would love that inside job instead of what they do now. Oh, and they'll do it for $13.50 an hour.
Four different brands of the exact same kind of shit-hole... as for the rest of your comment, are you seriously arguing that American workers should be happy with treatment that is one notch above the abuse suffered by illegal immigrant workers? I'm always amazed of just how fiercely some Americans will defend the very same oligarchs who are busily shafting them in the ***.
I would agree that unions are a better way to provide general welfare than minimum wage laws, but still not as good as methods which do not interfere with market forces. This is of course debatable, but many contend (including me) that unions harm overall competitiveness of a society in an effort to provide general welfare to all citizens. Basic income could do the same, but paid for by progressive taxation instead of reducing the global competitiveness of businesses.
What makes you think that unions are something unnatural and harmful to the free market? If you have large corporations with lots of small individual contractors (a,k.a. employees) working for them the negotiating power of the corporation is disproportionately large and they can beat up and abuse each small contractor individually (i.e. your perfect world). It is only natural for the small contractors to band together, become large players and kick back so they cannot be so easily abused. This is market forces at work, the workers are simply doing what is in their own interest just like the corporate management is when they merge with another corporation cuts their worker's pay and benefits and increases shareholder dividends (and usually their own compensation as well). They even have a term for what unions are: 'Consolidation' which defines as: 'market participators combining their operations to streamline their offerings and better compete in the free market'. If you think that consolidation of small contractors into large blocks of contractors (i.e. individual employees into unions) that negotiate jointly is harmful to competition you must accept that corporations consolidating into large corporations to is too and that unions are nothing more than a natural consequence of corporations abusing their labour force. You cannot allow corporations to consolidate and seek advantage without any restraint or any consideration for the misery it creates in society and expect everybody to cheer when you turn around and tell the smaller market participants that they are forbidden to consolidate for the purpose of competing more effectively with the big boys. To quote Mark Blyt, "The Hamptons is not a defensible position. It's a low-lying beach. Eventually people will come for you" (think: amphibious landing).
and collect the cats, spay them, and let 'em go. I knew a gal who worked for a catch and release outfit funded by the local gov't and donations. Worked great at reducing feral cat populations in a humane way.
No to mention that you can give the cats a whole bunch of vaccine shots and thus crack down on the spread of diseases.
So, do you think that companies should run on an absolute minimum profit? What do you consider a livable wage? How long do you think most of these companies would last if they had to pay wages at those levels without either raising prices or cutting staff?
You have to pony up some answers here because you're not bringing any solutions to the table, just lashing out against the rich simply because they are rich.
No, I'm simply of the opinion that tin the long run. it profits no company to be hated by its labour force. These companies should perhaps consider operating somewhere in the middle where they are not operating on minimum profits but also not operating on maximum profits at the cost of treating their employees like slaves in a Roman salt mine. Now please pony up and explain to me how it is desirable that companies maximise their profits by treating their employees like trash since you seem to be of the opinion that not only are companies entitled to do this but that the employees should be happy to be treated like garbage.
The Guardian article mentions speaking to a single worker in Illinois, one in Oregon, a disgruntled slave wage in Maryland, and another in California... none of who can be independently verified because of fear of repercussion. If you speak to enough hourly employees in any industry, you will find a few disgruntled individuals willing to speak negatively of their chosen employer, especially off the record.
Not to explicitly assume a small sample size, but it's a more interesting narrative if the great evil corporation is putting it to the little man.
So go do that, sample an Amazon facility personally. Stand at the gates of some Amazon slave bunker with a tablet computer and ask the people coming out how well and easily they can live on the wage they are paid and the hours they work, it's not quantum physics. Judging from the tone of your post I know you are expecting to hear many glowing protestations of love for Bezos, Amazon and trickle down economics but knowing what I do about Amazon you'd better get ready to learn a whole lot of new swear words and insults. All this assumes that you don't get chased away by Amazon's private security. Amazon facilities are shit-holes where nobody goes to work unless they have no other alternative.
When you don't pay people a living wage what do you think will happen? Eventually there will be a good investment to be made in guillotine futures. Jeff Bezos is the richest man on earth, he and his company can afford to pay people a wage his employees can live on. The only reason they don't is greed... greed and nothing but greed.
I am an Apple enthusiast and I will freely admit that I fuck frequently and find this activity immensely enjoyable.
