I know this is a tangent but honestly, this is why the Google decision to de-openify Android is insane even from Google's point of view. Who would want to be an iron clad gate keeper when the world is descending into authoritarianism? You just paint a giant target on your back for the authoritarians to come after. If Apple had supported open iCloud alternatives for backup and other services from day one, it woudn't e…
I think the fact that Apple is having to fight this fight is evidence of why they were right to make a secure walled garden. I don’t know of any other service I would recommend my mother use for securely backing up her phone. I think the UK is ultimately going to roll back this law. I don’t think this means that iCloud E2E is hostile to Apple or its users. I think Apple is going to win. The war isn’t won by telling p…
Time to start de-Appling
331–340 of 471 posts
Re: Time to start de-Appling
#332Sounds more like people need to de-UK. It's going to be a problem with any company or technology.
Re: Time to start de-Appling
#333Taking inspiration from the East India Company, Apple should colonize the UK and take over the government - the iGovernment, if you will. Citizens will regain their right to e2ee privacy, they will not have to deal with voting for mediocre politicians to lead them. Instead, Tim Cook will be their new leader, and every morning over the mandatory installation of HomePods in each home, citizens will be greeted with an e…
I have wondered why the likes of McKinsey, KPMG, and PWC do not put up candidates (don't even sponsor them, just say you're electing _well known consultancy_).
However, they don't ask questions, so one layer of money laundering is completely fine. Nobody asks where the funding for Farage's various projects comes from, for example.
Re: Time to start de-Appling
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can safely leave it to FOSS to implement ways around that.
How does FOSS prevent someone from pulling your teeth out with a wrench to get your passphrase?
Re: Time to start de-Appling
#335Wouldn’t it be easier to just move away from the UK? (I jest, but actually…)
nobody is going to stop you leaving the UK. its entering another country that suddenly becomes a real problem, and ofcourse, if you're in the UK, the only country worth moving to at that point is the US with (as I understand) quite stringent immigration restrictions. in reality, if the US were to open their doors to the UK, holy moly - this entire country would turn into Ukraine overnight, with nobody but pensioners…
I don't even know where to begin with this remarkably dreadful take.
Re: Time to start de-Appling
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have wondered why the likes of McKinsey, KPMG, and PWC do not put up candidates (don't even sponsor them, just say you're electing _well known consultancy_).
This is basically Pete Buttigieg
* 2009-2017 8 years in US Navy, including deployment to Afghanistan
Not that much McKinsey imo
Mitt Romney had a lot more years at BCG (22 years), including being VP + co-founder of Bain Capital.
Re: Time to start de-Appling
#337Earlier quoted context omitted.
I fail to see the point you're trying to make or the argumentative process by which you're trying to make it. Consider this: the current administration has received gifts from private corporations in return for more lenient tariffs. Or consider the amount of law projects passed through congress directly from large corporations with their logo still on the paper. And this is just the blatant tip of the iceberg the cur…
I don't particularly subscribe to any ideology that puts companies above people, but it isn't hard to see things from GP's point of view. Before shooting the messenger, it is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. >Consider this: the current administration has received gifts from private corporations in return for more lenient tariffs Who better understands where capital…
Should be applied for what purpose? What's the purpose of the government and what's the purpose of a corporation? When the latter is strongly influencing the former, why is it difficult to entertain the idea that their purpose and interests align?
> Why would we not seek input from the industries requiring regulation?
There's a difference between seeking and weighing input, and simply passing along legislature proposals without even looking at it. This is a strawman.
> Yet this is a golden age by every measure.
This isn't guaranteed to improve or even remain forever. And it really depends where you look. Plenty of war, misery and suffering to go around. And even in safe countries the lack of education, healthcare, financial stability is causing enough stress that people start favoring authoritarian options. That's not a great sign for the future. Just because most of us are doing better than our ancestors, doesn't mean we're going in the right direction or that we're doing the best we can. No progress is achieved by being content with the status quo, and the present is pretty miserable for a lot of people. Should we wait until a terrible war wipes out half the planet before we consider maybe changing things?
But I think that's beside the point. The argument being discussed is whether corporate entities parabolically "are" the government.
Re: Time to start de-Appling
#338Re: Time to start de-Appling
#339Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're asking for a monkey's paw. The current ruling party in the US has given its voters exactly what they think they wanted, and it's a fucking disaster.
My day-to-day life has never been impacted by who is in the White House. Where is the disaster?