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

Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

ustr.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 119 posts

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#91

Post by rhizome »

sillysaurus wrote: post #88
rhizome wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure: government will always be two-faced with respect to "free" markets, interfering where it suits their and/or their friends/benefactors' interests, or not, as the case may be. It has been this way for centuries, Adam Smith just added to the lexicon of rationales.

Well, in what way was Apple the government's friend or benefactor?

Honestly, is that a serious question? Do you have no concept of what I'm describing such that I'm required to list these things out?

Pretty much all Apple hardware is made in China, which makes the company an instrument of foreign policy. That's one aspect.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#92

Post by asveikau »

ruswick wrote: post #43
asveikau wrote: post #4

I know political discussion on HN is frowned upon by some, but I get amused thinking of hypothetical reaction from the president's opponents. This seems to be an action against regulation of business, but it's the Obama administration, therefore... Communism! Apple is in the tank for Obamacare!

It's upsetting that some proponents of this administration dismiss its critics because they presume that they dislike him categorically. It is this sort of bigoted presumption and political antagonism that is causing the erosion of political discourse in this country. This issue is not that Obama has critics, it's that some people believe that he shouldn't. Why is it so difficult for people to accept that those who d…

It's upsetting that you dismiss my dismissal, because a lot of the "criticism" I do see, including in this thread, amounts to little more than a transparently knee-jerk reaction that tends to be very lazy with the details. I am not mocking every criticism of Obama I have ever seen, only the crazy people who see the word "Obama" and instantly start talking about Kenya and health care regardless of the topic, drawing comparisons with the Axis powers (yes! this happened on this thread very early!) and a whole bunch of other shit that has nothing to do with anything. I don't think you can deny that this line of thought exists in the American psyche and it has more influence than it ought to.

But I would like to make another thing clear: Obama is a center-right politician. Your first line implies that I am a "proponent of [his] administration" but I am considerably to the left of that guy. But a large component of the attitude I am mocking is that many Obama haters really don't care about the details, they just know they're against the guy. Here's a guy who's got a tax plan from George Bush, a health care plan from Dole/Gingrich and implemented by Romney, a more competent wiretapper, assassin, and immigrant-deporter than his predecessor - even if some of these critics previously held similar beliefs as Obama, they don't care about any of that, he's just Satan to them. This includes congresspeople who are now against things they previously sponsored, because it's now an Obama plan. Witness on this thread that the administration is actually blocking "government intrusion in the marketplace", and people are really just finding excuses to find faults with this because of what party it comes from. I'd say on the balance they've proved my initial assertion right, far more than I expected even from the pseudo-libertarians I am accustomed to seeing on HN.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#93

Post by ruswick »

asveikau wrote: post #92
ruswick wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's upsetting that some proponents of this administration dismiss its critics because they presume that they dislike him categorically. It is this sort of bigoted presumption and political antagonism that is causing the erosion of political discourse in this country. This issue is not that Obama has critics, it's that some people believe that he shouldn't. Why is it so difficult for people to accept that those who d…

It's upsetting that you dismiss my dismissal, because a lot of the "criticism" I do see, including in this thread, amounts to little more than a transparently knee-jerk reaction that tends to be very lazy with the details. I am not mocking every criticism of Obama I have ever seen, only the crazy people who see the word "Obama" and instantly start talking about Kenya and health care regardless of the topic, drawing c…

I respect your views and sympathize with many of them, but your original comment did nothing to rationally confront the issues in the way that your second comment did. Your original post pertained to "the president's opponents," which seemed to include all of them. It just appeared as a off-handed, categorical attack, similar to the ones that you decried. I acknowledge that the reactionary, bigoted uber-right is frustrating, but immediately jumping on them in a way that didn't pertain to the the specifics of this case seemed like an unwarranted attack. I wish that you had explained your displeasure in a more thorough and thoughtful way that didn't seem like a political straw man, like you did in your second comment. Sorry if my initial response seemed condescending.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#95

Post by johngalt »

asveikau wrote: post #90
johngalt wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please explain how this instance of the government choosing winners and losers arbitrarily is pro free market? Creating arbitrary rules that don't apply to businesses who are serving the 'public interest' (politically connected) is only one step away from a planned economy.

