4 ms·

> There is nothing twisted about my interpretations, and I’m not defending Apple. I stopped reading there. It's as false as it is shameless to make such a clai

> There is nothing twisted about my interpretations, and I’m not defending Apple. I stopped reading there. It's as false as it is shameless to make such a claim after all the comments you spammed across the whole thread.

zepto 6y ago
Unfortunately, if you really stopped there, then you don’t understand what I mean when I say that. But, since you have such a black and white view: Can you quote a single comment from this thread in which I defend Apple?
- jedimind 6y ago
  > Can you quote a single comment from this thread in which I defend Apple? "Obviously they make their own ethical judgements when enforcing their own rules, as do we all." - It would have been more difficult to find comments from this thread where you didn't defend Apple applying all sorts of mental gymnastics.
  - zepto 6y ago
    What makes you think I’m defending Apple there? That quoted statement is obviously true. How does it “defend Apple” to state the truth?
    - jedimind 6y ago
      > What makes you think I’m defending Apple there? That quoted statement is obviously true. It's a tautology and a miserable attempt at defending Apple. Like reacting to a victim's complaint by saying "Well animals also steal from each other, most organisms engage in such behaviour" Then saying - That statement is true so how am I defending the thief here!? Even asking "hOw DiD I dEfEnD aPpLe" is absurd, when that's literally all you have been doing in most of the comments above. I'll no longer participate in your pointless hairsplitting games.
      - zepto 6y ago
        It’s only a tautology if you believe that ethics have a subjective dimension. That is not a given in this thread, where people are writing comments that essentialise Apple’s ethics. The reason I made that comment was to highlight this point. Each of us is bringing a sense of what is right and wrong to this. One we introduce this, we can start to reason about why Apple is taking what we think of as a wrong action, and what kind of compromises are leading to it. Simply vilifying them just closes us of from understanding them. Your analogy positions Apple as a perpetrator, the developer as a victim, and me as an apologist. Once again, you aren’t actually engaging in a discussion. You are begging the question with your framing. http://begthequestion.info/ http://begthequestion.info/ You aren’t actually explaining why the framing is valid. As I said, if I were really defending Apple, it would be easy to show. Just repeating over and over again that I am is not that. You can’t explain it because it isn’t happening.
        jedimind 6y ago
        > It’s only a tautology if you believe that ethics have a subjective dimension. Utter nonsense, it's a tautology either way, it being derived from a subjective or objective source has no effect on it. > Simply vilifying them just closes us of from understanding them. "Simply vilifying" them? It's not rocket science, a trillion dollar business is trying to protect its image using shady tactics. Your framing is again reeking of bias: "people are just vilifying poor Apple" according to you, but it's more like you blindly defending Apple, spamming the whole thread. > Once again, you aren’t actually engaging in a discussion. You are begging the question with your framing. We are engaging in the discussion, while you are trying to fool people with deceptive rhetoric. You have been given many evidences, but you always deflected with pseudo intellectual, unconvincing rhetoric. >As I said, if I were really defending Apple, it would be easy to show. Just repeating over and over again that I am is not that. You can’t explain it because it isn’t happening. People besides me have given you enough evidence & have also pointed out your weaselly rhetoric. You are truly living in your own fantasy world, most of your comments are greyed out for a good reason.
        zepto 6y ago
- rpdillon 6y ago
  I have a similar reaction to your posts in this thread, and while you are indeed careful with your phrasing, the end result seems very biased to me. This is partly because I have substantial bias of my own. =) The statement that tipped me towards thinking you were defensive about Apple was here: > One of the problems is that most of what people call ‘bugs’ or relevant ‘information’ about Apple is actually false. No one challenged this, and you just dropped it there like it's a fact. I don't know that to be true at all, and even if it were, I don't think it justifies Apple's behavior towards a developer trying to inform their users about their efforts to work around a bug on the platform. Users knowing about a flaw in their device's OS is highly relevant to them, and indeed may inform whether they want to purchase such devices again. I believe Apple is wrong to try and prevent developers from communicating this through the app store, but I read your comments as defending it. I won't try and argue that Apple doesn't have a right to do so, however. I think they do, and this is precisely why I don't buy their products.
  - zepto 6y ago
    It’s worth pointing out that ‘bias’ is a fairly meaningless word to be using here. It’s pretty obvious that ‘Jedimind’ is biased, isn’t it? As to my comment about ‘bugs’ etc. I don’t think it takes much to confirm that statement. Just look around online and in the press and then investigate in detail. What you will find is some kernels of truth, plus a vast amount of telephone-game like inaccuracy. This isn’t unique to Apple - it’s simply a feature of our current public discourse. By raising this, I’m just pointing out that Apple is operating in that real world, so to expect them to operate idealistically is unrealistic. As to me defending Apple - is it possible it only seems like this because my tone is less angry than some other people here? Take another look at what I’ve said. I don’t think you’ll find me anywhere saying their behavior is justified and you will find several places where I unequivocally say it’s wrong. I don’t think this is any different to your final paragraph. We can simultaneously think they are wrong, and try to understand what they are dealing with when they make their decisions. These two things don’t have to be in conflict. What I often see is the desire to make simplistic declarations that reduce Apple to some kind of demon where the wrong decisions or compromises they make are evidence that this is something fundamental about them to just rage about, rather than a problem to be understood. I see this as a kind of self-deception, which I would prefer not to fall into. When you look around the thread, where people are comparing Apple to the Gestapo and shrilly calling for them to be “smashed”, and their money confiscated and redistributed, do you really think that my ‘bias’ is the issue here?

