Flytrap

lkrupp said:

Seems reasonable that porn filters should be automatic by default. Those who wish to view such material can opt-in if they choose I hope. Leave it to the Mormons to come with this.

There is the question pertaining to the legal definition of what is "porn"

Justice Potter Stewart's concurrence in Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184 (1964) comes to mind here: "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description [pornographic]; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But, I know it when I see it"

Simply saying "I know it when I see it" is not going to cut the constitutionality mustard and will render this bill quite unenforceable.

iOS_Guy80 said:

Why does not Apple by ARM?

From the article:
"SoftBank, the current Japanese owner of ARM, was said to have approached Apple to discuss a takeover of the chip design firm in 2020. Apple, reportedly, wasn't interested in the acquisition due to antitrust concerns -- despite the reliance of Apple Silicon on Arm technology."

alanh said:

What is a fiat currency?

Fiat means "by arbitrary order or decree," which is derived from the original Latin meaning "let it be done."

Fiat Money or currency, therefore, is money that has been created by arbitrary government order or decree, but has no intrinsic value in and of itself - i.e. it is not pegged to or backed any thing of real value such as silver, gold, camels, cows or even land. This is what allows governments to simply print as much money as they want or need, because they do not need to back it with something real, like silver or gold.

We, as citizens, accept the value of Fiat Money we are told by the government for as long as we have confidence that it will remain exchangeable with other citizens for something of close to that value over a given period of time. Once that confidence starts to waver for enough citizens in the population, citizens being asked to accept and hold Fiat Money for a period of time in exchange for something of real value at the present time (such as a car, milk, land, etc.), start to hedge their bets, by asking for a little bit more to cover their perceived risk of loss of value at some point in the future (i.e. they start devaluing the value of the Fiat Money). The opposite happens when enough citizens start to worry that there may be a future shortage or limited ability to access more Fiat Money or that it may get harder in future to convince people of the value of the items they are selling (e.g. car, horse, etc.) than it is today.

I think that this is great... it removes one more internet component from being tracked or geocoded back to me. It reduces my surface area or exposed data, at least to web sites that Google's Safe Browsing feature has flagged as fraudulent. But at some point we need to ask:

• who voted and appointed Google as the decider of which site is fraudulent and which is not?
• who is keeping an eye on what happens to all that data accumulating on Apple's proxy servers?
• what happens in 10 years time when there is new leadership at the helm at Apple with a different commitment to privacy?
• while I do trust Apple's commitment to privacy... who appointed them to be the decider of who gets my data and who does not?

DAalseth said:

You see, this is the kind of crap that will get Apple in trouble. 

Just about every retail chain does this: Walmart, Target, Macy's, Walgreens, Home Depot, Best Buy, Verizon, AT&T, Nordstrom, etc.

What many people do not realise is that most large retailers make a significant amount of money from the interest earned on receipts from sales before they have to pay their suppliers. If you have ever sat with the buyers from any of these large retailers, you would be shocked at the terms that they are able to extract from suppliers desperate to get their goods onto their store shelves.