All of the major platforms, such as the BSDs, Linux, OS X, and windows, have enabled users to program their own machines. With a basic knowledge of programming, users could write and execute their own code on their computers using freely available tools and official APIs. If you were dissatisfied with a piece of software or wanted some software that was not published for your platform, there was nothing stopping you from rolling up your sleeves, writing, and running your own implementation. Thus, if one regards smartphones as computers, then iOS is practically the only platform where a third party has the final say over what instructions the user can load on his computer.
You can in fact write any program you want and run on in your iPhone. You need a Mac, then just download Xcode (a free download), write the program, plug your iPhone in to the USB port and install it. It could be a porn or gambling app or anything and Xcode won't stop you. Where the restrictions come in is if you try to distribute the app through the App Store. So basically you can put whatever you want on your own phone, just not everybody else's.
Yes. And? Until that says, ‘is’, the point is moot.
Hardly. The point becomes "is this what Apple is doing"? It doesn't immediately appear so, since Apple doesn't currently have a payments service, but the argument has become more of a theoretical one anyway. If Apple were to develop their own payments solution and also take steps to remove or hobble other payments services then that could viably be called an abuse of position.
What you're talking about is specifically supporting bitcoin yet you're claim is very, very different. Apps by Intuit, PayPal and Square readily come to mind as a way of making a payment using an iDevice.
Let me know when Apple starts banning all apps that support payments using legal tender.
Predictably, he has no come back for that.
When Apple gives no reason, haters project their deepest conspiracies and beliefs to fill the void.
I've never heard that Netscape was giving their browser away for free. What was their business model if the browser was free?
From Netscape’s IPO Documents, 1995:
"Netscape Communications Corporation provides a comprehensive line of client, server, and integrated applications software for communications and commerce on the Internet and private Internet Protocol (IP) networks. … Designed with enhanced security code, these software products provide the confidentiality required to execute financial transactions and to sell advertisements on the Internet and private IP networks.
….Incorporating both browser and server functions, the company’s integrated applications software programs are designed to provide enterprises with the capability to manage large-scale commercial sites on the Internet. Such applications enable these enterprises to conduct full-scale electronic commerce through a seamless system."
From an HBS IPO Case written about Netscape:
"….the majority [of revenues] were generated by one of Netscape’s three server products, Netscape Commerce Server. Revenues from Netscape’s server and integrated applications products were expected to increase as a percentage of overall revenues in the future.
Using the same “give away today and make money tomorrow” strategy that Andreessen’s team had used to popularize Mosaic, by the spring of 1995 Netscape had succeeded in capturing 75% of the Web browser market. Mosaic, under the guise of Spyglass, trailed far behind with 5% of the market. Having set the industry standard, Netscape was poised to make money by selling server software to companies that wanted marketing access to potential consumers."
I thought Apple was all about groundbreaking innovation.
Bitcoin is the largest innovation in personal finance since the credit card. It is NOT illegal, and therefore claims that Apple removed it because it's currently not legal are just unjustified.
As for the claims that it's only used for drugs - less than 5% of bitcoin passed through the Silk Road. Yet nearly all US$100 bills have trace amounts of cocaine on them, HSBC laundered hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars for Mexican drug cartels, and I go buy heroin in any city using untraceable cash.
The hypocrisy in this thread is astounding - 'nobody is forcing you to have an iPhone, Apple can choose what goes on it.' 10 years ago Microsoft claimed the same defence for packaging IE into their operating system.
The hypocrisy in this thread is astounding - 'nobody is forcing you to have an iPhone, Apple can choose what goes on it.' 10 years ago Microsoft claimed the same defence for packaging IE into their operating system.
The IE thing was about bundling a single app almost everyone with a computer needs to use. This is about rejecting apps very few people use.
People can say the same with the boob jiggle apps - Apple has no reason to ban them and having a single store means no jiggling.
What's the expected outcome?
They either relax the rules and allow more apps into their store, which they are then seen as promoting or they allow users to install apps themselves.
They already allow users to install apps themselves if they are developers and they allow companies to setup developer servers to distribute their own apps outside of Apple's approval.