My reading of the source material is that the administration is blocking an instance of a government entity "picking winners and losers". If you take off your John Galt Goggles maybe you would parse it that way too.

The administration blocked government intervention when it applied to their friends. Others do not get the same treatment. Did the administration dissolve the USITC? Did it declare the Tariff Act of 1930 unenforced? No, it simply picks and chooses who the rules apply to.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#96

Post by saraid216 »

distant-uncle wrote: post #77
cromwellian wrote: post #10

Seems to me that in the future, companies are going to withhold some of their patents from FRAND even if they would be potentially more useful as FRAND to continue to use them as a weapon. The potential royalties of many of these FRAND patents seem small compared to the damages from infringement. In fact, it seems the value of a patent is inversely proportional to it's usefulness. A patent which covers a critical wir…

I've been mulling over the most common argument predictably wheeled out by the patent aggressors and their supporters: "Theft! We don't want them to steal our stuff!!" Never mind that even if one allows that the whole concept of patents is a legitimate, and an ethical legal framework, patent infringement is never theft. Theft would involve actual trespass of someone's physical property, that involves removing and/or…

I'm not a fan of the concept of intellectual property, but...

...you apparently don't understand the concept of an analogy. The whole reason that IP is called intellectual property is precisely to draw an analogy. Thus, the violation of that property is called theft.

And besides, you don't understand theft of physical property either. It does not require physical trespass: taking someone's wallet when they put it down on a table for a moment is theft. Theft is a transfer of possession without an accompanying transfer of ownership.

In intellectual property, theft is a duplication of possession without an accompanying duplication of ownership. The result is nevertheless that someone comes into possession of property without the right to own it. Distilled, this is an entirely fair conceptualization of theft.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#97

Post by sillysaurus »

rhizome wrote: post #91
sillysaurus wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, in what way was Apple the government's friend or benefactor?

Honestly, is that a serious question? Do you have no concept of what I'm describing such that I'm required to list these things out? Pretty much all Apple hardware is made in China, which makes the company an instrument of foreign policy. That's one aspect.

Dude, you're being more than a little bit of a dick. I'm ignorant of government policy and politics in general, and it's only recently that I've begun rectifying that.

Yes, it was a simple, straightforward query for information that I lack. And you hardly answered.

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#98

Post by rhizome »

sillysaurus wrote: post #97
rhizome wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, is that a serious question? Do you have no concept of what I'm describing such that I'm required to list these things out? Pretty much all Apple hardware is made in China, which makes the company an instrument of foreign policy. That's one aspect.

Dude, you're being more than a little bit of a dick. I'm ignorant of government policy and politics in general, and it's only recently that I've begun rectifying that. Yes, it was a simple, straightforward query for information that I lack. And you hardly answered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_interventionism

Re: Obama administration vetos Apple iPhone 4, 3G iPad 2 product ban [pdf]

#99

Post by sillysaurus »

rhizome wrote: post #98
sillysaurus wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dude, you're being more than a little bit of a dick. I'm ignorant of government policy and politics in general, and it's only recently that I've begun rectifying that. Yes, it was a simple, straightforward query for information that I lack. And you hardly answered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_interventionism

You know what. I'm outta here for awhile. It's people like you that make me depressed to read HN or try to be involved. The guidelines even say "if you wouldn't say it to their face, then don't say it." Yet you were such an asshole to me right there without even an apology. That would've been okay if I had received an actual answer to my question, but instead I got a context-free link to a Wikipedia article with no way to interpret the complexities of how it relates to the issue at hand. The result is an unhelpful, unhealthy, negative state of mind. And that would be okay if I actually learned something from the experience. But the only thing I've learned from this is that you personally attack and belittle anyone who doesn't know the same things you know.
Post reply on HN