- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
“Apple CEO Tim Cook plans to donate $1 million to Donald Trump’s inauguration fund, reports Axios. The donation will be a personal donation directly from Cook rather than a donation from Apple”
I’ll defend Apple as being the least shitty of the big tech giants but I can’t defend this.
You must log in or register to comment.
Paying largesse/protection money.
This isn’t even remotely surprising. Apple has been a shitty company for well over a decade.
And before it wasn’t?
Tim Cook is hoping to be spared when Trump starts purging gay people.
Hey, he’s a billionaire. Being gay is only illegal if you’re poor like everything else.
No war, but the class war.
Ohh shocking!! A US company CEO donated to the inagural fund of the new president elected by the people (idiots).
Tim Apple.
After that slip he still bends the knee. Good old classic reliable Tim Apple
The personal donation part is weird. This sounds like a deliberate attempt to appease the fascists while trying, desperately, to maintain Apple’s image.
I can’t help but wonder if this is to take the news spotlight away from the Siri recording scandal that just popped up
What Siri recording?
lol 98 million? why not something proportional to the ad revenue that apple made in said years? oh I know why because law exists for billionaires. this is just apple paying some more money so that this scandal goes away as soon as possible which might be even more costly to them on the long run than the 98 mil they are paying.
It’s peanuts to them. It’s about 15h of profits is all. You can’t even call it a slap on the wrist, more like a friendly tickle ha
A 20 dollar per device settlement for selling your data for billions. And the lawyers get paid big. Who the fuck is working for the working class? The law? Defense attorneys? Leaders?
Gross. Sick of rich assholes enabling the fascist.
Absolutely disgusting
Not a good move tim
Apple stopped being apple when this cuck took over.
It always was same megacorp.
Yeah but it did do cool shit and pretended to be unique…
People now see them what they are, another parasite leeching on the working people
I guess it was that or a blow job.
It really is a class war, not a culture war.
Always has been.
I’ll defend Apple as being the least shitty of the big tech giants but I can’t defend this.
Why would you do that though? The only thing I’m aware of that they do even remotely better than anyone else is privacy. But it’s not that much better, and it comes at the cost of gestures at everything else
Like I said, they’re the least shitty. Can you think of a corp that’s better? Google? Fucking Meta? Microsoft?
At least with android devices there is a possibility of swapping the operating system and windows computers can always be made Linux.
I have my own problems with them, but off the top of my head I think the following tech companies all do better than Apple: Red Hat, Canonical, Framework, Purism, System76, Fairphone.
Microsoft didn’t spend multiple decades trying to force their own chargers and ports over universal standards. Not saying any of them are good, but apple is in no way better and has spent years creating contention between consumers. It’s just as likely they sell your tracking data as anyone else, they spend developer time every month making sure their ecosystem is considered better for cultural reasons while being ostensibly worse than competitors for most things. Their phones are generally a year or more behind competitors but they have made-up features that serve no purpose consumers rally around like imessage. They have a tiny sandbox to play in without completely voiding your warranty - Themes instead of real customization. “Blue bubbles”? Are you kidding me? How about allowing any form of tinkering beyond a garden path? How about supporting repair of devices at their actual branded stores? They’re easily up there as one of the worst for consumers at large.
I’m really not interested in a long, drawn out debate about this, suffice to say that if you think all the things you listed, most of which are your opinion rather than indisputable fact, somehow make Apple worse than Google, Microsoft, or Meta … well let’s just agree to disagree.
It’s Lemmy lol if you don’t use your own airgapped Linux distro you’re a complete cuck
TempleOS master race rise up.
The things he listed aren’t opinion lol, they’re proven facts.
Why don’t we just say that all these mega corps are evil, period?
They just settled Siri snoop case for a fee pennies…
“Privacy”
would a nice $20 bill appease the peasantry?
IDK why people say they have better privacy: They just settled a lawsuit over evesdroping using Siri. I think they probably have less interest than Google in selling data for advertising, mostly likely using it internally for their ecosystem so they probably come across more privacy focused but I assume they snoop just as much as any other big tech company.
less interest than Google in selling data for advertising
Google don’t sell data. The data is what makes them valuable, so it wouldn’t make sense. If they did sell data, the other big tech companies would just buy their data to remove their competitive advantage.
What Google actually sells is your attention. Advertisers can target people based on demographic data, things you like, etc, but the advertiser never sees the data used for targeting.
You can use Google and Facebook’s Ads Manager sites yourself and see exactly what advertisers see.
On the other hand, Apple mostly keep their collected data for their own ad network. Yes, they have one - it’s mostly just used for ads for “recommended” apps in the app store, but last I heard, they have plans to expand it.
Yeah apologies, that’s a good point - thanks for adding more context!
No worries - it’s a pretty common misconception that tech companies sell data. I’ve worked on ads systems at big tech companies so I’ve seen some parts of how it works. The companies are very protective of their data as it’s essentially their highest-value asset. Employees can’t see any of your data either - it’s very tightly locked down, with strict ACLs and audit logging.
