4 ms·
There are those of us that don’t see government forcing people to act a certain way as always a “win for everyone involved”
by buzzerbetrayed 2y ago
There are those of us that don’t see government forcing people to act a certain way as always a “win for everyone involved”
- matheusmoreira 2y agoApple is not "people". It's a trillion dollar corporation. I'd rather see it forced to open up all of its "value add" nonsense so that we can have interoperabiliry and truly own our devices.
- righthand 2y agoThe zealots think Apple is a person with rights. Look at how they talk about the company. It’s not exclusive to this thread and is apart of the Apple faith.
- tm-infringement 2y agoJust like the horrible government banning leaded fuel. I'm not joking, a stronger argument is needed about regulation than "any gubernatorial directive is bad". Apple isn't a person with natural rights. What are the actual drawbacks of this? Are we stifling innovation by forcing interop of the disruptive technology of "wireless filesharing"? It's infrared media transfer, but with 2.4GHz.
- buzzerbetrayed 2y agoI specifically said that it isn’t always a win to address this. But yes, creating a strawman certainly makes arguments easier.
- tm-infringement 2y agoYou say that government intervention is not always a win. Sure, totally true, also it isn't always Sunday. I'm was asking for concrete arguments or reasons, vaguely gesturing at regulation having drawbacks isn't one. And calling it out isn't a strawman. The parent articulated pros, you responded with a truism instead of cons or refuting his points, which certainly makes arguments easier.
- kelnos 2y agoThen your post upthread was content-free and pointless. It's not news that government intervention sometimes goes badly. Maybe explain why you think a specific instance of government intervention is bad. That would actually be interesting and lead to discussion.