I hope you use protection, because those rent boys at the leather bar tend to be, shall we say, less than hygienic. Just ask Tim Cook.
Oh my, another one. You do realise that when you think you are insulting somebody with accusations of homosexuality all it really does is speak volumes about your own sexual insecurities and doubts about your sexual orientation. I have no problems with gay people and I am in no way, shape or form insecure in my heterosexuality. Some wiseass accusing me of being gay has about as much of an effect on me as accusing me of being a short order cook. However, I do enjoy observing you guys struggle and fail to come up with new and innovative insults to throw at me so do feel free to try again.
Hey, you are the one up in a tizzy and slinging bigotry around to defend your obviously bad reasoning skills.
Yes, but you are the one who has issues with gay people, you must have since you threw that 'you must be gay' themed attempt at an insult at me thinking I'd find it as offensive as you obvioulsy do. Unfortunately for you I have no issues with gay people, you can accuse me of being gay till you run out of slurs and will I not be offended so try to find some better insult, think of it as a fun and invigorating game of insult whack-a-mole.
I am an Apple enthusiast and I will freely admit that I fuck frequently and find this activity immensely enjoyable
That's great! I'm sure your boyfriend loves it too.
Awwww.... somebody isn't comfortable about their sexual orientation so he slings gay jokes at people because he thinks everybody else is as messed up about it he is.
Holy shit, are you that blinded? We're not talking about customer service here. (Even then, what do you think will happen once out of warranty?)
We're talking about how green it is to design something that is extremely difficult to replace (or need replacing at all early in it's life)
I was not talking about customer service, just thought I'd mention it since he shelled out $700 for a keyboard fix which seems strange since keyboard failures are covered by warranty. As for the rest of my comment it was just meant to describe my personal experience with zero butterfly keyboard failures on my last three machines after that first incident and the similar experience of several family members who have not experience any butterfly keyboard failures either. I used to run a large fleet of PC laptops and I can assure you that keyboard failures are not that uncommon (and you would not believe what some people do to their keyboards). Mind you the early butterfly keyboard did have above average issues, from what I could tell mostly due to the butterfly component being excessively delicately built but they seem to have beefed them up in later versions.
P.S. While we all respect your life choice to worship excrement please spare the rest of use the visuals in the future, it's meal time for some of us:-).
Fuckin mac enthusiasts. Buy glass and steel versions of tiger repelling rocks and rely on anecdotal based reasoning.
Why, yes, you are quite right, I am an Apple enthusiast and I will freely admit that I fuck frequently and find this activity immensely enjoyable. If you are tired of your existence as an embittered incel hermit I can only recommend you join the Apple collective and get laid.
Slashdot Mirror
Spotify, why Apple would want to make things easier for you?
I suspect Netflix is next, since Apple is set to launch its competing streaming app.
While I think Apple's 30% tax is extortionate, Apple should get a swift kick in the nuts from a judge over that, but I cannot blame Apple for wanting a cut. If you had a brick and mortar electronics store would you sell Google/Apple streaming boxes without being compensated? ... spend your resources on flogging a product for somebody else for free? If Spotify thinks any app vendor is in the business of handing out their app for free to their users without getting some form of compensation then Spotify is delusional. Apple has also no business preventing Spotify from being able to spam its users on Apple platform to its hearts content through their app if they are really dead set on annoying users off their service, but requiring Apple to handle their e-mail traffic is a bit much.
It is more that time that Europe start to understand that the US are not ally
It's not that Europe does not understand that the US is a sucky ally (and unusually so at the moment), it's that they understand that being the ally of Russia and China is way worse.
Probably a copy of Android.....
In the FOSS community it's called forking, it's done all the time and there is nothing wrong with it. In fact Android uses the Linux kernel under the hood so in that sense the Android core systems themselves are a fork (a.k.a. 'copy') of Linux.
Nuclear is going under because the MARKET isn't viable anymore, mainly because renewable are cheaper and less involved.
Wind is cheaper, as long as it is subsidized. However, since it IS subsidized AND it requires expensive storage to be useful just for a day, nuclear becomes MUCH MUCH cheaper. And even subsidized solar remains more expensive than Nuclear. And yes, I am a supporter of both.
