tylersdad

lmasanti said:

Will they continue with coal and natural gas firing power plants to pay for more solar/wind projects?

Oh, no! They are the ones that fill GOP's congressmen pockets!

nicholfd said:

Jlong said:

nicholfd said:

Jlong said:

Everyone has been going back and forth but at the end of the day, let me put it in this way:

• There is 1 place where you can get IOS apps.
• There is 1 place where a developer can sell IOS apps
• There is 1 place where you can buy IOS apps.

Notice how it's always "1" place? This is the main issue, and in this regards Apple does have a monopoly (since only apple can sell IOS apps). Apple isn't denying this but also not acknowledging it because it's stupid to do so. Their statements/counterpoints about security and etc so far all point toward one narrative and for one outcome. And the outcome is to disallow side loading apps, disallow 3rd party app stores and for Apple to be the sole gatekeeper, in other words have a monopoly. 

Yep - because there's only one company that makes iOS & iOS compatible devices.  Apple.  This does not make it a monopoly.

It's their product and consumers can decide to buy it, or buy Android.  Consumers have a choice.

1. Apple makes some of the IOS apps,

2. Apple does not make all the IOS apps.

The monopoly isn't about Apple making apple devices either, the monopoly lies in the way that you can get, sell and install the apps. There is only 1 place where you can get IOS apps.

As for consumer choice, there is no consumer choice. You're confusing all "apps" vs "IOS Apps". There are many ways to get "apps" but 1 way to get IOS apps. 

You missed the point.  It's Apples product and Apples ecosystem.  Apple sets the rules.  Period.

There is consumer choice - Android.  Don't like Apple's mobile products/ecosystem/rules?  Buy Android.

What do you think about Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft's gaming systems?  They only allow "apps" (games generally, but not necessarily - Plex, VLC, etc.) to be sold through their App Store & mandate the same % cut.  Their products, their ecosystems, their rules.  

DAalseth said:

tylersdad said:

DAalseth said:

tylersdad said: 

tylersdad said:

DAalseth said:

Good. the original ban was put in for purely political reasons having to do with the upcoming election and Trump’s rally last fall getting s*rewed over by TicToc users. It was a petty act as was shown by it getting thrashed in the courts. 

Now whether TicToc and other Chinese apps are a legitimate security risk is a good question. Doing an evaluation first is the responsible way to handle it. That way if an app gets banned the government will have the legal support they need when it goes to court.

The ban was less about the code and more about the servers. The servers are in Singapore and China. The Chinese 2015 National Security Law specifically states that any server in China (regardless of ownership) must be accessible by Chinese government officials. It's a real problem and many companies have removed servers from China specifically for this reason. I know my company did (one of the big 4 financial services firms). 

Absolutely and that is a big concern. The mistake was in trying to apply this sort of thing by Royal Decree. They have to follow the legal procedure so when it goes to court they have the evidence to back it up. 

Royal decree? You mean Executive Order? If a president can implement policy (such as the deferred action program for illegal immigrants), then a president can certainly ban an app by EO. 

Yes Executive order. I should have included (/s) afterwards. 
There’s too much legislation getting done that way, by all Presidents. 

DAalseth said:

tylersdad said: 

tylersdad said:

DAalseth said:

Good. the original ban was put in for purely political reasons having to do with the upcoming election and Trump’s rally last fall getting s*rewed over by TicToc users. It was a petty act as was shown by it getting thrashed in the courts. 

Now whether TicToc and other Chinese apps are a legitimate security risk is a good question. Doing an evaluation first is the responsible way to handle it. That way if an app gets banned the government will have the legal support they need when it goes to court.

The ban was less about the code and more about the servers. The servers are in Singapore and China. The Chinese 2015 National Security Law specifically states that any server in China (regardless of ownership) must be accessible by Chinese government officials. It's a real problem and many companies have removed servers from China specifically for this reason. I know my company did (one of the big 4 financial services firms). 

Absolutely and that is a big concern. The mistake was in trying to apply this sort of thing by Royal Decree. They have to follow the legal procedure so when it goes to court they have the evidence to back it up. 

DAalseth said:

Good. the original ban was put in for purely political reasons having to do with the upcoming election and Trump’s rally last fall getting s*rewed over by TicToc users. It was a petty act as was shown by it getting thrashed in the courts. 

Now whether TicToc and other Chinese apps are a legitimate security risk is a good question. Doing an evaluation first is the responsible way to handle it. That way if an app gets banned the government will have the legal support they need when it goes to court.