zepto 6y ago

Unfortunately, if you really stopped there, then you don’t understand what I mean when I say that. But, since you have such a black and white view: Can you quote a single comment from this thread in which I defend Apple?

jedimind 6y ago
> Can you quote a single comment from this thread in which I defend Apple? "Obviously they make their own ethical judgements when enforcing their own rules, as do we all." - It would have been more difficult to find comments from this thread where you didn't defend Apple applying all sorts of mental gymnastics.
- zepto 6y ago
  What makes you think I’m defending Apple there? That quoted statement is obviously true. How does it “defend Apple” to state the truth?
  - jedimind 6y ago
    > What makes you think I’m defending Apple there? That quoted statement is obviously true. It's a tautology and a miserable attempt at defending Apple. Like reacting to a victim's complaint by saying "Well animals also steal from each other, most organisms engage in such behaviour" Then saying - That statement is true so how am I defending the thief here!? Even asking "hOw DiD I dEfEnD aPpLe" is absurd, when that's literally all you have been doing in most of the comments above. I'll no longer participate in your pointless hairsplitting games.
    - zepto 6y ago
      It’s only a tautology if you believe that ethics have a subjective dimension. That is not a given in this thread, where people are writing comments that essentialise Apple’s ethics. The reason I made that comment was to highlight this point. Each of us is bringing a sense of what is right and wrong to this. One we introduce this, we can start to reason about why Apple is taking what we think of as a wrong action, and what kind of compromises are leading to it. Simply vilifying them just closes us of from understanding them. Your analogy positions Apple as a perpetrator, the developer as a victim, and me as an apologist. Once again, you aren’t actually engaging in a discussion. You are begging the question with your framing. http://begthequestion.info/ http://begthequestion.info/ You aren’t actually explaining why the framing is valid. As I said, if I were really defending Apple, it would be easy to show. Just repeating over and over again that I am is not that. You can’t explain it because it isn’t happening.
      - jedimind 6y ago
        > It’s only a tautology if you believe that ethics have a subjective dimension. Utter nonsense, it's a tautology either way, it being derived from a subjective or objective source has no effect on it. > Simply vilifying them just closes us of from understanding them. "Simply vilifying" them? It's not rocket science, a trillion dollar business is trying to protect its image using shady tactics. Your framing is again reeking of bias: "people are just vilifying poor Apple" according to you, but it's more like you blindly defending Apple, spamming the whole thread. > Once again, you aren’t actually engaging in a discussion. You are begging the question with your framing. We are engaging in the discussion, while you are trying to fool people with deceptive rhetoric. You have been given many evidences, but you always deflected with pseudo intellectual, unconvincing rhetoric. >As I said, if I were really defending Apple, it would be easy to show. Just repeating over and over again that I am is not that. You can’t explain it because it isn’t happening. People besides me have given you enough evidence & have also pointed out your weaselly rhetoric. You are truly living in your own fantasy world, most of your comments are greyed out for a good reason.
        zepto 6y ago
rpdillon 6y ago
I have a similar reaction to your posts in this thread, and while you are indeed careful with your phrasing, the end result seems very biased to me. This is partly because I have substantial bias of my own. =) The statement that tipped me towards thinking you were defensive about Apple was here: > One of the problems is that most of what people call ‘bugs’ or relevant ‘information’ about Apple is actually false. No one challenged this, and you just dropped it there like it's a fact. I don't know that to be true at all, and even if it were, I don't think it justifies Apple's behavior towards a developer trying to inform their users about their efforts to work around a bug on the platform. Users knowing about a flaw in their device's OS is highly relevant to them, and indeed may inform whether they want to purchase such devices again. I believe Apple is wrong to try and prevent developers from communicating this through the app store, but I read your comments as defending it. I won't try and argue that Apple doesn't have a right to do so, however. I think they do, and this is precisely why I don't buy their products.
- zepto 6y ago
  It’s worth pointing out that ‘bias’ is a fairly meaningless word to be using here. It’s pretty obvious that ‘Jedimind’ is biased, isn’t it? As to my comment about ‘bugs’ etc. I don’t think it takes much to confirm that statement. Just look around online and in the press and then investigate in detail. What you will find is some kernels of truth, plus a vast amount of telephone-game like inaccuracy. This isn’t unique to Apple - it’s simply a feature of our current public discourse. By raising this, I’m just pointing out that Apple is operating in that real world, so to expect them to operate idealistically is unrealistic. As to me defending Apple - is it possible it only seems like this because my tone is less angry than some other people here? Take another look at what I’ve said. I don’t think you’ll find me anywhere saying their behavior is justified and you will find several places where I unequivocally say it’s wrong. I don’t think this is any different to your final paragraph. We can simultaneously think they are wrong, and try to understand what they are dealing with when they make their decisions. These two things don’t have to be in conflict. What I often see is the desire to make simplistic declarations that reduce Apple to some kind of demon where the wrong decisions or compromises they make are evidence that this is something fundamental about them to just rage about, rather than a problem to be understood. I see this as a kind of self-deception, which I would prefer not to fall into. When you look around the thread, where people are comparing Apple to the Gestapo and shrilly calling for them to be “smashed”, and their money confiscated and redistributed, do you really think that my ‘bias’ is the issue here?