redraider11

About

Banned
Username
redraider11
Joined
Visits
56
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
374
Badges
1
Posts
186
  • Apple CEO Tim Cook says globalization is 'great for the world' in China speech

    georgie01 said:
    I see the benefits of globalisation but can't support Cook on it. It creates greater potential for negative global consequences, things in our arrogance we assume won't happen. Even the shipping of bees around the US to pollinate crops makes me nervous—that seems like a disaster waiting to happen (why not develop a sustainable crop variety to encourage bee population year round?). Also, through globalisation there is a reduction in the uniqueness of different cultures, and I think it's arrogant to assume those losses are inconsequential.
    There are also consequences of non-globalization, as we see with the slowly sinking ship of the British economy.

    And there are even dangers in democracy, if the electorate is ignorant and uncommitted to the principles of that form of government, as we saw in Egypt and other Arab Spring disasters, and we may be seeing in the US right now.
    The US is NOT a Democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic. But you are correct in that our electorate, on both sides, seem uncommitted to preserving the Constitution as it was written and try to interpret it in their own ways which is very bad. 
    tallest skilSpamSandwich
  • Facebook 'Trending' fights fake news on desktop & iPhone, displays trusted publisher & sum...

    chasm said:
    I think this is generally a good idea. It gives people more reliable points of reference, but doesn't abridge anyone's rights -- you can still get your freshly made-up fake news if that's what you want. For myself, once the election got going I decided to stop reposting anything from sites I've never heard of, or with obviously click-baity headlines, and to stick with mostly news sources that have, you know, won at least one Pulitzer. I also make sure to actually read anything I'm reposting first -- boy did that cut out a lot of stuff I used to post. My last rule was that if it didn't meet the criteria above, **even if I agree with the political view or wanted to believe it was true** -- I didn't post it until one of the trustworthy sources verified it. Thus far this is working out well, and has as a byproduct eliminated most arguments, since anyone rebutting the share must come up with a better source than what I used. :)
    I don't think it's necessary at all. You yourself said you stopped reposting stories from sources you didnt trust, so why do we need Facebook to do this for us? People should be getting their news from multiple sources and generating their own informed opinions. I think it's a dangerous path to start heading down where maybe in the future sources that Facebook doesn't agree with can start getting left out.

    Nevertheless it's Facebook's platform and they aren't limited by the First Amendment so they can inevitability do what they want. I guess if enough people requested it then they're just giving the people what they want. 
    wonkothesane
  • Apple to oppose 'Right to Repair' legislation in Nebraska, report says

    paxman said:
    I must be missing something here because you can find any part you need to fix an iPhone on Ebay for cheap. iFixIt has tutorials for most of it.

    Nothing is stopping you from fixing your phone (or having someone else do it) right now!

    As for the modern car? I have a Porsche that has it's own coding tools et al, but I just bought a code reader and software off of Ebay for $35. So nothing is stopping me from recoding things as I see fit.

    Why does there need to be a law for this?
    I agree with you - it is all doable now and people do it. There are a thousand small shops that can repair much of common damage on iPhones and all sorts of other glued and sealed or otherwise difficult to get at products. But companies actively work to limit user repairability. It is not just about iPhones, but toasters and vacuum cleaners etc, too. A law requiring companies to go out of their way too make products user repairable is required because repairing 'stuff' is unnecessarily difficult. I don't think it is a technical issue as much as a philosophical one and for that reason 'business' is unfit to make it.
    Why don't you instead go and buy products that are easy to repair yourself instead of requiring the government to make a law to FORCE companies to make their products repairable. Use the Free Market and vote with your wallet. You nanny state dems are so unbelievable leaning on government force, which is immoral, instead of just supporting other companies or creating a product yourself. If you don't like what a certain manufacture has to offer THEN DON'T BUY IT. Apple isn't holding a gun to your head to buy their products, but you're perfectly willing to hold a gun to theirs (literally) to force them to comply with your ideology? This is capatilism, not facism. 
    Rayz2016
  • Wireless charging and new glass casing will require heat compensation in Apple's 'iPhone X...

    sog35 said:
    Wireless charging is a huge, big, waste of time, IMO.

    But I'll trust Tim Cook's judgement in the end.

    I mean, how much effort is it to plug my iPhone? 1 second?
    I don't understand how someone can be so unimaginative and against technological progress, but ok. 

    I think it would be amazing to be able to lay my phone down anywhere on my nightstand, desk, or in my car and just have it start charging without having to fumble around for a cable. This is assuming it works over a reasonable distance rather than a charging pad. 

    Everything else is wireless, and if we can make charging work, then why not that too? I guess you were against wireless syncing and Bluetooth back in the day as well though. 
    schlackcornchip
  • Lyft for iPhone adds Calendar destinations, surges on App Store following 'DeleteUber' cam...

    Don't really care either way and will still use uber, but glad people finally starting to understand how the free market is supposed to work rather then run to mommy and daddy (aka the government) and have them impose regulations and laws to force them to comply. If you don't like something then don't use it. 
    mike1