- Last Active
The EU already has a tax based on revenue. It's called VAT (Value Added Tax).
In addition, the European Commission does not have the right to raise taxes. That privilege is - for the time being - reserved to the sovereign treasuries of the EU member states.
This is a case of the EU massively overstepping its competencies and a Commission that, yet again, acts without any democratic mandate.
I'm very glad that the UK has voted to kick it to the kerb.
Total BS I picked up a brand-new 6Plus 2 weeks ago and with in one day had screen Flickr. Just went back this weekend and replaced it. Apple will never own up for anything It's now in thier culture
This would most likely only affect people who have 'cut the cord' and no longer receive broadcast signals via aerials, satellite or cable and thus think they don't need to pay the mandatory UK TV Licence fee. Since watching any form of live-broadcast TV, however it's delivered, including online, requires a TV licence, most of the people inconvenienced by this will likely not have much of a leg to stand on to complain.
GeorgeBMac said:But, instead of removing the infectious from our streets, businesses and schools, we were told to huddle in our homes while the virus raged outside our doors.The whole point of the app is to identify exposure so that the right people 'huddle'. Testing only works if you have a continuous daily testing regime for absolutely everyone. Tracing only works if people can reliably identify who their contacts are. Since no country that calls itself even remotely free can ever hope to achieve that, the app provided a valuable tool for people to be informed of their risk of exposure. It's entirely reasonable to carry out such a statistical exercise to identify the lives saved as a result of people knowing they need to 'huddle' indoors.
OutdoorAppDeveloper said:I am tired of Apple standing on the neck of the entire computer industry.
There were some pretty obvious and audible less-than-impressed reactions to the price of the stand from the audience - clearly they expected it to be included in the price of the monitor and to be told that you have to pay extra - for either the stand or the VESA adaptor as its alternative seems like something of a slap in the face. I don't suppose Apple would have expected that reaction from what would otherwise be expected to be die-hard fans.
Personally 32" isn't remotely big enough for that price - I would have preferred a screen at least 43" and preferably curved for the viewer to sit in the sweet spot to make it really immersive. Certainly the resolution of the screen is utterly pointless at that small size - nobody is ever going to be able to make full use of it: nobody's eyes are that good.
I'm going to stick with my dual 4K 43" setup - together they cost about £1500. Whether I buy the Mac Pro itself is down to budget, although I probably will as it definitely has the grunt to do what I need it to do (my 2013 Mac Pro is now running out of steam, 5 years on). The price of the computer is reasonable considering how long it will likely last, but the screens... as beautiful as the engineering is, I couldn't possibly use them.