4 ms·

> Houses can’t be arbitrarily changed. Cars have governors. Scissors shouldn’t be run with. None of these regulations are decided by the company that manufactu

> Houses can’t be arbitrarily changed. Cars have governors. Scissors shouldn’t be run with. None of these regulations are decided by the company that manufactured the device, they are all decided democratically by an elected state. How about... Houses can't have arbitrary appliances installed that weren't made by someone approved by the house-builder Cars can't fill up gas from a stand not paying 30% by the car manufacturer Scissors can't cut paper sold by someone unaffiliated by the scissor manufacturer. Sounds reasonable to me! > If you don’t mind breaking the warranty, please jailbreak your iPhone and install whatever apps you’d prefer. No, Apple wanted jailbreaking to be "go to jail" illegal, not just voiding your warranty.

yazaddaruvala 6y ago
Maybe I should have clarified. The Strata/HOA regulates the appliances, the customizations, even the “look and feel” of my patio.
dylan-m 6y ago
> Scissors can't cut paper sold by someone unaffiliated by the scissor manufacturer. Of course, going by evidence in these threads, people would defend Scissors Corp to the death, arguing "but that's a feature which makes these scissors safe so people don't injure themselves, and sure they own half of the scissors (and paper) market but you can always bring your own scissors (and paper) and avoid interacting with people who use Scissors Corp stuff, so what's the problem?"
- yazaddaruvala 6y ago
  If I bought scissors that could only cut certain types of paper, thickness or proprietary paper, I wouldn’t later complain about their inability to cut all paper. “Ownership” of a tool has always been limited to the feature set the manufacturer originally intended for it. This entitlement over the tools Apple creates, accurately advertises, and legal sells is the only problem I see. [1] https://www.sliceproducts.com/safety-scissors https://www.sliceproducts.com/safety-scissors
  - stale2002 6y ago
    > If I bought scissors that could only cut certain types of paper If there was a scissors duopoly, in which a company that controls 50% of the market, implemented practices that are anti-competitive, then this could be illegal. > has always been limited to the feature set the manufacturer originally intended for it. Actually, no. Once you purchased the item, you can do whatever you want with it, regardless of what the manufacture wants. > This entitlement This is about anti-trust law. Apple should follow the law. They are not entitled to break the law, without consequences.
    - yazaddaruvala 6y ago
      And the courts agreed! I agree! If you want to jailbreak your iPhone you can and you should! I even agree Apple should be forced to create more tools to create jailbroken iPhones. However, the warranty should be void. Same as if you use scissors as a hammer, which is your right, the warranty is void. Expecting the original warranty to hold, or expecting the manufacturer to help you misuse the tool is the entitlement.
      - stale2002 6y ago
        > expecting the manufacturer to help If their actions are anti-competitive, then they absolutely have obligations, under anti-trust law, which does not require a literal monopoly, and only instead requires significant market power for these laws to apply. Apple is subject to the law. They have to follow it, or they will suffer consequences.
        yazaddaruvala 6y ago
        If then yes. But it seems unlikely and my preference is to live in a world where Apple continues to curate the AppStore on my behalf. I hope Apple doesn’t need to remove the AppStore entirely. But that would definitely be better than the alternatives of allowing sideloading.
        6y ago

yazaddaruvala 6y ago

Maybe I should have clarified. The Strata/HOA regulates the appliances, the customizations, even the “look and feel” of my patio.

dylan-m 6y ago

> Scissors can't cut paper sold by someone unaffiliated by the scissor manufacturer. Of course, going by evidence in these threads, people would defend Scissors Corp to the death, arguing "but that's a feature which makes these scissors safe so people don't injure themselves, and sure they own half of the scissors (and paper) market but you can always bring your own scissors (and paper) and avoid interacting with people who use Scissors Corp stuff, so what's the problem?"

yazaddaruvala 6y ago
If I bought scissors that could only cut certain types of paper, thickness or proprietary paper, I wouldn’t later complain about their inability to cut all paper. “Ownership” of a tool has always been limited to the feature set the manufacturer originally intended for it. This entitlement over the tools Apple creates, accurately advertises, and legal sells is the only problem I see. [1] https://www.sliceproducts.com/safety-scissors https://www.sliceproducts.com/safety-scissors
- stale2002 6y ago
  > If I bought scissors that could only cut certain types of paper If there was a scissors duopoly, in which a company that controls 50% of the market, implemented practices that are anti-competitive, then this could be illegal. > has always been limited to the feature set the manufacturer originally intended for it. Actually, no. Once you purchased the item, you can do whatever you want with it, regardless of what the manufacture wants. > This entitlement This is about anti-trust law. Apple should follow the law. They are not entitled to break the law, without consequences.
  - yazaddaruvala 6y ago
    And the courts agreed! I agree! If you want to jailbreak your iPhone you can and you should! I even agree Apple should be forced to create more tools to create jailbroken iPhones. However, the warranty should be void. Same as if you use scissors as a hammer, which is your right, the warranty is void. Expecting the original warranty to hold, or expecting the manufacturer to help you misuse the tool is the entitlement.
    - stale2002 6y ago
      > expecting the manufacturer to help If their actions are anti-competitive, then they absolutely have obligations, under anti-trust law, which does not require a literal monopoly, and only instead requires significant market power for these laws to apply. Apple is subject to the law. They have to follow it, or they will suffer consequences.
      - yazaddaruvala 6y ago
        If then yes. But it seems unlikely and my preference is to live in a world where Apple continues to curate the AppStore on my behalf. I hope Apple doesn’t need to remove the AppStore entirely. But that would definitely be better than the alternatives of allowing sideloading.
        6y ago