you fail to see that their net worth is dependent on everybody else’s actions: if the combined shareholders of their companies start selling for whatever reason, what happens to musk’s net worth?
the only way that rich people are rich is because other people want to get rich on their succes and that’s why they buy in. regardless of the real value produced, net worth is much like influencer reach.
No, this is true for most random people. My net worth is largely tied up in assets like my car and house - if everybody else decides these are worthless, because I live in a "bad neighborhood", or if they decide that they prefer new cars way more, I stand to lose huge proportions of my net worth.
This is no less true for the average person. If the real estate market in your area crashes and you own a house, your net worth would crash through other peoples collective action.
The only difference is that most of these billionaires are invested in a few specific companies, however there are plenty of people who (likely for bad reason) are also heavily invested in only a few companies.
Yeah It’s an old extension and doesn’t work great but it sort of works. I had to disable autocomplete in forms for it because it would break even apple’s login screen - couldn’t submit (some js error from the injected extension code). now i just use it from the button in the toolbar and that gives me the password
The App Privacy Label on this is crazy It says it will collect and link health, fitness, financial, browsing history, usage data, purchases, search history, sensitive information etc Instagram doesn’t track that much, but Facebook does
The goal wasn't hurting them in the first place, just ensuring that Apple plays fair on their own hardware. You may be totally correct with your second point, if Apple implements things well.
> just ensuring that Apple plays fair on their own hardware
As software, firmware, and hardware lines blur, it's a legacy concept that hardware and software must be divided.
Incredible value comes from fluid and designer-driven remixing of the three according to usability, ruggedness/resilience, and security principles.
The most useful appliances for Normals™ will be the ones that blend these best. This kind of ruling holds us back from the huge vertically integrated design investments that deliver ease of use and trust that end users want.
Well, good news. Apple can still blur the lines for you while unlocking the bootloader for me and letting normal users install software packages. You have yet to present an example of how the things I want conflict with the things you want.
Go read the discussion sections of any of the other 50,000 times this exact exchange has happened. There's plenty of explaining in those. It never seems to get through, but you could fill a 20-volume encyclopedia with those (incredibly repetitive) posts.
TL;DR many Apple users like the way things are now, and don't want any amount of risk to that. The chief risk we see is that we'll no longer be able to get 100% of the software we want (or are forced to use) on iOS through the Apple app store, with all of Apple's protections and guarantees, or that Apple will have to reduce those protections and guarantees to keep such a splintering from happening. Yes, we're aware that Android hasn't seen much adoption of alternative stores, but Android also hasn't (delightfully) jammed a thumb in Facebook's eye over and over. Even a small chance of that coming to pass isn't worth it to us. We wish you'd all just go use Android or Linux phones or whatever and leave us alone.
Well, sucks for you. Europe wants Apple to compete with other software stores, and you'll be hard-pressed to defend Apple's stranglehold on software distribution.
It's fine that you enjoy Apple's curation, they can still curate things for you under the new law. They just also need to provide competitive app distribution. Considering how many complaints I've heard from devs vis-a-vis the App Store, I reckon some competition is exactly what Apple needs to put them in line.
>The chief risk we see is that we'll no longer be able to get 100% of the software we want (or are forced to use) on iOS through the Apple app store
I don't think that's ever been the case. You've never been able to get an alternative browser on the Apple App Store or a streaming gaming app such as Xbox Cloud Gaming, or Geforce Now. Or currently I cannot get Fortnite
These are all apps I want that are not available on the Apple App Store.
I play Xbox Cloud Gaming. On iOS. As a web app saved to Home Screen. Works fantastic, iPad Pro with Xbox controller is the bomb.
(Btw, SetApp app approach works too.)
Meanwhile, Steam competes with Gig on PC and charges 30%. All this 'allow alt app stores to break apple's pricing' (zero other real benefits are cited) has not happened on PC.
Sure, but I'm responding to a complaint about apps not being available on the App Store, and neither is Xbox Cloud Streaming. If we were talking about iOS, then alternative app stores and browsers would still be iOS.
Steam is a different product in a different market. Steam's 30% is set by the market deciding that Steam's value is worth the 30%. Apple's 30% comes from whatever Apple feels like charging because there is no alternatives, hence the complaints. If you believe Apple's 30% comes from value and that no one can beat it, then they should be able to prove it in some free market competition like Steam has.
> There is absolutely no argument for preventing other people from using something else.
There is though. I'm not going to post it yet again because it's already in this thread multiple times, and in literally every other thread like this ever on this site.
You might disagree with the argument, but you're flat-out wrong that it doesn't exist or can be trivially dismissed on factual grounds.
I think it will help some people use apple who were infinitely frustrated by this. But I'm sure Apple has done the calculation and benefits more than it hurts from being a total dick to its users, or they wouldn't be doing it.
typical EU playbook: outlaw it here, make headlines, outsource it en gross without caring about “internal” rules. we hold corporations like apple responsible for following rules across the supply chain, maybe it’s time we check the supply chain of the EU and US also - we subsidize electric cars built in China with local money while Chinese plants do not meet environmental standards.
One planet.
The whole of how we experience reality is made up by our mind. Decisions and actions are sort of precognitions - rather than being reactions to stimuli, they’re actions with expected results, adjusted very fast after we get feedback. Probably sharing some wiring, most of us agree on the same stuff. But there are outliers. If the mind can create reality and all the worlds we can imagine awake, then certainly in an altered state it can create other experiences. What’s real? Anything or nothing, maybe everything in between.
I think I read something like this in a Schopenhauer book on Free Will: if you admit of a precognition (or subconscious) can't you, by the same reasoning, say that the subconscious has a sub-subconscious, etc?
