longpath

tylersdad said:

vmarks said:

tylersdad said:

flydog said:

mobird said:

Is the Apple Chief Security Officer Thomas Moyer still employed at Apple?

Why wouldn't he be?  Did he steal something from Apple?  Jerk off in his office? Not show up for work?   There's nothing here to suggest he committed any misconduct while in the scope of his employment. 

He attempted to bribe a public official. I can't think of a single company that would allow someone to stay on their roster of employees after that. 

According to https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/23/apple-security-chief-accused-of-bribing-officers-in-exchange-for-gun-permits.html Apple found nothing wrong.

“We expect all of our employees to conduct themselves with integrity. After learning of the allegations, we conducted a thorough internal investigation and found no wrongdoing,” an Apple spokesperson said in a statement.

The mind boggles at how Apple managed to clear them, while a Grand Jury chose to indict. If they are found guilty will Apple change their mind? I don't see how they could at this point, but this just looks like Apple protecting Apple employees who have clearly done wrong. 

Bribing a public official is wrong. But Apple is somehow totally fine with that? 

You are jumping multiple conclusions. The first u in a that the grand jury wasn’t manipulated by the prosecution in order to prepare a patsy at trial. If you know anything about Grand Jury operation, you should understand the obvious conflict of interest prosecution faces when seeking an indictment against law enforcement, whether for corruption of criminal negligence, such as the negligent discharge that killed sleeping 7 year old Aiyana Stanley-Jones.

Your second assumption is that Apple came to the wrong conclusion and that their employee wasn’t merely a victim of an extortion scheme.

nikon1 said:

“ Jensen reportedly managed to get Moyer to promise that Apple would donate 200 iPads, worth about $70,000, to the Sheriff's Office. Undersheriff sung also extracted from Chadha, the insurance broker, a "promise of $6,000 worth of luxury box seat tickets to a San Jose Sharks hockey game."

In California, it is illegal to carry a concealed firearm without a CCW license that can cost between $200 and $400.

So these 2 CLOWNS (Moyer & Chadha) risked their careers and wanted to avoid paying between $200 & $400 to legitimately get their CCW legally?  They should be imprisioned for pure greed and stupidity.

What a pair of Morons!

No, your comprehension of the situation is the lacking piece. They weren’t trying to skirt fees. Approval of application for a CCW is entirely at the whim of the official. It’s an inherently racist and classist process where even if you have money, a spotless record, have exemplary relevant skills, etc., you can still be turned down, without cause. I can only presume you don’t have a CCW and have no concept of the difference between a shall issue and a may issue state.

marsorry said:

Unbelievable, happens to the best of them I suppose. Wouldn’t it have been cheaper and safer to just get a permit???

You completely misunderstood. No, it wouldn’t be cheaper and safer “just to get a permit”. They were trying to get a permit; but such is the case for all “may issue” states, that it is entirely up to the whim of one or more officials, no matter how perfectly you dot your I’s and cross your T’s. I can only assume you don’t have a CCW and have zero concept of what’s involved, especially in a state like California with decades of racist gun control laws (look up the Mulford Act). Your statement suggests that you honestly don’t understand that applying for the permit you said he should have applied for is what was happening when the deputy and sheriff looked for extras. 

I’m more interested in whether Apple will take this wake up call, and take steps to prevent such a blunder with the forthcoming Apple Silicon systems.

MacPro said:

That self-healing is surely not limited to a foldable device or is it the 'straightening out' after being folded that is part of that process?

If I follow their intent correctly, it would the use of a thermo-softening elastomer (elastic polymer), which, as pointed out in the latter portion of the article is, applicable to “a computing device such as a laptop computer," through phones, and even "a smaller device such as a wrist-watch device, a pendant device, a wearable or miniature device of other types." The question is whether the aggregate ability to heal is better in a particular application than using a harder material that resists the scratching altogether. As this isn’t viable in a flexible component, this is how they came up with it. That being said, if the implemented version proves to be superior to a hard coating in dealing with normal wear & tear, then I could see this replacing hard coatings in some applications, even though the coated components may not need to flex. Indeed, I could envision such technology implemented in Project Titan, for windshields, lamp covers (headlights & signals), camera covers for self driving technology, and even for paint, with the advantage in that last scenario that a proper implementation would restore the paint while the car warmed in the sun during the warmer half of the year.