3 ms·

> They can say that, but it makes them look like assholes. So it's not effective for them to do that Unfortunately, there a lot of assholes that only act like

> They can say that, but it makes them look like assholes. So it's not effective for them to do that Unfortunately, there a lot of assholes that only act like assholes behind closed doors with other assholes that tolerate them being assholes because they spend money out the asshole. /s But actually my point is that public PR team can't say that but Tim Cook giving Ted Cruz a quiet phone call can totally say that (off the record), probably followed up with "this would keep us from affording that new Texas factory/office/thing we were about to build with this money we make"

antasvara 4y ago
I don't disagree with the idea here, but this sort of decision has to have a public facing, somewhat valid reason for opposing legislation. An example of this would be marijuana legislation and the idea that marijuana is a "gateway drug." This is a somewhat sensible view that a political party can latch onto and push without losing too much popular support. I have to wonder if "new firmware on old devices" has a public-facing view that won't crater a politician's popularity. I'm sure there has to be one, but I don't know what it would be.
- vineyardmike 4y ago
  > I have to wonder if "new firmware on old devices" has a public-facing view that won't crater a politician's popularity. I'm sure there has to be one, but I don't know what it would be. The lack of any large important group that cares about this enough to try and smear a politician against it is enough. No one outside of nerds cares because no one knows to care. Compare it to abortion or guns, lots of regular people care or could be corralled into caring. If a politician is quizzed about their stance on end of life firmware, they can just say "I want to not end the life... of babies! The other guys want to abort your children" and then the whole topic is lost and they deflected successfully.

antasvara 4y ago

I don't disagree with the idea here, but this sort of decision has to have a public facing, somewhat valid reason for opposing legislation. An example of this would be marijuana legislation and the idea that marijuana is a "gateway drug." This is a somewhat sensible view that a political party can latch onto and push without losing too much popular support. I have to wonder if "new firmware on old devices" has a public-facing view that won't crater a politician's popularity. I'm sure there has to be one, but I don't know what it would be.

vineyardmike 4y ago
> I have to wonder if "new firmware on old devices" has a public-facing view that won't crater a politician's popularity. I'm sure there has to be one, but I don't know what it would be. The lack of any large important group that cares about this enough to try and smear a politician against it is enough. No one outside of nerds cares because no one knows to care. Compare it to abortion or guns, lots of regular people care or could be corralled into caring. If a politician is quizzed about their stance on end of life firmware, they can just say "I want to not end the life... of babies! The other guys want to abort your children" and then the whole topic is lost and they deflected successfully.