That's a smart -- and ethical -- move by Apple. Law and order is good and should not be subverted.
Law and order is good and should not be subverted. Sounds like a line out of a bad B movie about Kim Jong Un... uttered as he shoots his uncle with an anti-aircraft gun.
....
I tend to agree: Law and truth have both fallen out of favor in recent times.
That's a smart -- and ethical -- move by Apple. Law and order is good and should not be subverted.
Law and order is good and should not be subverted. Sounds like a line out of a bad B movie about Kim Jong Un... uttered as he shoots his uncle with an anti-aircraft gun.
....
I tend to agree: Law and truth have both fallen out of favor in recent times.
So can we assume you're going to go petition Apple to remove all the apps that monitor the police? Apps like: Waze, RadarBot, Cobra iRadar, Speed Camera Radar, Police Scanner, 5-0 Radio Pro, Scanner Radio, Speed Trap Plus. I mean, all the subversion.
That's a smart -- and ethical -- move by Apple. Law and order is good and should not be subverted.
Law and order is good and should not be subverted. Sounds like a line out of a bad B movie about Kim Jong Un... uttered as he shoots his uncle with an anti-aircraft gun.
....
I tend to agree: Law and truth have both fallen out of favor in recent times.
So can we assume you're going to go petition Apple to remove all the apps that monitor the police? Apps like: Waze, RadarBot, Cobra iRadar, Speed Camera Radar, Police Scanner, 5-0 Radio Pro, Scanner Radio, Speed Trap Plus. I mean, all the subversion.
If they are aiding and abetting lawlessness, they should. But, your example is also a false equivalency: there is a very big difference between going over the speed limit and violence against innocent people, destruction of property and attacking law enforcement.
The App developer is outright lying about the real intention of the app. Why would anyone use 'dog' to mark the spot where anti-riot police is spotted.
And till date, they still refuse to accept that they are rioters, no longer protesters.
That's a smart -- and ethical -- move by Apple. Law and order is good and should not be subverted.
Law and order is good and should not be subverted. Sounds like a line out of a bad B movie about Kim Jong Un... uttered as he shoots his uncle with an anti-aircraft gun.
....
I tend to agree: Law and truth have both fallen out of favor in recent times.
So can we assume you're going to go petition Apple to remove all the apps that monitor the police? Apps like: Waze, RadarBot, Cobra iRadar, Speed Camera Radar, Police Scanner, 5-0 Radio Pro, Scanner Radio, Speed Trap Plus. I mean, all the subversion.
If they are aiding and abetting lawlessness, they should. But, your example is also a false equivalency: there is a very big difference between going over the speed limit and violence against innocent people, destruction of property and attacking law enforcement.
Nah bud. There's no false equivalency here. Your original rhetoric was pretty emphatic. No equivocation. Law and order is good and should not be subverted. ← That is what my quote is a response to, not the China/HK issue. So that we're clear, your absolutism is what I'm criticizing. All of those apps, in varying degrees, help people to speed, avoid police speedtraps, circumvent DUI checkpoints, etc. Subverting law and order. I'm fairly certain you, like the rest of us, understand nuance. Your original words however don't indicate that you do.
Apple needs to make a choice - and by that I mean Tim Cook - they either stand for their social morals, as they say they do when it comes to anything in the US, Saudi Arabia etc or they don’t. But be consistent. To take the easy way out and grandstand in countries where Apple feels it will not be hurt monetarily but bend the knee to China only makes Tim and Apple come off as hypocrites.
My feeling is companies should be apolitical as the overall need to satisfy shareholders will always win out over political views when the stance taken will result in real harm to the company. And these are stickier situations compared to changing the keyboard on a MacBook. Stick to what you know Apple or take a stand for everyone everywhere. That’s the choice. Otherwise you expose yourselves as opportunistic wankers.
Perhaps stating the obvious for some... China is a communist dictatorship, Xi JaPing, has total control, if he said tomorrow, wipe out the demonstrations and take over, it would happen overnight at great cost..
Now the international community might be outraged, some of them anyway, and China might pay a big price. but that price won't hurt Xi, he'll just sit back and watch the consequences happen largely to his people,.. Perhaps the only reason it has not happened yet, is just maybe he doesn't want to be remembered as a brutal dictator that killed another few million like some of his predecessors.
That's a smart -- and ethical -- move by Apple. Law and order is good and should not be subverted.
Law and order is good and should not be subverted. Sounds like a line out of a bad B movie about Kim Jong Un... uttered as he shoots his uncle with an anti-aircraft gun.
....
I tend to agree: Law and truth have both fallen out of favor in recent times.
So can we assume you're going to go petition Apple to remove all the apps that monitor the police? Apps like: Waze, RadarBot, Cobra iRadar, Speed Camera Radar, Police Scanner, 5-0 Radio Pro, Scanner Radio, Speed Trap Plus. I mean, all the subversion.
If they are aiding and abetting lawlessness, they should. But, your example is also a false equivalency: there is a very big difference between going over the speed limit and violence against innocent people, destruction of property and attacking law enforcement.