They've decided they don't want to promote boob jiggling and they don't want to promote bitcoin. They haven't said why but it's their choice. They provide alternative options for people who really need these apps.
Because boob jiggling and potentially competitive personal financial services applications are the same thing right?
Here's even more hypocrisy - Barclays Pingit, Yoyo, PayPal and others are all allowed apps. But an app which passes ownership of a alternative value token from one holder to another - nope, banned.
Because boob jiggling and potentially competitive personal financial services applications are the same thing right?
Here's even more hypocrisy - Barclays Pingit, Yoyo, PayPal and others are all allowed apps. But an app which passes ownership of a alternative value token from one holder to another - nope, banned.
It's funny how one of you trolls first claims that "Apple is abusing its market power in an attempt to corner a position in payments." but when it's pointed out that Apple allows multiple payment systems, just not ones that use bitcoin, you come back with an argument that 1) bitcoin is completely legal and accepted currency by the US, and 2) that all these other payment systems using legal tender are somehow engaging in nefarious activities that Apple supports by creating some untraceable, illegal currency.
They appear to be blocking BitCoin wallet apps, so yes they are.
Nope. Read it again.
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
It's funny how one of you trolls first claims that "Apple is abusing its market power in an attempt to corner a position in payments." but when it's pointed out that Apple allows multiple payment systems, just not ones that use bitcoin, you come back with an argument that 1) bitcoin is completely legal and accepted currency by the US, and 2) that all these other payment systems using legal tender are somehow engaging in nefarious activities that Apple supports by creating some untraceable, illegal currency.
Makes me want to see an XLS pop up. You know, to compliment Major League Soccer and as a throwback to the XFL. Have the game be played on a circular field and have the goalposts constantly moving around the edge of it. Don’t even keep them equidistant; have them right next to each other sometimes. That’d be neat, I think. It’s like that basketball variant, too, where the nets are surrounded by trampolines. That’s the way to go.
How come no one can get an interview with the creator of bitcoin?
How come the creator won't reveal is identity?
Sounds extremely shady to me.
The only thing that is keeping bit coin alive is rampant greed and the ability to buy illegal goods and services without being tracked
This article explains that 70% of bitcoins are owned by 100 accounts and that these early adapters can hit a kill switch that will allow these top owners to get their money but everyone else gets nothing. Pathetic. Fraud. Pos. greed. Get this crap out go here
Just to address 3 of your points:
Can you interview the inventor of banks or credit cards, cars or even boats? Does that make them less useful?
Heard of overstock.com, scan.co.uk, tigerdirect, Virgin Galactic, Tesla motors? Are they 'selling illegal goods and services without being tracked'?
70 individuals have more money than 50% OF THE REST OF THE WORLD - does that make money less useful?
Bitcoin is open source software (seriously, go to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin) - there are no kill switches, there's no way for 'the owners' to take control of everyone's bitcoins.
Educate yourself about it before you start just making shit up.
It's funny how one of you trolls first claims that "Apple is abusing its market power in an attempt to corner a position in payments." but when it's pointed out that Apple allows multiple payment systems, just not ones that use bitcoin, you come back with an argument that 1) bitcoin is completely legal and accepted currency by the US, and 2) that all these other payment systems using legal tender are somehow engaging in nefarious activities that Apple supports by creating some untraceable, illegal currency.
A 'troll' is not someone who just disagrees with you. You are also completely misrepresenting my argument, I believe maliciously.
Bitcoin is not illegal. It is accepted by shops and businesses across the US (see coinmap.org).
These other payment systems are not engaging in 'nefarious activities'. Where did I say this? What I did say is that these are all doing the same as bitcoin apps - enabling electronic transfer of value between individuals and businesses. So why are these allowed when bitcoin apps aren't?
A 'troll' is not someone who just disagrees with you. You are also completely misrepresenting my argument, I believe maliciously.
Bitcoin is not illegal. It is accepted by shops and businesses across the US (see coinmap.org).
These other payment systems are not engaging in 'nefarious activities'. Where did I say this? What I did say is that these are all doing the same as bitcoin apps - enabling electronic transfer of value between individuals and businesses. So why are these allowed when bitcoin apps aren't?
Although soon it will only be accepted at low-bob cigarette shops and other low life sundry's since it will only be on android.