Horse shit, wind is cheaper than coal un-subsidised and so is solar and both are giving natural gas a hard time. The LCOE of (advanced) nuclear in the US is 90 $/MWh, for conventional coal 100 $/MWh, for advanced natural gas plants was 40 $/MWh, onshore wind is at 42 $/MWh, Photovoltaic solar 48.8 $/MWh. These figures are according to the EIA, adjusted for inflation, without any subsidies. Onshore wind and solar are beating everything except natural gas.
The XKCD cartoon was for Spirit, but it captured this feeling for Rover as well.
https://xkcd.com/695/
There is an XKCD cartoon for Opportunity as well:
https://xkcd.com/1504/
They have become Microsoft back in 1995-8, a true monopolist.
Ironically Microsoft is largely irrelevant.
Apple, Google, Facebook, Twitter, however all need to be shattered.
Apple? It's Google + Facebook that are the great monopolists. Apple does not hold a monopoly in any market segment.
And, of course, you have proof of this?
The NSA project is called Tailored Access Operations: http://www.spiegel.de/internat...
Actually, this is favourable for Cisco: it shows that the NSA actually has to break into things to get access. They've also intercepted shipments and tweaked the firmware.
If Cisco was in bed with the NSA, these types of steps would not have to be done. If the NSA has had to intercept physical boxes, it goes to show that the default stuff is (relatively) secure.
No. it is a lose-lose for Cisco because it means that no matter how hard they work to make their equipment secure, the US government will hack it and spy on you. In the case of non-US businesses this means that the NSA will be handing your trade secrets over to your American competitors which is something Airbus for one found out the hard way. There is a very real possibility that if this sort of behaviour continues for too long many non-US businesses will begin to eliminate all Cisco boxes they can at the earliest possible opportunity and this trend is likely to be irreversible even if the NSA stops it's bugging operations because the trust in Cisco simply isn't there anymore. It would be really ironic if the US government obsession with surveillance actually turns out to be what bankrupts Cisco. Needless to say, it would be pretty dumb of the Chinese government to follow the NSA's example with Huawei since when they would inevitably get caught it would likely destroy Huawei just like NSA meddling with their products could easily destroy Cisco.
Nah, they'll send Mike Pence over....the Germans response will be, "Hey, how come you sent us door stop, we have door stops."
Not like this one you don’t, our doorstop has Genuine People Personality tech courtesy of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation. When he is approached by a female of any sentient species our GPP doorstop let’s out a shrill scream and runs away in panic.
And, of course, you have proof of this?
The NSA project is called Tailored Access Operations: http://www.spiegel.de/internat...
Cisco got so pissed about it they went to visit the president to complain: https://www.techdirt.com/artic...
Warning of an erosion of confidence in the products of the U.S. technology industry, John Chambers, the CEO of networking giant Cisco Systems, has asked President Obama to intervene to curtail the surveillance activities of the National Security Agency.
This is why they went with a 3D ultrasonic fingerprint scanner. With facial recognition software, you don't need fakes. You just need to wave the phone in front of their face and presto, unlocked! At least with a finger, you have a chance at resisting.
I went with an iPhone 8 rather than one of the X models because of the fingerprint scanner. I can unlock the iPhone 8 without looking at it, whereas with the face recognition I have to hold the thing in front of my face which is annoying.
Put down the Kool-Aid and walk away.
You sure?
If you wanted to divide, weaken, and destabilize the US you could hardly improve on AOC and Ilhan Omar.
Bullshit, most of the people outraged at Ilhan Omar for pointing out that AIPAC uses money to **GHASP** lobby!!!! ... because it is supposedly anti-semitic to point out that jewish people are not above buying political influence with money like everybody else. However, the people most outraged over Omar's utterances are also the same people who have been deriding George Soros, Michael Bloomberg and other jewish people more liberal than themselves which they don't like for buying political influence with money. Of course that is a steaming pile of hypocrisy since that means that it's OK to sling around anti-Semitic tropes about jews and money if you are, white, Republican and a Trump supporter but not if you are a little brown woman in a Hijab.
So was Hillary a Russian troll when she declared a quarter of America a "basket of deplorables"?
She was trolling for the same people Mitt Romney was trolling for when he effectively called 47% of Americans a bunch of enitled moochers and his entire Republican audience clapped their approval. Hint: most of those 47% are dirt poor minimum wage workers who don’t pay income taxes because the tax code explicitly exempts them due to them being dirt poor. According to the Republicans these Walmart slaves are simply to lazy to be millionaires.
