larryjw

No amount of harm can ever come from not being able to play a video game.

GeorgeBMac said:

According to Reuters, Apple got blasted for its App Store policies in "terse" exchanges between the judge and Apple's lawyer:

"During a terse exchange with Apple counsel Richard Doren at a hearing on Monday, the judge said she saw “no competition” to Apple’s App Store on the iPhone.

“The question is, without competition, where does the 30% (App Store commission) come from? Why isn’t it 10? 20? How is the consumer benefiting?” she asked.

Doren replied that consumers had choices when deciding to buy an Android device or an iPhone.

“The competition is in the foremarket,” he said, reiterating an argument that has been central to Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook’s defense during Congressional antitrust hearings.

Gonzalez Rogers replied that there was “plenty of economic theory” to show that switching brands imposed costs on consumers.

She at one point muted Doren in the virtual proceedings."

Essentially the judge called Bull on what she sees as Apple's bullshit contention that the iPhone has not created a monopolistic market that it exploits with the App Store.

My personal thoughts on it are that Apple needs to go beyond (or drop) its claim that it has not created any sort of monopoly and iPhone users are free to go over to Android and claim (correctly) that the Apple Store is an integral part of what makes the iPhone private, secure and stable.

If the Reuter’s quote from the judge was accurate, she just took herself out of the proceeding. This was not a hearing on the merits, so she went outside of the facts necessary to make a TRO decision. 

mtlion2020 said:

MacPro said:

The rich that fell for a 'get richer' pyramid scheme, bitcoin scams, Wells Fargo's fake accounts and so on are given headlines but not an elderly widow ripped off by a roofing company that goes out of business with her life savings and no work is done only to start up again a few weeks later in another State. This and hundreds of similar schemes go on every day and no one seems to give a damn.

Scammers are truly the lowest of the low whatever the scheme they employ. Scamming the elderly, the poor, single moms on the bread line, and so on should carry far higher penalties. I am just not sure what the punishment should be, if only there was some way to make them have to walk in their victims' shoes. At the very least they should have to work for a decade in service to their victims in some way, prison is not punishment enough and doesn't help their victims./rant

I think...HOPE....something karma-wise screws up their devious lives and the taken be compensated in someway.
seems to me the mover and shakers in our world are more worried about a movie being downloaded that a senior sucked out of their saving for not being sharp anymore.

I was in the apartment of some seniors, recently moved from their home in the neighborhood to this senior center. While there, they received a phone call. The husband answered and it became clear that he was on a elder-scam call. He was being asked to go to the local chain pharmacy and wire-transfer funds to the caller -- $5000.

Putting my attorney hat on, I began to counsel them that this was a scam call. They fought my counsel that the government, at least then, doesn't make telephone threats to pay back taxes to avoid arrest. In particular, I could not get them to accept that it was a scam, and once they understood, I could not get them to ask the questions to gather evidence that might be useful for later prosecution. This elderly couple, in their prime, were highly accomplished individuals but as seniors, had lost whatever cognitive ability was required to protect themselves. 

Friends of mine, and a couple who are both elderly emeritus professors, were subject to elder-scam, being asked to wire-transfer money to their grandchild, went through all the steps, but were stopped by their son who by accident caught wind of it. (They made the wise decision to give their son say over their finances). 

I had the experience of sitting on a Federal Grand Jury wherein such actions were finally being prosecuted and listen to the evidence, and how easy it is to scam people in general, not just the elderly. 

My less direct experience recently is that many of a much younger age, seem to suffer from similar cognitive failures that beset these elderly couples. Threats work: the ability to stand up to such behavior is absent. "Man-ing up" seems lacking. 

mtriviso said:

Sigh. Just open the movie theaters. There's nothing like watching a movie in a massive IMAX 3D theater. If people are frightened they might get the rona, then just stay at home. Please, just let the rest of us who are unafraid enjoy what our acting troupes have to offer in the milieu to which we have become accustomed. 

Frightened? Maybe informed. My grandparents and parents were WWI and WWII generations. And I'm a boomer pre-vaccine and pre-antibiotics. We know disease and pandemics first hand. 

In reviewing census data for genealogy I would run across families asked how many children did you have? 14. How many still living? 4. My grandparents lost young siblings  and cousins to disease. STDs were a big problem among girls and guys in uniform stateside during WWII -- my mother's job was to help treat them. So was TB -- sanitariums built across the nation to confine them. Nobody thought it was bravery to not care if you came down with these diseases. Certainly, there was sympathy sometimes, but getting sick and not pulling your weight was morally reprehensible. 

Being brave by ignoring a disease. My father's WWII diary mentions some other GI's getting sick -- great way to stay behind for some R&R while others did the fighting for you. Malingering was a problem and pissed off others pulling their weight. 

And I had the pleasure of contracting polio during the 50's epidemic. It was no fun. 

So, coming down with Covid-19 when you are fortunate enough to be able to take precautions is really morally reprehensible -- not willing to pull your weight. 

Why use of Mac for Windows when you can buy a new PC for, what is it now, $200?