Nice to see Apple working to protect the free world. https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7z5bm/apple-airdrop-china-ios
@matthew_d_green sigh. Such a dumb way to cave to the CCP
@SamTheGeek @matthew_d_green I mean Apple has a HUGE market in China, of course they won’t go against. But a big question is also who defines “freedom”? Also by law a company needs to conform to each country’s requirements (or else they can depart which obviously isn’t good for business). Disclaimer: My idea of freedom is probably similar to yours rather than PRC, I do own Apple products (and I admire their engineering and attention to detail in UI/physical design).
@wizofe
I think many people find laws that don't prohibit individuals from doing something, but make it somewhat more onerous in a way that has no direct benefits, objectionable, regardless of the law's intent. Similarly, I expect even more people find the concept of government exerting pressure onto anyone in a non-public way objectionable, regardless of the intent of that pressure.
@wizofe @SamTheGeek @matthew_d_green
Ah, sorry, I was trying to point out that there's a way in which this is objectionable independently of one's definition of freedom (or rather, independent of one's view of the decisions taken, but only looking at the process that caused them to be taken).
@wizofe @robryk @SamTheGeek @matthew_d_green Simple, they is no reason to give thatleeway in the first place. a of you havea at of ethical cause, but set them aside for an entity out of convenience they must not be very important to you.
@robryk @SamTheGeek @matthew_d_green I understand; but why do we expect a company which is based and built on capitalistic values to have the same sensitivities?