8 ms·

There are no “good guy” companies. Stop electing obstructionists who have no interest in governing. Regulation is the only solution.

briandear 7y ago
It’s not the only solution. Another solution is to buy products from companies you agree with. If that company doesn’t exist, start it. Nobody is required to buy an Apple product.
- nate_meurer 7y ago
  Cool, I'll look into starting a new mobile hardware company to compete with Apple. Maybe this weekend. In the mean time, I'll also be voting against captured politicians.
  - briandear 7y ago
    Buy an Android. By something else. And remember Apple started as a garage company going up against IBM. Banning something you personally don’t like isn’t freedom, it’s fascism. Nobody has to buy an Apple product! It isn’t like it’s the government where you are forced at the point of a gun to comply. It’s a free market. Buy whatever you want. Sell whatever people want. Start your own damned company. Plenty of people before you have done exactly that. That you chose not to is your fault, not Apple’s.
    - xtian 7y ago
      First of all, the "free market" is a fairy tale. It has never existed. States have been shaping their economies since the beginning of civilization. The very existence of modern corporations and their special rights of limited liability is a radical dispensation from government. And secondly, where do you (or do you at all) draw the line on what sort of ban constitutes fascism? (Setting aside the fact that corporations have historically loved the stability of fascist states.) Is regulated overtime fascism? Workplace safety laws? Child labor laws?
      - AnthonyMouse 7y ago
        You can't have it both ways. Neither of you. Apple is a creature of the state. We wouldn't need laws requiring their phones to be repairable if there weren't already laws prohibiting you from running iOS on non-Apple hardware or using non-Apple app stores on Apple hardware etc. Having none of it is a valid option. Dumping the DMCA in the bin and allowing anybody to transfer their copy of iOS to a phone made by Samsung or Purism when their iPhone dies would solve it too. What we can't have is the laws that favor the corporation and not the laws that favor their customers. That's an asymmetry; it has to be both or neither. So have your ideological debate, but we either need more laws or fewer -- the status quo is unreasonable.
    - modo_mario 7y ago
      >Banning something you personally don’t like isn’t freedom, it’s fascism. Oh? Oh really? Like banning people from repairing things they own? Like that?
      - sbuk 7y ago
        I’m personally on the fence with this issue, and using the term ‘fascism’ in this case is extremely pejorative. But... People calling for laws to regulate things like this bothers me. Where does it lead? As the GP posited, there is competition. Apple ‘banning’ you from repairing a device is purely commercial. The only things actually preventing you from repairing your device are really scarcity of parts and warranty issues. I understand why they disable Touch ID on 3rd party parts for instance. It makes sense for both parties (Apple and end user). Should there be a 3rd party program in this instance? That’s a commercial decision. As for Warranties; if you attempt a repair and bodge the job, why should any company be liable for that? Yes, repair it, but at full cost. If it’s irrecoverable, tough shit on the person that initially attempted the repair or the vendor should have the right to refuse. If it’s out of warranty; the owner/repairer should pay for the work. A better argument to be had at this point is the minimum warranty length. For electronic devices 3-5 years seems reasonable. Accidental damage cost should not be covered by this. That is what insurance is for. The real motive behind this push as far as I can see is the tinkerer or modder movement. That’s fine, but be honest. There are trade offs to be had on both sides.
        bmn__ 7y ago
        Explanation for your downvotes (text is already medium grey): > The only things actually preventing you from repairing your device are really scarcity of parts and warranty issues. This is written to mislead people who do not know the relevant background information. Apple puts a three-way stranglehold on the parts market. The scarcity exists precisely because of their anti-capitalist, anticompetitive actions.
        sbuk 7y ago
        > This is written to mislead people who do not know the relevant background information. How dare you put words in my mouth. I have no skin in this whatsoever. It was written as a statement of fact as I see it. The motive behind the scarcity is not something I was discussing, and is, as I said a commercial one. Legislating that a 3rd party parts market must be catered for is potentially a slippery slope. As for anti-capitalist? This is right out of the capitalist playbook! False scarcity leads to control of the market place, which leads to capital, by way of higher repair parts or increased revenue in terms of new device sales instead of repairs.
- ClumsyPilot 7y ago
  Companies are not people. They do not have beliefs and opinions, they do not loose sleep at night. Even if they did, you would not be privy to them.
  - qtplatypus 7y ago
    Legally companies are people. Though so is a river in new zealand.
ropiwqefjnpoa 7y ago
I shudder at the thought that more government is the only solution.
- xtian 7y ago
  Please present another.
  - ropiwqefjnpoa 7y ago
    Stop buying apple or google products
    - xtian 7y ago
      To what effect?
AshamedCaptain 7y ago
There are good companies, but perhaps not good large companies (i.e. "no one got rich by being the good guy"). Also, perhaps more importantly, there are better companies (i.e. even if no one were to be perfect, you can still aim for the best).

