I think the worst part is not that they added it, but that they removed regular S3.

They’re doing it as part of reducing their carbon footprint. There’s so much carbon produced during manufacturing that they need devices to continue being used for about ten years after the original sale, otherwise the company will never be carbon neutral.

Bull fucking shit.

Apple goes out of their way to stop repairs. They ask the companies that supply their microcomponents to create a new version of them, just different enough for the original not to work, then make them sign a contract to only sell to them. By doing this, third party component level repair shops can’t just buy the components from the supplier and have to have a stock of donors boards in order to repair anything.

When you go to the Apple store because something in your board failed, they charge you the price of a new device to repair it and then advise you to just buy a new one. Even if you decide to do the repair because it’s more eco-friendly even thought it costs the same, you will lose all your data, because they just replace the entire thing instead of the milimeter capacitor or microchip that is broken.

Apple’s newer models, that are supported for self repair, are designed to be easy to repair. That’s why they’re the only ones that are supported.

Apple devices are still a pain in the ass to open and use non-standard screws with tons of different sizes, making sure that if you mix a longer and a shorter screw, you will probably break something.

Is this machine by any chance a recent laptop?

Newer laptops with Intel cpu (not sure about AMD) don’t have a real sleep mode anymore. Instead, they have a mode where, besides the ram, the cpu and the network device are also kept alive for communication.

In theory, this means that when you wake up your device all of your apps and stuff will already be updated with the latest information from the web with little battery loss. In practice, it just overheats your laptop while in your backpack and kills the battery.

The ping you see while it is “sleeping” might be from this.

They only introduced this recently because of the always increasing backlash against their practices.

And thing is, they only sells parts for a small subset of devices from the last decade. If you have one of the latest devices (from iPhone 12), great. If not, get fucked.

Yup, people have been suggesting this for a while, but that goes against the interests of Apple.

Also, it’s still confusing to me how they just allow for someone who sees you put your pin and steals your iPhone to be able to hijack your iCloud account.

They say it’s to stop people from stealing iPhones to sell for parts.

What they don’t say is that the only reason there is a market for that is that they aren’t willing to sell the parts directly at an affordable price…

I said in my comment that Europeans made it worse. I was just saying that those places were never peaceful to begin with.

Didn’t say it was.

But here specifically I’m refering to optimization, as in changes the manufacturer did to either streamline the production and make it more efficient (cheaper) or to differentiate from similar products to make it more appealing.

Surely you chose your devices on some sort of criterea and other people would come to a different choice.

This I believe can only happen under capitalism.

Wait wait, do you think the rest of the world was in perfect harmony until the white man came?

AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA

Where the fuck do you think African slaves came from? Most europeans didn’t enslave them, they just bought them in the well established african slave markets after other africans and arabs enslaved them first.

In North America, do you think the indians only started scalping when the europeans appeared, or that it was a common practice in tribes that were at constant war with each other?

In South Africa a lot of the land europeans got was payment from tribes for help fighting other tribes.

Did europeans cause extra suffering in the places they colonized? Definitly.

Were those places peaceful before that? Fuck off.

You are using an open source platform, developed without a profit incentive, running on one of the most impactful publicly-funded infrastructure developments of our lifetimes, which is also powered by near countless free-and-open-source tech stacks.

I can almost guarantee every single physical thing you used to type that was the product of capitalism based optimization.

They can do whatever they want, they only do it because Google allows it.

By that logic, Brave is also completely against Google because they block their ads and go against them.

Your last point is laughable.

Yes Brave cannot make commits to Chromium, but it makes changes to their own repos (well, obviously) and can also accept/reject changes Google makes to Chromium.

In my opinion, Firefox is more of a slave to Google than Brave will ever be because they rely entirely on Google giving them money for the default search engine.

Is Brave’s revenue model scammy? Maybe. But at least they aren’t Google little bitch.

The browser as is right now is open source and has way better defaults for privacy than Firefox (currently it seems it is the best browser in this aspect after librewolf. see: https://privacytests.org ).

Still, if you were sharing with 3 friends before, it’s a 4x price spike for you.

Yeah, and in cases where there is a monopoly or quasi-monopoly of a product it becomes really exploitative.

But in this case in particular, I’m gonna have to say it’s the fault of the users.

They chose to pay more for a worst product that had already been declining in quality steadily, when there are tons of other streaming services with good content.

I mean, the Netflix password sharing crackdown was a vote put on the users to decide if it’s a good thing to do or not.

And it appears that the results are good, since they are reporting subscriber growth and more revenue. Now every other service will follow because, otherwise, they’d just be wasting untapped profits.

I don’t like this profit maximization companies are trying to do, but one thing is clear: people prefer to pay more for the extra convenience than to stand their ground in their principals.

Even if people like us stand our ground, most won’t even care (I can see it in my personal relationships as well).

In the middle of this controversy there is just one thing I don’t really understand: why haven’t they banned the offending account?

Ok… But why?

How is it nefarious?

When people complained, they removed it and apologized.

Is it that much worse than this?