Last Active
  • Huawei CFO arrest in Canada could affect iPhone tariffs if US-China trade talks sour

    tzeshan said:
    DAalseth said:
    Something I don't understand. The US may be pissed with the company for violating the US law. They have the right to block export to the company, and the import and sale of the companies products into the US. To even lay fines on the company and seize its assets in the US.
    But how can they look at criminally charging a Chinese citizen who works for a Chinese company that is doing business in China?
    Does this mean that Saudi Arabia could demand my extradition for violating their Apostasy laws?
    Could Russia demand my extradition for slandering Putin and his criminal regime?
    The US has a beef with the company, but why would they have any jurisdiction for criminal charges?
    Yes, they could, but the US would not be supporting/complying with that decision. Canada, on the other hand, is in agreement with the US on trade wars. In short - Very poorly thought out example that you made here. If you are a Chinese national that breaks US laws by selling illegal products in the US, my advice to you would be - DO NOT GO to the countries where extradiction laws could create legal problems for you. Just the same way - do not fly via Saudi airports, if you break Saudi laws...  
    Your example is not challenging. I have a better one if you can tolerate. China banned sales of weapons to Taiwan because Taiwan is a province of China. Can China arrest US weapon producer employees for selling weapons to Taiwan? 
    Well...first off, although China likes to say that Taiwan is a province of the PRC, over 23 MILLION Taiwanese disagree with you.  They are a sovereign nation with ambiguous recognition internationally. Taiwan has been separate for decades.  So your example is a poor one.  The US routinely sells to Taiwanese government and companies.  It’s really not the same thing. 
    A better example would be if the US was selling to Tibet or the Uighurs after china had specifically, and with reason, put blocks in place.
  • Apple Watch surges to top of global wearables market with 'market-beating growth'

    No, they should have their watch on their wrists to track their sleep. It's an important function.
    I can’t sleep with a watch on, so it charges at night.  My significant other sleeps with the Apple Watch but just charges it when showering/getting ready for work.  More than enough time daily to recharge the watch and keep it going.

    I had a pebble back in the day and hated it becuase of the battery.  The battery last around 5 days, but it was infrequent enough that I often forgot to charge it so it would die on me. Yes I know...my fault, but charming nightly on the Apple Watch is routine so it works better for me.  
  • Apple, other tech companies decry North Carolina anti-LGBT law

    Just curious 99secondkox2 said:
    The preservation of privacy and morals are paramount here. 

    Mono woman or young girl should ever have to see a mans penis in a ladies restroom. EVER. 

    and no man should have to deal with the flip side. 

    Let's get real here. 

    No matter what you "identify" as, male and female are as physically descriptive as can be. Heck we even have male and female connectors in engineering. 

    So identify to hear hearts content. But go to the male restroom if you are male. 


    Mono father should have to worry about some dude who thinks he's a girl taking a leak next to his daughter or wife. 

    Enough is snough. And shame on Apple and others for getting involved. 

    Tim wants to be with other dudes. Ok. That's his prerogative. But I bet he uses the right bathroom for crying out loud. 
    Just out of curiosity...why are you staring at dudes penis in the bathroom?  The reason I ask is that I've been using the mens room all my life and I've never seen a man's penis in the restroom.  An women restrooms have stalls.  There isn't much chance of any female running into a random penis if a MTF transgender person uses the women's restroom.  

  • San Bernardino's top cop says it's likely 'there is nothing of any value' on iPhone the FBI wants A

    Congratulations on your first, uninformed, uncited, and unsupported post. Look forward to many more of them. 
    The Crazy Train just keeps chugging along.
    Something that needs to be clearly stated is that the "User" and the "owner" of the phone are one and the same according to Apple Terms of Service ---  San Bernadino County.  They owned the phone and gave it to an employee (the shooter) who signed a statement agreeing to use it only for work.  The FBI is not even asking for access to the phone.  They only want Apple to force a backup because they already have access to the cloud backups.  Apple can do this by simply pushing a phone-specific update to the OS that forces an immediate and full backup.  No back door, no one's privacy rights endangered.  But Tim Cook sees this as a form of free advertising.  The fact is that Apple has a long history of illegal activities.

    calibaconstangkevin kee
  • San Bernardino's top cop says it's likely 'there is nothing of any value' on iPhone the FBI wants A

    jungmark said:
    Contacts? If he called anyone, that would show up on his cell phone records right? No need to hack the iPhone. 
    I don't think that iMessages and FaceTime show up on his cell phone records, and if I am not mistaken, that may be what the unlock request is all about. Happy to be corrected if I am wrong about that.
    Possible. But very unlikely it had anything to do with his attack. It was his WORK phone. He destroyed his personal phone (android) prior to the attack.  And how many people do you only FaceTime and iMessage, where the iMessage always goes through, and never goes through as a text message, and you also never make phone calls to? They have his call records for years if they want.