Unions are an inferior substitute for having laws which protect all workers. They don't protect workers in professions which are difficult or impossible to unionize, and they depend on good management — unions with poor management don't protect their workers, either. They're a lot better than nothing, but they're a lot worse than just having a living minimum wage, health care for everyone, etc. Having UBI and national health makes them largely unnecessary.
How is it that the only participants in the truly free market who, according to free market evangelist (not accusing you of being one but you know the type of person I refer to), are not free to consolidate or otherwise use the freedom of the market in whatever way seems best to them, are workers? Now you are talking about regulation and laws which are the exact antithesis of everything the free market stands for. In a truly free market workers are allowed to consolidate and organise to get a better deal from corporations in any way they want. I'm not necessarily a fan of a completely free unregulated market ruled by raw predatory capitalism but if we are going to have such a system workers should be as free as anybody else to consolidate or otherwise freely participate in that market. I don't really think it matters what you try to do to work around worker consolidation (a.k.a. unions), the corporations always win. If we go for the route you propose and which the US currently tries to implement, all that happens is that the corporations buy the politicians, and the abuse of workers continues. While there are better theoretical alternatives to unions, de-facto they are the best solutions.
Chances are, a job in an Amazon warehouse is no worse than a similar vocation at Walmart or Dollar General, and orders of magnitude better than workers at Ali Express or Foxconn.
Off the record, for fear of reprisal, we interviewed four or five migrant ditch diggers and farm workers who would love that inside job instead of what they do now. Oh, and they'll do it for $13.50 an hour.
Four different brands of the exact same kind of shit-hole ... as for the rest of your comment, are you seriously arguing that American workers should be happy with treatment that is one notch above the abuse suffered by illegal immigrant workers? I'm always amazed of just how fiercely some Americans will defend the very same oligarchs who are busily shafting them in the ***.
I would agree that unions are a better way to provide general welfare than minimum wage laws, but still not as good as methods which do not interfere with market forces. This is of course debatable, but many contend (including me) that unions harm overall competitiveness of a society in an effort to provide general welfare to all citizens. Basic income could do the same, but paid for by progressive taxation instead of reducing the global competitiveness of businesses.
What makes you think that unions are something unnatural and harmful to the free market? If you have large corporations with lots of small individual contractors (a,k.a. employees) working for them the negotiating power of the corporation is disproportionately large and they can beat up and abuse each small contractor individually (i.e. your perfect world). It is only natural for the small contractors to band together, become large players and kick back so they cannot be so easily abused. This is market forces at work, the workers are simply doing what is in their own interest just like the corporate management is when they merge with another corporation cuts their worker's pay and benefits and increases shareholder dividends (and usually their own compensation as well). They even have a term for what unions are: 'Consolidation' which defines as: 'market participators combining their operations to streamline their offerings and better compete in the free market'. If you think that consolidation of small contractors into large blocks of contractors (i.e. individual employees into unions) that negotiate jointly is harmful to competition you must accept that corporations consolidating into large corporations to is too and that unions are nothing more than a natural consequence of corporations abusing their labour force. You cannot allow corporations to consolidate and seek advantage without any restraint or any consideration for the misery it creates in society and expect everybody to cheer when you turn around and tell the smaller market participants that they are forbidden to consolidate for the purpose of competing more effectively with the big boys. To quote Mark Blyt, "The Hamptons is not a defensible position. It's a low-lying beach. Eventually people will come for you" (think: amphibious landing).
and collect the cats, spay them, and let 'em go. I knew a gal who worked for a catch and release outfit funded by the local gov't and donations. Worked great at reducing feral cat populations in a humane way.
No to mention that you can give the cats a whole bunch of vaccine shots and thus crack down on the spread of diseases.
So, do you think that companies should run on an absolute minimum profit? What do you consider a livable wage? How long do you think most of these companies would last if they had to pay wages at those levels without either raising prices or cutting staff?
You have to pony up some answers here because you're not bringing any solutions to the table, just lashing out against the rich simply because they are rich.