Nah bud. There's no false equivalency here. Your original rhetoric was pretty emphatic. No equivocation. Law and order is good and should not be subverted. ← That is what my quote is a response to, not the China/HK issue. So that we're clear, your absolutism is what I'm criticizing. All of those apps, in varying degrees, help people to speed, avoid police speedtraps, circumvent DUI checkpoints, etc. Subverting law and order. I'm fairly certain you, like the rest of us, understand nuance. Your original words however don't indicate that you do.
And I will stick to what I said: equating speeding with throwing a Molotov cocktail at police or disrupting mass transit in a city is a false equivalency and false argument.
The one that says you aren't allowed to aid and abet those who attack innocent civilians, destroy property both public & private, attack police and throw Molotov cocktails at them. That law.
You’re operating under a bullshit premise that everyone using the app to see where conflicts are are doing those things.
Also, what about laws that say oppressive regimes can’t intern, torture, murder, and harvest organs from a million of its own people?
Apple needs to make a choice - and by that I mean Tim Cook - they either stand for their social morals, as they say they do when it comes to anything in the US, Saudi Arabia etc or they don’t. But be consistent. To take the easy way out and grandstand in countries where Apple feels it will not be hurt monetarily but bend the knee to China only makes Tim and Apple come off as hypocrites.
My feeling is companies should be apolitical as the overall need to satisfy shareholders will always win out over political views when the stance taken will result in real harm to the company. And these are stickier situations compared to changing the keyboard on a MacBook. Stick to what you know Apple or take a stand for everyone everywhere. That’s the choice. Otherwise you expose yourselves as opportunistic wankers.
That opinion, that it’s shareholders above all else, is waning, as we see social and civic responsibility are more important. If a government is inhumane (kidnapping and murdering its own citizens, harvesting their organs, etc), it would be insane to suggest the corporate responsibility is to follow the policies of this government.
That's a smart -- and ethical -- move by Apple. Law and order is good and should not be subverted.
Law and order is good and should not be subverted. Sounds like a line out of a bad B movie about Kim Jong Un... uttered as he shoots his uncle with an anti-aircraft gun.
....
I tend to agree: Law and truth have both fallen out of favor in recent times.
So can we assume you're going to go petition Apple to remove all the apps that monitor the police? Apps like: Waze, RadarBot, Cobra iRadar, Speed Camera Radar, Police Scanner, 5-0 Radio Pro, Scanner Radio, Speed Trap Plus. I mean, all the subversion.
If they are aiding and abetting lawlessness, they should. But, your example is also a false equivalency: there is a very big difference between going over the speed limit and violence against innocent people, destruction of property and attacking law enforcement.
Nah bud. There's no false equivalency here. Your original rhetoric was pretty emphatic. No equivocation. Law and order is good and should not be subverted. ← That is what my quote is a response to, not the China/HK issue. So that we're clear, your absolutism is what I'm criticizing. All of those apps, in varying degrees, help people to speed, avoid police speedtraps, circumvent DUI checkpoints, etc. Subverting law and order. I'm fairly certain you, like the rest of us, understand nuance. Your original words however don't indicate that you do.
And I will stick to what I said: equating speeding with throwing a Molotov cocktail at police or disrupting mass transit in a city is a false equivalency and false argument.
Not when it comes to the position you declared — law & order must be obeyed. That means even minor infractions cannot be tolerated. Thus speed trap apps are immoral.
That's a smart -- and ethical -- move by Apple. Law and order is good and should not be subverted.
I cannot even express how glad I am that the Founders weren't as...shortsighted as you.
I can only assume it's sarcasm. Which doesn't really come out in a message, let alone 1 sentence. Should add a "/s". That is my guess anyway.
It’s not sarcasm at all. If the founding fathers were as shortsighted as our resident nationalist, they’d have never left the British empire and we’d still be colonies right now.
Apple needs to make a choice - and by that I mean Tim Cook - they either stand for their social morals, as they say they do when it comes to anything in the US, Saudi Arabia etc or they don’t. But be consistent. To take the easy way out and grandstand in countries where Apple feels it will not be hurt monetarily but bend the knee to China only makes Tim and Apple come off as hypocrites.
My feeling is companies should be apolitical as the overall need to satisfy shareholders will always win out over political views when the stance taken will result in real harm to the company. And these are stickier situations compared to changing the keyboard on a MacBook. Stick to what you know Apple or take a stand for everyone everywhere. That’s the choice. Otherwise you expose yourselves as opportunistic wankers.
Apple is doing the right thing here and I applaud Tim Cook for being a calm adult instead of a hot head young man and traveling the less traveled road. By stay engaging in China they could see first hand what is happening there and understand how they could push and test the boundary. By creating all these controversies they also put pressures on the China government. What Apple can do better is being more transparent. Transparency shall set Apple free.
The one that says you aren't allowed to aid and abet those who attack innocent civilians, destroy property both public & private, attack police and throw Molotov cocktails at them. That law.
You’re operating under a bullshit premise that everyone using the app to see where conflicts are are doing those things.
Also, what about laws that say oppressive regimes can’t intern, torture, murder, and harvest organs from a million of its own people?
...as reported by an international tribunal and the WaPa. Not made up right-wing fantasy as you’ve previously claimed.