And we all know how little $$ the droid dorks have.
Comments
All of the major platforms, such as the BSDs, Linux, OS X, and windows, have enabled users to program their own machines. With a basic knowledge of programming, users could write and execute their own code on their computers using freely available tools and official APIs. If you were dissatisfied with a piece of software or wanted some software that was not published for your platform, there was nothing stopping you from rolling up your sleeves, writing, and running your own implementation. Thus, if one regards smartphones as computers, then iOS is practically the only platform where a third party has the final say over what instructions the user can load on his computer.
You can in fact write any program you want and run on in your iPhone. You need a Mac, then just download Xcode (a free download), write the program, plug your iPhone in to the USB port and install it. It could be a porn or gambling app or anything and Xcode won't stop you. Where the restrictions come in is if you try to distribute the app through the App Store. So basically you can put whatever you want on your own phone, just not everybody else's.
That was then; this is now, yeah?
Silk Road was shut down in November 2013.
Total bitcoins mined as of November 2013: approximately 11,800,000
Total bit coins mined as of now: approximately 12,300,000
https://blockchain.info/charts/total-bitcoins
Total bitcoins seised from Silk Road in November 2013: 144,336
So, in November 2013, when Silk Road was shut down, Silk Road had 144,336/11,800,000 = 1.2% of all bit coins, not half.
QED
Hardly. The point becomes "is this what Apple is doing"? It doesn't immediately appear so, since Apple doesn't currently have a payments service, but the argument has become more of a theoretical one anyway. If Apple were to develop their own payments solution and also take steps to remove or hobble other payments services then that could viably be called an abuse of position.
Predictably, he has no come back for that.
When Apple gives no reason, haters project their deepest conspiracies and beliefs to fill the void.
I've never heard that Netscape was giving their browser away for free. What was their business model if the browser was free?
From Netscape’s IPO Documents, 1995:
"Netscape Communications Corporation provides a comprehensive line of client, server, and integrated applications software for communications and commerce on the Internet and private Internet Protocol (IP) networks. … Designed with enhanced security code, these software products provide the confidentiality required to execute financial transactions and to sell advertisements on the Internet and private IP networks.
….Incorporating both browser and server functions, the company’s integrated applications software programs are designed to provide enterprises with the capability to manage large-scale commercial sites on the Internet. Such applications enable these enterprises to conduct full-scale electronic commerce through a seamless system."
From an HBS IPO Case written about Netscape:
"….the majority [of revenues] were generated by one of Netscape’s three server products, Netscape Commerce Server. Revenues from Netscape’s server and integrated applications products were expected to increase as a percentage of overall revenues in the future.
Using the same “give away today and make money tomorrow” strategy that Andreessen’s team had used to popularize Mosaic, by the spring of 1995 Netscape had succeeded in capturing 75% of the Web browser market. Mosaic, under the guise of Spyglass, trailed far behind with 5% of the market. Having set the industry standard, Netscape was poised to make money by selling server software to companies that wanted marketing access to potential consumers."
It was only free for some, noncommercial and educational users, but others had to license it.
See above.
Bitcoin is the largest innovation in personal finance since the credit card. It is NOT illegal, and therefore claims that Apple removed it because it's currently not legal are just unjustified.
As for the claims that it's only used for drugs - less than 5% of bitcoin passed through the Silk Road. Yet nearly all US$100 bills have trace amounts of cocaine on them, HSBC laundered hundreds of BILLIONS of dollars for Mexican drug cartels, and I go buy heroin in any city using untraceable cash.
The hypocrisy in this thread is astounding - 'nobody is forcing you to have an iPhone, Apple can choose what goes on it.' 10 years ago Microsoft claimed the same defence for packaging IE into their operating system.
The IE thing was about bundling a single app almost everyone with a computer needs to use. This is about rejecting apps very few people use.
People can say the same with the boob jiggle apps - Apple has no reason to ban them and having a single store means no jiggling.
What's the expected outcome?
They either relax the rules and allow more apps into their store, which they are then seen as promoting or they allow users to install apps themselves.
They already allow users to install apps themselves if they are developers and they allow companies to setup developer servers to distribute their own apps outside of Apple's approval.