No, I'm simply of the opinion that tin the long run. it profits no company to be hated by its labour force. These companies should perhaps consider operating somewhere in the middle where they are not operating on minimum profits but also not operating on maximum profits at the cost of treating their employees like slaves in a Roman salt mine. Now please pony up and explain to me how it is desirable that companies maximise their profits by treating their employees like trash since you seem to be of the opinion that not only are companies entitled to do this but that the employees should be happy to be treated like garbage.
The Guardian article mentions speaking to a single worker in Illinois, one in Oregon, a disgruntled slave wage in Maryland, and another in California... none of who can be independently verified because of fear of repercussion. If you speak to enough hourly employees in any industry, you will find a few disgruntled individuals willing to speak negatively of their chosen employer, especially off the record.
Not to explicitly assume a small sample size, but it's a more interesting narrative if the great evil corporation is putting it to the little man.
So go do that, sample an Amazon facility personally. Stand at the gates of some Amazon slave bunker with a tablet computer and ask the people coming out how well and easily they can live on the wage they are paid and the hours they work, it's not quantum physics. Judging from the tone of your post I know you are expecting to hear many glowing protestations of love for Bezos, Amazon and trickle down economics but knowing what I do about Amazon you'd better get ready to learn a whole lot of new swear words and insults. All this assumes that you don't get chased away by Amazon's private security. Amazon facilities are shit-holes where nobody goes to work unless they have no other alternative.
What did people think would happen?
When you don't pay people a living wage what do you think will happen? Eventually there will be a good investment to be made in guillotine futures. Jeff Bezos is the richest man on earth, he and his company can afford to pay people a wage his employees can live on. The only reason they don't is greed ... greed and nothing but greed.
I hope you use protection, because those rent boys at the leather bar tend to be, shall we say, less than hygienic. Just ask Tim Cook.
Oh my, another one. You do realise that when you think you are insulting somebody with accusations of homosexuality all it really does is speak volumes about your own sexual insecurities and doubts about your sexual orientation. I have no problems with gay people and I am in no way, shape or form insecure in my heterosexuality. Some wiseass accusing me of being gay has about as much of an effect on me as accusing me of being a short order cook. However, I do enjoy observing you guys struggle and fail to come up with new and innovative insults to throw at me so do feel free to try again.
Hey, you are the one up in a tizzy and slinging bigotry around to defend your obviously bad reasoning skills.
Yes, but you are the one who has issues with gay people, you must have since you threw that 'you must be gay' themed attempt at an insult at me thinking I'd find it as offensive as you obvioulsy do. Unfortunately for you I have no issues with gay people, you can accuse me of being gay till you run out of slurs and will I not be offended so try to find some better insult, think of it as a fun and invigorating game of insult whack-a-mole.
You seem to be interpreting every single figure of speech in this thread literally. Are you autistic, or German?.
No I'm a pretty large and hairy Scandinavian cave troll.
Gosh, you're clever.
I know ;-) ...
I am an Apple enthusiast and I will freely admit that I fuck frequently and find this activity immensely enjoyable
That's great! I'm sure your boyfriend loves it too.
Awwww.... somebody isn't comfortable about their sexual orientation so he slings gay jokes at people because he thinks everybody else is as messed up about it he is.
Holy shit, are you that blinded? We're not talking about customer service here. (Even then, what do you think will happen once out of warranty?)
We're talking about how green it is to design something that is extremely difficult to replace (or need replacing at all early in it's life)
I was not talking about customer service, just thought I'd mention it since he shelled out $700 for a keyboard fix which seems strange since keyboard failures are covered by warranty. As for the rest of my comment it was just meant to describe my personal experience with zero butterfly keyboard failures on my last three machines after that first incident and the similar experience of several family members who have not experience any butterfly keyboard failures either. I used to run a large fleet of PC laptops and I can assure you that keyboard failures are not that uncommon (and you would not believe what some people do to their keyboards). Mind you the early butterfly keyboard did have above average issues, from what I could tell mostly due to the butterfly component being excessively delicately built but they seem to have beefed them up in later versions.
:-).
P.S. While we all respect your life choice to worship excrement please spare the rest of use the visuals in the future, it's meal time for some of us
Fuckin mac enthusiasts. Buy glass and steel versions of tiger repelling rocks and rely on anecdotal based reasoning.
Why, yes, you are quite right, I am an Apple enthusiast and I will freely admit that I fuck frequently and find this activity immensely enjoyable. If you are tired of your existence as an embittered incel hermit I can only recommend you join the Apple collective and get laid.