bill_t_cat

StrangeDays said:

For this to be true, there has to be no viable market alternatives. Yet iOS is not the majority market share, as Android provides a wide open plain of alternatives -- multiple app stores, as well as side-loading. There is inarguably room there for this supposed stifled innovation to thrive. 

Apple cannot have a monopoly on their own store, no more than McDonald's has a monopoly on their own store & menu by not allowing Whoppers, or sushi vendors, etc...

well said ... someone who actually understands what a monopoly means.

it's really no different than perdue selling chicken to price chopper, who then marks it up to sell to the end user. if you want to make more money on your app, charge more money. if you price yourself out of the market, lower your price. perdue depends on various grocery stores to sell their products the same as app developers rely on multiple app stores to sell their products.

additionally, facebook's very existence stifles innovation, competition, intelligence and rational discourse and provides absolutely no discernible benefit.

apple is by no means perfect nor are they a benevolent benefactor ... rather, they are a capitalist entity whose purpose is to provide a safe and usable product to their end users while satisfying their stockholders. given the tens of thousands of apps on the app store, the entry fee is obviously not onerous. and, if your app is really great and really useful, people will buy it regardless of the price.

DAalseth said:

dominikhoffmann said:

I am a conservative and a enthusiastic Trump supporter. However, weakening encryption is such a bad idea. I am also a pro-lifer who has been an activist with over the past differing levels of involvement. I shudder to think of a time, when today’s Antifa comes to power and then exploits weakened encryption to “enforce the law” against someone like me who engages in legitimate activities, civil disobedience or similar..

Well I am strongly progressive, vehemently anti Trump, vocally pro choice, and proud to say I am sympathetic with and have marched alongside Antifa.

But I agree with you about the necessity of strong encryption. Personal liberty is dependant on strong encryption. Privacy is the foundation of the Bill of Rights and in the 21st century privacy is dependant on strong encryption. 

What the original poster doesn't seem to get is that it is Antifa, not the current president* nor any other Republican, who would defend to the death their right to be pro-life or an activist or whatever they choose to be. Anti-fascist (Antifa) at this point in our country's history, is almost synonymous with anti-Republican ... or at the very least, anti-Trump Republican. Somehow, Trump supporters have blinded themselves to this little tidbit.

That's not to say that President Obama didn't overreach with his administration's demands for access to encrypted data, but by and large, it is generally Repubs who are for weakening encryption and decreasing personal privacy and Dems who are for maintaining encryption and increasing personal privacy. Yes, there is plentiful data supporting this stance and, no, one's personal belief in the veracity of that statement does not change the larger sample results.

Once there is a backdoor, nobody will be safe ... except for the politicians.