slow n easy

F_Kent_D said:

They’re opposing the bill because it’s full of garbage. Besides, it’s not being called a climate change bill it’s being called an infrastructure bill, get the topic of the article correct. It doesn’t do what it claims it will and it’s far more than $3.5T at the end of the day. Good for them. A Libtard whoever Senator or whatever he is threw a page in that lays out groundwork for our government to bankrupt any business that doesn’t follow Biden’s vaccination mandate by fining any company $700,000/employee that’s not vaccinated. That’s asinine! How is this infrastructure? How does this help our “Roads and bridges”? I call good on them and I call BS on this pork filled bill. 

They did get the topic of the article correct. The article was about the climate change aspect of the bill and a very big part of the bill does have to do with climate change. Obviously AppleInsider is going to focus on the climate change part of the bill because Apple itself is focused on climate change. There is nothing wrong with this article. F Kent D however, is putting out misinformation. There is no requirement for all workers in every business to get vaccinated as you have implied. The federal requirement is for government workers and government contractors and all medical facilities that take Medicare and Medicaid. And with all businesses that employ over a hundred people, you have the option to not be vaccinated and just be tested instead. So you are way over exaggerating the situation. Plus you are also conflating the vaccine mandate with the reconciliation bill. Those are two completely separate things. Plus you are also conflating the reconciliation bill with the infrastructure bill. Those are also two separate bills.

David H Dennis said:

Hold on, the 12 Pro Max had a 5x zoom and the new one has only 3x?  That can’t be right …

The 12 Pro has a 2X optical zoom and the 12 Pro Max has a 2.5X optical zoom.

factsonly said:

DAalseth said:

's not like they had a choice.

They always have a choice… but they choose political and monetary profit over freedom of speech. 

Well, that political speech wouldn’t have lasted very long. If they refused to remove it, then they would have been forced out of the country.

Japhey said:

entropys said:

That’s pretty rich coming from the CEO of one of the big four banks.

"It is analogous to imagine a world today where, on your Apple phone, the only person that could determine which carrier you used is Apple," he continued.

I don’t think that is a meaningful analogy. Besides, I seem to remember certain banks wanting to collude in not adopting Apple Pay and force customers to only use their own version, which of course wasn’t as good.  

There were a couple different ones, but the only one I can think of right now is CurrentC. The market spoke and it crashed and burned. It’s a ridiculous analogy. 

No, you are thinking of something else. Current C was a bunch of retailers in the U.S. getting together and forming a competitor to Apple Pay and it was headed by Walmart and Best Buy. Japhey was referring to something that was going on specifically in Australia where the big banks were trying to prevent Apple Pay from being used in that country.

timusca said:

neilm said:

Interesting. The obvious question is this: how inefficient is it?

No doubt the answer is "extremely". Wireless charging gets more inefficient the further the device is from the coils, which makes this inefficient by design.

I think that is jumping to conclusions. You can’t charge your iPhone directly on the device itself or it sounds like you would wreck your iPhone. You have to have a piece of wood or plastic in between the device and the iPhone by design. So I wouldn’t jump to the conclusion that it’s inefficient. 

I’m not sure I would like this design, though, because it has to line up perfectly in order to charge. That is why I felt so frustrated with my Belkin charger and why I feel like MagSafe is a game changer for me. I will never again buy a non MagSafe charger.