redefiler

You guys are such soap opera divas.  Who cares if they wanted to remove it or not?   People liked it, it's being added back to the beta AND with improvements.

The pathetic conspiracy theorizing over a beta is embarrassing.  This is particularly true for sumergo who's got a whole fan fiction Jony Ive story and character motivation imagined as some sort of industrial design supervillian.

msantti said:

Wow.

A feature Apple denies us.

No thanks, I'll keep paying Apple to not use SD cards and totally f*%$ing ghetto mobile device features.  It's 2016, and the pro tip is shuffling a couple gigs of internal storage with Apple Music or a cloud storage service is much cheaper, faster and convienent than offloading music files onto stupid storage wafers.

justbobf said:

Sorry, Dude…

As much as I like Apple, their tax policy sucks. It's time to cough up, pay your bill and be a good citizen. 

Apple doesn't set tax policy anywhere.  They payed their exact fair bill, owed according to Irish law. 

So sorry 'dude', next time be a good citizen and try a little reading comprehension.

sog35 said:

cnocbui said:

When they are clearly lying about their profit - you betcha.

Give me a friken break. 
The profit calculation is based on Australian tax law. Go fix the tax law if its broken.  But don't be blaming Apple for following the law and taking advantage of it.

It's also funny how people think 'paying taxes' is somehow taking advantage of the law.  Paying any tax is a penalty, never an 'advantage'.

All this nonsense stems from class bigotry, the most prevalent form of bigotry in the 21st century.  Funny how it's condoned by a lot of the same people beating the bigotry drum at every other opportunity.  

volcan said:

macwise said:

So you're saying that congress can make a law which allows government to enter your home and search it anytime you buy a desk, and your argument would be that "Who is forcing you to buy a desk?" Are you really that daft?

No, just pointing out that there is no provision in the Constitution for any of what people are arguing as their rights. The articles are very literal.  Encryption is not mentioned in any way manner or form.

Actually it's Amendment 10 of the Bill of Rights that covers this.  In case you missed the entire gist of Constitution/Bill of Rights, these documents' sole purpose is limiting the rights of the government to only those specifically given by the people, and not the other way around.  It also means that all other rights  belong to the people, not the government.  So the right to decryption ain't the government's, because nowhere in the Constitution or Bill of Rights is the government granted that right.   Anybody intimating otherwise is completely wrong.

I don't blame you for this oversight, education and in return popular understanding is universally abysmal about the Constitution and Bill of Rights.  Shame because most of the key authors and supporters were some of the smartest, most prolific writers of their time, and explained almost point by point the exact thinking, and exact arguments used to craft these ideas.