ericthehalfbee

Sope-on-a-rope still spouting his usual bullshit.

Why no antitrust case against the banks that refuse to add their cards to Apple Pay? They are reducing my personal security regarding payments by not allowing me to use Apple Pay. This is the same as a bank saying we only allow our cards to work on certain payment terminals. If a store uses that terminal then you can’t use your card there.

As to the companies that think they have a right to access iPhone hardware/software for their own use, I have a question. Should I be allowed to create a bank card that duplicates normal bank cards but adds extra security features? After all, I’m just making something compatible with the banks own card. Banks should have any issue with someone making “compatible” cards that use the number I already have assigned to me.


We know why this is happening. The EU is targeting the Big 5 US tech companies because their own tech industry is a failure. So instead of passing laws that affect everyone equally (targeting a specific behavior) they’re making oddly worded rules that only affect the Big Five but carefully avoid their own home-grown companies.

Another example that shows the EU is a joke.

Why no complaints about banks withholding their cards from iPhones? Why can they refuse to let customers add their bank card to the iPhone (and enjoy increased security/reduced fraud) yet complain that Apple won’t allow Apps access to NFC?

Waiting for the inevitable antitrust lawsuit.

Move To iOS can transfer your message history since Android can grant permission to read SMS. However, Switch to Android can’t copy iMessages to Android because Apple has no such permission to grant access.

Therefore, Apple preventing access to iMessage via permissions is just another attempt by Apple to make it difficult to switch.

/s

I don’t know about the US, but in Canada you need to file in a reasonable time if you feel any condition of your employment is unjust (like your employer changing the terms of your contract or salary).

If you don’t raise the issue within this “reasonable time” then you are said to have implicitly accepted the terms of your employment.

How can someone work for 8 years decide almost 4 years after they leave a company that they weren’t happy with the terms of their employment?

crowley said:

Whatever the outcome, Apple are nickel and diming at the expense of their own employees.  Just pay your low wage workers weekly ffs.

Dumbest take in all this.

How is Apple “nickel and diming”? Employees are paid their full wages. 

Imagine filing a lawsuit that states you want to pay your “insert monthly bill here” weekly, instead of monthly, because paying a large amount once a month is strenuous and you want to break it up into weekly payments, even though the dollar amount remains the same.

It is said Ramos is injured by the failure to pay wages weekly because "she was temporarily deprived of money owed to her," and that she "lost the time value of that money." 

Fuck off with this bullshit. What are you, a world-class day trader that earns massive dividends on every dollar you make? You’re missing out on that big deal because you had to wait an extra week for your ‘full’ paycheque?

Put another way, bills are due every month. By hanging on to money for a month you’re depriving the company you owe money of the time & value of that money by waiting an entire month to pay them.