Large advertisers generally don’t get any special access either - the tools/apps that large advertisers use are mostly the same as what small advertisers / individuals can see and use.
The only thing I’m aware of that they do even remotely better than anyone else is privacy.
Where did you hear this? Its my understanding that they are one of the worst when it comes to privacy.
Siri “unintentionally” (because it’s a sentient being right?) recording entire conversations def feels pretty terrible.
They do better about privacy because they make enough money from their inflated prices and blind brand loyalty where they dont have to become an ad company like google. Google is very good at protecting their users data from third parties, as long as they can still collect all of it.
Apple (currently) doesn’t collect a lot of data which allows them to design products with security as a primary component instead of as an afterthought
They collect everything. Every detail of your usage. They may not sell it, but your entire life is on an apple server
I’ll get downvoted because Lemmy has a weird hate boner for asking for proof but do you have any proof that they “collect everything”?
The proof is in your iCloud.
How so?
When you log into your phone with an apple ID, they hold a record of every interaction you have using it. Download an app, song, or backup your phone using icloud? Use their health app? It’s all stored and associated with your apple ID and phone serial number as well as other device unique identifiers. They reserve the right to analyze this data in-house or 3rd party and how you use their products and services to improve them, produce new, market to, etc.
This isn’t proof, is it?
All these Billionaires PAYING Trump MILLIONS of Dollars is PROOF he CANT be Bought!
None of these companies would touch Trump with a 10 foot pole in the situation wasn’t so dire. But he is the next president, and he is known to respond to stuff like this. Bend knee, kiss his ass and carry a huge wad of cash. This is just the cost of doing business, and even if a vocal minority cries out most people still buy iPhones, Teslas and shop at Amazon and Wal-Mart.
It’s almost like capitalism is a terrible idea.
I struggle to call this capitalism. It’s so twisted and corrupt it doesn’t resemble what it started out as.
lol I interpret this as sarcasm, as with many of your other comments around Lemmy. If they are so, I think they’re funny and so far I agree with what you actually value, democracy. However, it took me some time to understand your sarcasm. This might be just me, but I wonder if your comments could be subjected to Poe’s Law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe’s_law). Is it impossible that they could be interpreted as candid?
I got the joke right away, I don’t think there’s any problem with it.
The thing is, no matter how obvious a contradiction is, far-right folks won’t understand any of it, because they’re so dumb. You cannot give them even the most basic, easily digestible facts and explanations, because even that requires a brain, which they don’t have.
So I think, these kind of jokes are perfectly fine for our entertainment, and no amount of facts and information will ever convince the dumbest of the people.
Fair points:
- I see how that joke can be fine in the sense that, if everyone in the group shares values, there is no need to consider how a staunch Trump supporter will respond to the joke. After all, I think there are very few staunch Trump supporters reading this.
- I also see that it can be very hard to convince people to reconsider tightly-held beliefs, or at the very least gain perspective on them. It sounds like you do not believe changing perspectives is even possible, that no dialogue can ever be worthwhile or useful.
I see you appreciate facts and information, the scientific process and the institutions that enable it. We have that in common. That’s why, ironically, I’ll start with anecdotal facts and then move on to more robust and generalizable findings. Do you know about my friend who went from defending “one dollar, one vote” (a couple of years ago) to explaining how the lack of third spaces is associated with inequality (a couple of weeks ago)? I don’t expect you to at all, so do you know Contrapoints’ impact on radicalized people who reach out to her (https://www.vice.com/en/article/contrapoints-interview-2019-natalie-wynn/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Nrz4-FZx6k)?
These may sound like cherry-picked examples, but there’s actually evidence of massive shifts in people’s political views: the World Value Survey. Do you know how world values have changed ever since the WVS started?(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIXdRVe92gg)
In the face of the WVS shifts, it may seem like value changes only occur when material conditions allow for it, but there’s evidence within the WVS literature that material conditions are not as important today (in particular, the variance that explains the change in values used to be mostly explained by material conditions, but now it is mostly explained by connectivity). However, we can also look at another set of scientific literature that shows that the way that things are presented can lead to changes in political attitudes. Do you know about the moral reframing literature? I’m sorry for the paywall https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12501 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337861541_Moral_reframing_A_technique_for_effective_and_persuasive_communication_across_political_divides
Thank you for showing me this valuable piece of information. No, I haven’t seen these before.
Until now, I’m 100% confident that it’s impossible to convince someone on the far-right of anything that’s against their views, because I’m from a country that is 15 years ahead of the US on this tragic path into the dark future far away from common sense, thus I have a somewhat clear prediction for the general mental state of the people in the coming decades, which likely cannot be reversed in a century.
Yet, I’m thinking quite often, what I could do as an individual to at least somewhat better the situation in this miserable world. And so far all my ideas are based on withdrawal of content (much like how you take drugs away from a junkie) instead of adding arguments, which is obviously hard to pull off on a large scale.
Not that I could do anything though. Today you need to be rich to achieve something.
Nonetheless, maybe this is the missing piece to the puzzle. I’m considering to pay those extra bucks for that publication, also Welzel’s book; they look promising. So thanks again for sharing.
