- Last Active
pslice said:This is plainly in response to Apple’s privacy efforts. DOJ, Barr dummies, goes after anything that doesn’t jump to Trump’s tune. Sickening.
DOJ has been looking at tech for years, going back to 2013. There has been a ton of public interest and concern about Apple, Facebook, Google and Amazon. It's an issue that crosses party lines, with Trump's DOJ taking a closer look, right through Elizabeth Warren's statements about breaking up Amazon. Whether or not they find violations is anyone's guess.
DAalseth said:Part of the problem is the murky world of who owns what. Somebody writes a song. They own it. They let someone record the song. Do they still own it, or the artist, or the record label? Depends on the contract and sometimes even the people involved don't know. I got flagged on a YouTube video once. I had used a piece of Royalty Free, Public Domain Creative Commons music. It turned out that the musician had the rights to his performance, but not to the original piece he had performed. I had to reedit the video to remove the background music. The theatres I work at buys the rights to the plays and music we put on. We can use it inside the theatre, but we are forbidden from recording it even for our private use, or even doing a live performance of a vignette outside the theatre. It's a bloody minefield.
It is, indeed. I'm a music educator. Basically everything we do is technically a violation of copyright. There are myriad standards for what is allowed under Fair Use, as well as grey areas where it depends who you ask. It often comes down to a common sense judgement of "are we doing the right thing?" or "what is the likelihood anyone would be sued for this? You can't ask copyright attorneys...they'll tell you everything is illegal. At one point, the RIAA took the legal position that the act of importing a CD to a computer was a violation. As district and state festivals, you have to have the physical band/chorus arrangements sitting on the stage if you use temporary copies (so students don't destroy originals).
dysamoria said:The conflict of interest that has me even more concerned is that this is happening under the Trump administration. I don’t see this as remotely believably aimed at fixing anticompetitive practices and helping consumers. I suspect it is the targeting of entities that are perceived as political opponents. The tech giants seem to lean left (only because tech tends to lean toward science and science tends to appear to have a left-leaning political bias) AND they also have power (money is power and information technology is power). That’s a threat to the authoritarian-leaning current administration.
Under another administration, I’d be in support of this attempt at regulation. This administration is explicitly against regulation. This situation therefore has the odor of ulterior motivation.
You can suspect whatever you want, but there is no evidence it's true. Now, on the other hand, the Obama administration provably targeted political opponents with the IRS. They targeted journalists. They spied on Sheryl Atkinson, and tried to criminally pursue James Rosen. They also used intelligence agencies and the State department to spy on, frame, and attempt to remove the duly-elected President. This stuff actually and provably happened. Right now, your position seems to be that you don't trust Orange Man, so his entire administration must be corrupt and can't be trusted to even look at these matters fairly.
That position doesn't make sense, no matter what you think of the Orange Man. Under whose administration did these probes really get moving? Hint: It wasn't Obama. It was under Trump and his new AG. Moreover, Trump has worked with Cook, far more than has been publicized. True, he goes after Bezos, but that's presumably more about WaPo.
A few things. First, this lawsuit has a snowball’s chance in hell. Challenging the NDAA? Even the most liberal districts and circuits take a dim view of challenging legislated national security policies. The other ban is an executive order, which more liberal courts have been fond of blocking under Trump. The thing is, he’s using a duly-passed law that gives him the authority to declare emergencies. Third, Huawei doesn’t have much political sympathy. Even Schumer has stood behind Trump on China on general.
Finally, the skeptics of these bans don’t seem to understand this isn’t necessarily about security risks right now (spyware, spying hardware) or “stolen” technology. This is about Huawei being a major player in 5G, one that could end up with a strong hardware footprint in our markets. The problem with that is the relationship between the communist Chinese government and their corporations. You could end up with an oppressive, somewhat aggressive and expansionist regime basically controlling a big portion of the Internet and dominating next gen wireless. Believe me even I tell you...we don’t want that.
macplusplus said:He was using it on his lap. Those computers are called “lap-top” metaphorically, not literally. Laptop doesn’t mean that it is to be used on someone’s lap or belly. That model has tiny air intakes on left and right bottom borders. If those are obstructed and the heat outlet below the hinge is also obstructed (very common case when using on the lap), I wish I am wrong but the unusually excessive heat may harm vulnerable parts such as battery. I am rather inclined to find a user error in that incident instead of an error in Apple’s quality control.
Dude...you are claiming you can't use a laptop on your lap? That's absurd. I've used Apple laptops for 20 years. I've had ones that get so hot, you need a cooling pad to have it on your lap. Unless you're surrounding it with thermal blankets, there is no way it's going to catch on fire without some type of malfunction. It could be the charger, damage to the battery, manufacturing defect, etc. It's not that it was on his friggin lap.
This entire thing is a dog and pony show. It’s a red herring. The NSA and intelligence agencies monitor ALL electronic and telephonic communication. I’m sure it’s accurate they aren’t using the program anymore. They just have another program by another name. This is been going on for decades. I’m not saying it’s right, I’m just acknowledging the truth.
"We appreciate that customers are more concerned than ever about the performance and safety of batteries in their mobile devices," Apple said in a statement.
ARRRGGGGGH. That statement is like nails on a chalkboard. Stop with the passive-aggressive statements, corporate America. Grow a pair. Everyone knows these reports are bullshit.
Just come out and say it: After investigation, Apple has determined that the affected devices suffered external damage prior to any malfunction. There was no defect in design or materials that caused the incidents in question.
focuspuller said:mac_128 said:this guys is dangerous. For those who have forgotten, he essentially committed treason by co-authoring the letter telling Iran that any deal they struck with President would be reversed by congress as soon Obama leaves office.