Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple vs the Law

formularsumo.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 450 posts

Re: Apple vs the Law

#391

Post by immibis »

saubeidl wrote: post #298
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We don't need cars from fascists. Really? Because look up on the history of VW, BMW, Porsche, Fiat, etc and their founding families, some of who still own a large part of the shares of those companies today. Most of them worked with fascists no problem, some by force of the era some by opportunity but none of them opposed them. You see this is the typical European hypocrisy that I dislike. Pointing fingers that Elon…

The fact that Elon openly supports and speaks at events of a German party that has been officially labeled far right extremist by the domestic intelligence agency is a stronger signal than even the Hitlerite hand gestures.

The average person is not following politics that deeply, and doesn't know which German party Elon Musk supports, what that party is, how much he supports it, or what has been officially recognized about that party (they retracted the recognition btw). It's much smaller than the already small percentage of people who see someone do a Nazi salute and recognize the gesture.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#392

Post by immibis »

FireBeyond wrote: post #326
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when is Airbus a small company and not part of the large state supported corp monopoly gang? Same with SAP, Roche and Bayer. These are all masive corporations that swallowed entire sectors. Same with Spotify having used its monopoly status to screw over smaller artists. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills when I read such comments. Let me ask you guys something else, if EU hates large monopolist companies so muc…

> Let me ask you guys something else, if EU hates large monopolist companies so much as you claim, then why are all its car companies monopolistic mega conglomerates that rule the world like Volkswagen, Stellantis, Daimler Benz, BMW, and Renault? Where's EU's equivalent of Tesla if they supposedly hate all these big companies? LOL, what? Tesla has a bigger market cap than those companies COMBINED. And more. How is it…

Who cares about market cap? Monopoly is about the share of cars you make - Tesla is near zero.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#394

Post by immibis »

pjmlp wrote: post #284
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We don't need cars from fascists. Really? Because look up on the history of VW, BMW, Porsche, Fiat, etc and their founding families, some of who still own a large part of the shares of those companies today. Most of them worked with fascists no problem, some by force of the era some by opportunity but none of them opposed them. You see this is the typical European hypocrisy that I dislike. Pointing fingers that Elon…

Yes, everyone played a role in WW 2, that is why we try to learn from history, instead of supporting those eager to repeating it.

I don't think there is currently any country that was involved in WW2 where repeating WW2 is not mainstream politics.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#395

Post by immibis »

birksherty wrote: post #363
FinnLobsien wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The EU has basically said that it's better to have a handful medium-sized companies in competition for customers than one or two mega-corps owning and dictating the market. And to resolve that they employ two things, one is the DMA/DSA and similar laws which mostly takes effect when your company reaches a certain large market penetration, the other is standardisations such as the Radio Equipment Directive (think "U…

If a company is so small and weak that they can't support GDPR etc., then that company should not exist. I don't care about any companies like Americans do with American business centric laws that hurts normal people. Life isn't about lowest price at any cost model. Buy from china (as everyone is doing but try to hide it) if you want low cost. I don't give a damn if all those companies die for not complying GDPR, fuc…

Even in Europe, small companies can often (not always) get away with not following regulations or only following them in spirit but missing the details, simply because they are small and do not attract attention. Some laws have escalating requirements based on business size. GDPR isn't one of those, but a lot of small businesses still don't follow it.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#396

Post by dzonga »

hnlmorg wrote: post #212
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when is Airbus a small company and not part of the large state supported corp monopoly gang? Same with SAP, Roche and Bayer. These are all masive corporations that swallowed entire sectors. Same with Spotify having used its monopoly status to screw over smaller artists. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills when I read such comments. Let me ask you guys something else, if EU hates large monopolist companies so muc…

How is Tesla an example of your point? It’s the biggest EV manufacturer owned by one of the world’s richest men. Perhaps the problem here isn’t that smaller brands don’t exist, it’s that if we give examples of smaller brands then you’ll argue “Never heard of them. Thus proof that the EU is holding them back” And if we mention household names then you’d argue “Those aren’t small companies” You’ve basically crafted an…

Tesla has no moat. but people don't wanna look at things objectively.

BYD makes better batteries than Tesla. the EU brands provide a better luxury than Tesla.

the US / Japan brands provide a better car in terms of quality than Tesla.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#397

Post by fsflover »

frollogaston wrote: post #346
fsflover wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a working Bluetooth on a Linux laptop: https://forums.puri.sm/t/bluetooth-stopped-working-on-l14-wi...

"Bluetooth stopped working on L14 with PureOS" is the title of the thread. Frankly, not very many people have patience for that. Like if I'm doing a presentation, this needs to not even be a question.

It didn't work, because PureOS doesn't provide proprietary drivers. Please read more than just titles.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#398

Post by mtomweb »

nicoburns wrote: post #378
shuckles wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The goalposts move every time Apple resolves some bug that PWA advocates promise is the one issue holding them back from taking over the world with crappy web apps.

Nope, it's been push notifications and persistent storage for a decade.

I would also add: - Install Prompts / Discoverability - Bugs (like https://github.com/web-platform-tests/interop/issues/84) which likely would only get fixed if Safari has heavy competition on iOS (it's a funding issue)

Re: Apple vs the Law

#399

Post by concinds »

oaiey wrote: post #177
OkPin wrote: post #61

This is fascinating and troubling. Apple’s presentation felt more like a marketing defense than a compliance discussion. Their claim that meeting the DMA “current interpretation” is “impossible” really stood out, it’s almost like they’re banking on legal ambiguity to stall real change. I’m curious: if Apple and Google are using workshops as delay tactics, what’s the EC’s real enforcement power here? Are small fines e…

Rule of law also means, that fair process is given. which takes time. It is a problem, 100% agree, but I prefer a slow enforcement because of this than a unjust enforcement.

Why is slowness synonymous with rule of law?

Apple's implementation is overtly malicious. This malice is a publicly-known, conscious effort on the part of some of their trashier employees to make it as malicious as possible to please their execs ("Ohh, keep going").

All you need for "rule of law" is an independent judicial entity to notice this. Why give them months and months "to comply", when everyone on Earth knows they have no intention to? Why turn up the fines slowly, when we all know we're headed all the way to the seizure of 10% of global turnover in 4 years? Why are we all pretending not to know the end-state?

Re: Apple vs the Law

#400

Post by dan-robertson »

microtonal wrote: post #204
dan-robertson wrote: post #160

I’m a bit conflicted: when I used to care more about this freedom stuff say 10 years ago, I would have been more in favour of these regulations. Today I care less about that and more about security and I mostly think that Apple’s preferred approach is better for security than what the EU proposes. That said, I am not super happy about the rate of scams or junk in the App Store. I think even for Americans who like the…

Today I care less about that and more about security and I mostly think that Apple’s preferred approach is better for security than what the EU proposes. This is mostly a false dichotomy that Apple likes to push. macOS has strong security with sandboxing, code signing, malware scanning, etc. I have never encountered someone among my direct acquaintances who had their Mac compromised. Yet, it's perfectly possible to m…

iPhones are a much more juicy target compared to macs.
Post reply on HN