I would agree with you if this was a main line product (iPad, Macs, iPhone). You could argue the Apple Watch is a main line product as well.
But this is an accessory line. Apple is pretty good at keeping accessories working for as long as possible. AirPods v1 still work. A Magic Mouse bought 10 years ago still works as long as the battery isn't dead.
I truly wonder can be done at this point if congress already passed it into law and judges have sided with congress.
At the minimum it would be nice if some actual concrete evidence came out to why it was banned. Not just more "It's a Chinese spying app that knows you like watching brainrot and its bad"
If the first amendment goes, so does the rest of the amendments and probably the constitution with it.
This isn't the America of 1776. We have turned from a handful of somewhat consolidated groups that could be treated with a broad brush into 360 million screaming individuals with no leader and no cohesive American dream for the next 30 years to shoot for.
I don't use tiktok, I don't care for it.
But I don't think that congress should have the right to take away their ability to operate, only that they should have the ability to not allow exfiltration of American PII to other nations.
Whelp, this is a bi-partisan congress who voted for it, the House representative and Senator you voted for probably supported this act too. And it's not a narrow majority, it's an overwhelming one. And the courts fully support it to.
When you were voting for your representative, would it not have been probable to know they likely would have supported the act? This bill and backlash has been building for years. It's unambiguously clear that America has made her choice here. There is no risk of "authoritarianism" because the overwhelming political plurality is in consensus. Nor is there any concrete political opposition or protests.
Thankfully, the internet isn't real life, and I'm hard pressed to know of the majority complaining here really are Americans with the best interests of America at heart or if they're mad because the interests of a certain country gets harmed here.
> There is no risk of "authoritarianism" because the overwhelming political plurality is in consensus. Nor is there any concrete political opposition or protests.
You could write three books on those two sentences
>Repubs put it in with Ukraine aid to force it through.
The bill passed with the House with 352-65, which I recall this forum often says is more representative of the population than the Senate. You're implying that Republicans bundled it against the opinions of the Democrats when it reality it was more of matter of expendiency for a bipartisan addition with the foreign aid bill. Biden obviously signed it off, the Democrats overwhelmingly support this bill, it's the Republicans who care more about free speech anyways.
>And a consensus doesn’t mean it isn’t against the principle of the country and the first amendment. Literally. Banning. Speech.
That's just your individual interpretation that the divestment bill conflicts with the "principles" and the first amendment, clearly the house, the senate, the courts do not. America dosen't share your opinion on that matter. A more obvious principle of American Principles is respecting the democratic process even if you don't personally agree with the conclusion.
>No he couldn’t have not signed it because that would mean aid was not passed.
Biden literally said if they passed it in the House, he would sign it. You're trying to insinuate that this is not what the Democrats or Biden wanted when all indications of their statements and actions show the exact opposite.
>America and any citizen can want a dictatorship. That doesn’t mean it was part of the founding principles. That’s a logical fallacy you’re making.
No, the logical fallacy you are making is that you are placing your interpretation that this is a violation of the first amendment as an objective fact, when it's just an opinion that the House, Senate, Courts and the Presidents disagree with you on.
No, I am arguing just against your point that something can’t be against the first amendment/constitution etc just because the majority of Americans are for it.
TikTok said it wasn't exfiltrating data and turned out to be lying.
I don't really understand the argument that this is a First Amendment issue. TikTok was asked to protect its users from CCP surveillance. It didn't. Now the US is forcing it to cut ties with the CCP.
TikTok can continue to operate if it complies. Its owners and users have lost no freedom to speak either way.
> TikTok said it wasn't exfiltrating data and turned out to be lying.
Is there a source for that?
The Wikipedia article [0] states "There has been no public evidence of American TikTok user data being accessed by the Chinese government" backed by three sources (124-126) from earlier this year.
> A former TikTok executive suing the platform alleged Monday that ByteDance, TikTok’s China-based parent company, has far more extensive control over the social media platform than it has claimed
A beefier iteration is the Xbox PlayStation way. To many people what makes Nintendo special is that they often avoid that. Wii, Switch, snd DS being successful examples.
>Hopefully Nintendo learned its lessons from the Wii U.
That’s my concern, Nintendo doesn’t like incremental titles like “Switch 2”. They’d rather call it something weird like “Switch Me” which only confuses non informed customers.
> Hopefully Nintendo learned its lessons from the Wii U
But... this is in direct contradiction to what you're saying.
The Wii U was essentially a beefier Wii and it failed. It wasn't revolutionary, wasn't much of a new form factor. But it did have beautiful games.
If you look at all the Nintendo consoles that ate up the competition, none of them are "iterations". They're brand-new things. DS, Wii, Switch were all major departures from what came before them.
Agreed, a lot of people were expecting a bump in processing power in the OLED refresh, but it's pretty clear now that they were saving that for the Switch 2.
Yeah playing emulated Switch games is a much better experience on a Steam Deck than it is on the Switch. Nintendo is in a weird spot now because the competitive landscape is much different.
The GBA (original and SP) also supported OG Gameboy games, but the Gameboy Micro only supported GBA games
The 3DS also had games from other consoles for sale in the eShop, but they were emulated (GB, GBC, Game Gear, NES, SNES). If you bought a 3DS before the price drop, you could also play some GBA games. These are also running natively, not emulation https://en-americas-support.nintendo.com/app/answers/detail/...
Game Boy Micro can still enter GBC mode, it just can't read any cartridges. It's missing the switch which is normally triggered by the cartridge shape, and also missing the voltage conversion circuitry.
Your most successful customer is the one that no longer needs your platform, so a monthly fee or relying on ads does not work. You end up with a perverse incentive to make sure users only ever get "okay" matches, and never GOOD or even GREAT matches.
But if you charge a one-time fee, then the barrier of entry is too high and you won't get many people buying, especially once the people who are frankly undateable start bad-mouthing your app.
You could try a method where you only pay once you decide you landed a good match, but that's going to be impossible to enforce without greatly giving up privacy.
Needing to request access for another AI waitlist a bit annoying. Make me wonder how Steve Jobs would have rolled out AI features if he was still around
Disney really should be broken up if they want to have agreements like this. There is no one who thinks its okay to waive your rights to sue because you took advantage of a free trial 5 years ago for a service that has nothing to do with what killed your wife.
But this is an accessory line. Apple is pretty good at keeping accessories working for as long as possible. AirPods v1 still work. A Magic Mouse bought 10 years ago still works as long as the battery isn't dead.