They've decided they don't want to promote boob jiggling and they don't want to promote bitcoin. They haven't said why but it's their choice. They provide alternative options for people who really need these apps.
Here's even more hypocrisy - Barclays Pingit, Yoyo, PayPal and others are all allowed apps. But an app which passes ownership of a alternative value token from one holder to another - nope, banned.
No particular point, just a (possibly) interesting (possible) fact.
Barclays Pingit, Yoyo, PayPal and others are all allowed apps.
Last I looked, they were all dealing with real currencies. Do any of them deal with bitcoins?
It's funny how one of you trolls first claims that "Apple is abusing its market power in an attempt to corner a position in payments." but when it's pointed out that Apple allows multiple payment systems, just not ones that use bitcoin, you come back with an argument that 1) bitcoin is completely legal and accepted currency by the US, and 2) that all these other payment systems using legal tender are somehow engaging in nefarious activities that Apple supports by creating some untraceable, illegal currency.
They appear to be blocking BitCoin wallet apps, so yes they are.
Nope. Read it again.
Makes me want to see an XLS pop up. You know, to compliment Major League Soccer and as a throwback to the XFL. Have the game be played on a circular field and have the goalposts constantly moving around the edge of it. Don’t even keep them equidistant; have them right next to each other sometimes. That’d be neat, I think. It’s like that basketball variant, too, where the nets are surrounded by trampolines. That’s the way to go.
They appear to be blocking BitCoin wallet apps, so yes they are.
Yes, Apple is blocking BitCoin wallet apps, but they're not stopping anyone from using a web app for any BitCoin activities.
How come no one can get an interview with the creator of bitcoin?
How come the creator won't reveal is identity?
Sounds extremely shady to me.
The only thing that is keeping bit coin alive is rampant greed and the ability to buy illegal goods and services without being tracked
This article explains that 70% of bitcoins are owned by 100 accounts and that these early adapters can hit a kill switch that will allow these top owners to get their money but everyone else gets nothing. Pathetic. Fraud. Pos. greed. Get this crap out go here
Just to address 3 of your points:
Can you interview the inventor of banks or credit cards, cars or even boats? Does that make them less useful?
Heard of overstock.com, scan.co.uk, tigerdirect, Virgin Galactic, Tesla motors? Are they 'selling illegal goods and services without being tracked'?
70 individuals have more money than 50% OF THE REST OF THE WORLD - does that make money less useful?
Bitcoin is open source software (seriously, go to https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin) - there are no kill switches, there's no way for 'the owners' to take control of everyone's bitcoins.
Educate yourself about it before you start just making shit up.
It's funny how one of you trolls first claims that "Apple is abusing its market power in an attempt to corner a position in payments." but when it's pointed out that Apple allows multiple payment systems, just not ones that use bitcoin, you come back with an argument that 1) bitcoin is completely legal and accepted currency by the US, and 2) that all these other payment systems using legal tender are somehow engaging in nefarious activities that Apple supports by creating some untraceable, illegal currency.
A 'troll' is not someone who just disagrees with you. You are also completely misrepresenting my argument, I believe maliciously.
Bitcoin is not illegal. It is accepted by shops and businesses across the US (see coinmap.org).
These other payment systems are not engaging in 'nefarious activities'. Where did I say this? What I did say is that these are all doing the same as bitcoin apps - enabling electronic transfer of value between individuals and businesses. So why are these allowed when bitcoin apps aren't?
A 'troll' is not someone who just disagrees with you. You are also completely misrepresenting my argument, I believe maliciously.
Bitcoin is not illegal. It is accepted by shops and businesses across the US (see coinmap.org).
These other payment systems are not engaging in 'nefarious activities'. Where did I say this? What I did say is that these are all doing the same as bitcoin apps - enabling electronic transfer of value between individuals and businesses. So why are these allowed when bitcoin apps aren't?
Although soon it will only be accepted at low-bob cigarette shops and other low life sundry's since it will only be on android.
And we all know how little $$ the droid dorks have.
Originally Posted by RogueDogRandy
And we all know how little $$ the droid dorks have. (only as much as their unwed whore mothers give them as allowance)
What a horrible person you must be.