What’s your personal connection to China?
Aiding and abetting criminals to commit crimes is both wrong and illegal -- regardless of the qualifications or rationalizations.
Would you be saying the same if another country or company provided strategic aid to law breakers/rioters/terrorists destroying property, attacking innocent citizens, disrupting society and attacking police here in the U.S.? I doubt it. You would be up in arms.
Thanks to AppleInsider for linking to the live version.
This raises the question whether installing web apps shouldn’t be easier; just like how a website can link to their AppStore app in a way that Safari recognizes it?
Arguably it's about the same difficulty to install a PWA (the term for online or offline web apps). Since the whole process is just four taps: Once on the link to visit the PWA, once on the share sheet, once to 'add to the homescreen' and finally once to accept the name and icon. I doubt they'll get App-style header banners anytime soon because Apple has a wholly hands-off approach to PWAs, plus developers can already do this manually. (Plenty of sites direct users to install the web app version.)
Just call it a web app, no need to go all "the term for…" and insist on an abbreviation for a technical term for a particular type of web apps. It just makes the whole thing less approachable/easy to understand by most people. It's just apps, web apps, and websites. The rest is nerd particulars that most people shouldn't have to know a thing about.
Nothing wrong with using a recognised term. Now you know it too, instead of having to write a descriptive sentence each time you want to refer to the concept. Then again, just be arrogant and uninformed. Don't care.
Apple needs to make a choice - and by that I mean Tim Cook - they either stand for their social morals, as they say they do when it comes to anything in the US, Saudi Arabia etc or they don’t. But be consistent. To take the easy way out and grandstand in countries where Apple feels it will not be hurt monetarily but bend the knee to China only makes Tim and Apple come off as hypocrites.
My feeling is companies should be apolitical as the overall need to satisfy shareholders will always win out over political views when the stance taken will result in real harm to the company. And these are stickier situations compared to changing the keyboard on a MacBook. Stick to what you know Apple or take a stand for everyone everywhere. That’s the choice. Otherwise you expose yourselves as opportunistic wankers.
That opinion, that it’s shareholders above all else, is waning, as we see social and civic responsibility are more important. If a government is inhumane (kidnapping and murdering its own citizens, harvesting their organs, etc), it would be insane to suggest the corporate responsibility is to follow the policies of this government.
Life is political.
And that’s fine. If that is indeed the direction of corporate America, or at least Apple, then my main point still stands. Apple should exercise this relatively newfound positioning equally across every region it does business in.
I’m sure we are all against kidnapping, murdering citizens, and harvesting their organs. Yet as far as Apple’s concerned that’s ok when it comes to China. What stand are Apple taking there? It’s pretty clear Tim’s moral code has a limit and that limit smells like profit over civic responsibility.
I’m a big Apple products fan but this ability of Apple’s to look the other way when it’s politically expedient lessens their impact when they do speak up against say US policy. Having a moral or civic code means nothing if you only espouse it when it’s easy and you face no real consequences.
I suppose this means Android will be growing its market share in China, since it's easier to root those devices and sideload apps that the government can't control onto them.
Comments
But, your example is also a false equivalency: there is a very big difference between going over the speed limit and violence against innocent people, destruction of property and attacking law enforcement.
And till date, they still refuse to accept that they are rioters, no longer protesters.
Now the international community might be outraged, some of them anyway, and China might pay a big price. but that price won't hurt Xi, he'll just sit back and watch the consequences happen largely to his people,.. Perhaps the only reason it has not happened yet, is just maybe he doesn't want to be remembered as a brutal dictator that killed another few million like some of his predecessors.
Tim Cook has become weak, what a sad contrast from when he stood up for rights with the US gov't.
Also, what about laws that say oppressive regimes can’t intern, torture, murder, and harvest organs from a million of its own people?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/chinas-repressive-reach-is-growing/2019/09/27/dccb5f48-dfc1-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/china-forcefully-harvests-organs-detainees-tribunal-concludes-n1018646
...as reported by an international tribunal and the WaPa. Not made up right-wing fantasy as you’ve previously claimed.
What’s your personal connection to China?
Life is political.
Not when it comes to the position you declared — law & order must be obeyed. That means even minor infractions cannot be tolerated. Thus speed trap apps are immoral.
By your nationalist logic, anyway.
It’s not sarcasm at all. If the founding fathers were as shortsighted as our resident nationalist, they’d have never left the British empire and we’d still be colonies right now.
Would you be saying the same if another country or company provided strategic aid to law breakers/rioters/terrorists destroying property, attacking innocent citizens, disrupting society and attacking police here in the U.S.? I doubt it. You would be up in arms.
I’m sure we are all against kidnapping, murdering citizens, and harvesting their organs. Yet as far as Apple’s concerned that’s ok when it comes to China. What stand are Apple taking there? It’s pretty clear Tim’s moral code has a limit and that limit smells like profit over civic responsibility.
I’m a big Apple products fan but this ability of Apple’s to look the other way when it’s politically expedient lessens their impact when they do speak up against say US policy. Having a moral or civic code means nothing if you only espouse it when it’s easy and you face no real consequences.