briandear 7y ago

It’s not the only solution. Another solution is to buy products from companies you agree with. If that company doesn’t exist, start it. Nobody is required to buy an Apple product.

nate_meurer 7y ago
Cool, I'll look into starting a new mobile hardware company to compete with Apple. Maybe this weekend. In the mean time, I'll also be voting against captured politicians.
- briandear 7y ago
  Buy an Android. By something else. And remember Apple started as a garage company going up against IBM. Banning something you personally don’t like isn’t freedom, it’s fascism. Nobody has to buy an Apple product! It isn’t like it’s the government where you are forced at the point of a gun to comply. It’s a free market. Buy whatever you want. Sell whatever people want. Start your own damned company. Plenty of people before you have done exactly that. That you chose not to is your fault, not Apple’s.
  - xtian 7y ago
    First of all, the "free market" is a fairy tale. It has never existed. States have been shaping their economies since the beginning of civilization. The very existence of modern corporations and their special rights of limited liability is a radical dispensation from government. And secondly, where do you (or do you at all) draw the line on what sort of ban constitutes fascism? (Setting aside the fact that corporations have historically loved the stability of fascist states.) Is regulated overtime fascism? Workplace safety laws? Child labor laws?
    - AnthonyMouse 7y ago
      You can't have it both ways. Neither of you. Apple is a creature of the state. We wouldn't need laws requiring their phones to be repairable if there weren't already laws prohibiting you from running iOS on non-Apple hardware or using non-Apple app stores on Apple hardware etc. Having none of it is a valid option. Dumping the DMCA in the bin and allowing anybody to transfer their copy of iOS to a phone made by Samsung or Purism when their iPhone dies would solve it too. What we can't have is the laws that favor the corporation and not the laws that favor their customers. That's an asymmetry; it has to be both or neither. So have your ideological debate, but we either need more laws or fewer -- the status quo is unreasonable.
  - modo_mario 7y ago
    >Banning something you personally don’t like isn’t freedom, it’s fascism. Oh? Oh really? Like banning people from repairing things they own? Like that?
    - sbuk 7y ago
      I’m personally on the fence with this issue, and using the term ‘fascism’ in this case is extremely pejorative. But... People calling for laws to regulate things like this bothers me. Where does it lead? As the GP posited, there is competition. Apple ‘banning’ you from repairing a device is purely commercial. The only things actually preventing you from repairing your device are really scarcity of parts and warranty issues. I understand why they disable Touch ID on 3rd party parts for instance. It makes sense for both parties (Apple and end user). Should there be a 3rd party program in this instance? That’s a commercial decision. As for Warranties; if you attempt a repair and bodge the job, why should any company be liable for that? Yes, repair it, but at full cost. If it’s irrecoverable, tough shit on the person that initially attempted the repair or the vendor should have the right to refuse. If it’s out of warranty; the owner/repairer should pay for the work. A better argument to be had at this point is the minimum warranty length. For electronic devices 3-5 years seems reasonable. Accidental damage cost should not be covered by this. That is what insurance is for. The real motive behind this push as far as I can see is the tinkerer or modder movement. That’s fine, but be honest. There are trade offs to be had on both sides.
      - bmn__ 7y ago
        Explanation for your downvotes (text is already medium grey): > The only things actually preventing you from repairing your device are really scarcity of parts and warranty issues. This is written to mislead people who do not know the relevant background information. Apple puts a three-way stranglehold on the parts market. The scarcity exists precisely because of their anti-capitalist, anticompetitive actions.
        sbuk 7y ago
        > This is written to mislead people who do not know the relevant background information. How dare you put words in my mouth. I have no skin in this whatsoever. It was written as a statement of fact as I see it. The motive behind the scarcity is not something I was discussing, and is, as I said a commercial one. Legislating that a 3rd party parts market must be catered for is potentially a slippery slope. As for anti-capitalist? This is right out of the capitalist playbook! False scarcity leads to control of the market place, which leads to capital, by way of higher repair parts or increased revenue in terms of new device sales instead of repairs.
ClumsyPilot 7y ago
Companies are not people. They do not have beliefs and opinions, they do not loose sleep at night. Even if they did, you would not be privy to them.
- qtplatypus 7y ago
  Legally companies are people. Though so is a river in new zealand.

ropiwqefjnpoa 7y ago

I shudder at the thought that more government is the only solution.

xtian 7y ago
Please present another.
- ropiwqefjnpoa 7y ago
  Stop buying apple or google products
  - xtian 7y ago
    To what effect?

AshamedCaptain 7y ago

There are good companies, but perhaps not good large companies (i.e. "no one got rich by being the good guy"). Also, perhaps more importantly, there are better companies (i.e. even if no one were to be perfect, you can still aim for the best).