6 ms·

I feel like this is a win for consumers - I'd much rather there remain more OS competition on mobile devices[1] but if Apple wants to pursue a business model th

by munk-a 3y ago

I feel like this is a win for consumers - I'd much rather there remain more OS competition on mobile devices[1] but if Apple wants to pursue a business model that excludes large portions of the world from their customer base that's their decision. I don't believe there exists any maliciousness from the EU towards Apple - they do, after all, benefit greatly from corporation tax revenues from Apple and iPhones are still quite popular in the EU. I think at the end of the day there's just a difference in the social expectation of privacy and freedom between the EU and NA. Apple, being primarily steeped in NA's expectations for freedom, hasn't built an ecosystem that is compatible with the EU's higher expectations. 1. Still hoping to see something amazing RIM!

jokethrowaway 3y ago
I don't see how you can call EU having any expectation of freedom when commenting about a law which forces a company to comply to regulation. This actively reduces freedom, the freedom of running your business. You just don't care about it. If you don't like walled gardens you can just not use them (I certainly never bought anything Apple for this very reason), there's no need to infringe on the freedom of everyone else who wants to use walled gardens. The EU is in general becoming increasingly less free, thanks to barely elected bureaucrats who line up their pockets with sponsors money.
- munk-a 3y ago
  I think this is a great example of what I had mentioned as social differences of freedom between the EU and NA - in NA the freedom of businesses is often well protected up until it causes actual harm to human beings[1] - in the EU the freedom of human beings tend to be given priority of those of companies. It's important to remember that there are a lot of freedoms in this world and they often conflict in major ways. A quote that I love is "Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man's nose begins". Freedoms are extremely easy to guarantee if they're non-conflicting but that's rarely the case. In this case the EU is siding with the freedoms of the customers rather than the freedom of the corporation - whether that makes the society less or more free overall is a matter of opinion. 1. I'd point to a great example from one of our current justices in this regard: https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/mar/23/neil-gorsuch-supreme-court-frozen-trucker-alphonse-maddin https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/mar/23/neil-gorsuch-sup...
  - jquery 3y ago
    That dissent sent him to the top of the Heritage Foundation SC shortlist for being a corporate kowtowing stooge.
- justinclift 3y ago
  > line up their pockets with sponsors money. That's not just an EU problem though. It seems to be well established (and perhaps worse?) in many places.
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  > If you don't like walled gardens you can just not use them (I certainly never bought anything Apple for this very reason), there's no need to infringe on the freedom of everyone else who wants to use walled gardens. No-one's forcing Apple customers to go outside the walled garden. They can still source their apps from only the Apple App Store.
- trinsic2 3y ago
  Companies don't have freedom. People do. Companies are a collection of people that have a responsibility to the people who allow them to operating by charters. In our current age, I'd say that justice in this regard isn't operating as it should, because our governments are allowing selfish individuals within companies to do illegal stuff that go against the original intent of charters. Individuals that would normally be held accountable for their actions are now being protected from being prosecuted for harms they commit while being part business. Companies are designed and allowed, by characters, to operate within the scope of whats good for society. If it harms the public good then it needs to be reigned in. I have no illusions that companies have the same standing and rights as living beings do. They are lifeless entities meant to be subject to the will of people.
- johnnyanmac 3y ago
  >This actively reduces freedom, the freedom of running your business. You just don't care about it. In the same way Right to Repair, Minimum Wage, and Disciminatory hiring affects the freedom of running a business, sure. Unfortunately, rules are written in blood and this is happening because other businesses at this point abused the point of labor or customer satisfaction and needed to get dinged for it. In this case, Blame Microsoft, I guess. Heck, even Google. we already know the result of a closed system abusing its platform and large share to make its product worse. I'm glad we're actually jumping into this before it's too late (like we usually do).
justinclift 3y ago
> NA's expectations for freedom That'd be "corporate freedom" rather than "end user freedom" yeah? That's my impression of what the NA model of freedom seems to mean these days.

by munk-a 3y ago

jokethrowaway 3y ago

I don't see how you can call EU having any expectation of freedom when commenting about a law which forces a company to comply to regulation. This actively reduces freedom, the freedom of running your business. You just don't care about it. If you don't like walled gardens you can just not use them (I certainly never bought anything Apple for this very reason), there's no need to infringe on the freedom of everyone else who wants to use walled gardens. The EU is in general becoming increasingly less free, thanks to barely elected bureaucrats who line up their pockets with sponsors money.

munk-a 3y ago
I think this is a great example of what I had mentioned as social differences of freedom between the EU and NA - in NA the freedom of businesses is often well protected up until it causes actual harm to human beings[1] - in the EU the freedom of human beings tend to be given priority of those of companies. It's important to remember that there are a lot of freedoms in this world and they often conflict in major ways. A quote that I love is "Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man's nose begins". Freedoms are extremely easy to guarantee if they're non-conflicting but that's rarely the case. In this case the EU is siding with the freedoms of the customers rather than the freedom of the corporation - whether that makes the society less or more free overall is a matter of opinion. 1. I'd point to a great example from one of our current justices in this regard: https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/mar/23/neil-gorsuch-supreme-court-frozen-trucker-alphonse-maddin https://www.theguardian.com/law/2017/mar/23/neil-gorsuch-sup...
- jquery 3y ago
  That dissent sent him to the top of the Heritage Foundation SC shortlist for being a corporate kowtowing stooge.
justinclift 3y ago
> line up their pockets with sponsors money. That's not just an EU problem though. It seems to be well established (and perhaps worse?) in many places.
FireBeyond 3y ago
> If you don't like walled gardens you can just not use them (I certainly never bought anything Apple for this very reason), there's no need to infringe on the freedom of everyone else who wants to use walled gardens. No-one's forcing Apple customers to go outside the walled garden. They can still source their apps from only the Apple App Store.
trinsic2 3y ago
Companies don't have freedom. People do. Companies are a collection of people that have a responsibility to the people who allow them to operating by charters. In our current age, I'd say that justice in this regard isn't operating as it should, because our governments are allowing selfish individuals within companies to do illegal stuff that go against the original intent of charters. Individuals that would normally be held accountable for their actions are now being protected from being prosecuted for harms they commit while being part business. Companies are designed and allowed, by characters, to operate within the scope of whats good for society. If it harms the public good then it needs to be reigned in. I have no illusions that companies have the same standing and rights as living beings do. They are lifeless entities meant to be subject to the will of people.
johnnyanmac 3y ago
>This actively reduces freedom, the freedom of running your business. You just don't care about it. In the same way Right to Repair, Minimum Wage, and Disciminatory hiring affects the freedom of running a business, sure. Unfortunately, rules are written in blood and this is happening because other businesses at this point abused the point of labor or customer satisfaction and needed to get dinged for it. In this case, Blame Microsoft, I guess. Heck, even Google. we already know the result of a closed system abusing its platform and large share to make its product worse. I'm glad we're actually jumping into this before it's too late (like we usually do).

justinclift 3y ago

> NA's expectations for freedom That'd be "corporate freedom" rather than "end user freedom" yeah? That's my impression of what the NA model of freedom seems to mean these days.