It is a little surprising to see someone of his position speak so plainly and fairly on the balance between the free market and regulation. In essence, a free market is a good base when there is...
Cook also talked about the looming privacy regulations that may come to Silicon Valley. When asked if federal regulation is inevitable, Cook emphasized that he's "not a big fan of regulation" but that companies have to recognize when the free market approach has failed.
"I'm a big believer in the free market," Cook said. "But we have to admit when the free market is not working. And it hasn't worked here. I think it's inevitable that there will be some level of regulation. I think Congress and the administration at some point will pass something."
It is a little surprising to see someone of his position speak so plainly and fairly on the balance between the free market and regulation. In essence, a free market is a good base when there is room for considering when and how to address it failing.
To me this is more notable than the content of the article. Perhaps I'm just biased against successful CEOs of large corporations and this sentiment is more accepted among his class of people than I thought.
Edit: I take it all back, Tim Cook tricked me with with his disarming appearance and clever words. The fact that I felt a need to point out that it was good is a sign of their success.
That seems accurate. I assume those people develop a strong bias against any thing they perceive as either being lower than themselves. Partially as a defense mechanism against their guilt as well...
That seems accurate. I assume those people develop a strong bias against any thing they perceive as either being lower than themselves. Partially as a defense mechanism against their guilt as well as fear of losing their position and isolation from the horrors of the world.
Having your morals and sense of self completely tied to your societal standing effortlessly deludes people who are climbing through the ranks.
Doing exactly what's convenient to them while being largely apathetic toward anything but stock price. This can be seen directly by how he handled China and iCloud.
Doing exactly what's convenient to them while being largely apathetic toward anything but stock price.
This can be seen directly by how he handled China and iCloud.
You are probably right to question this. Apple wants to make Google the default because it benefits them but know that security consciouses people will complain. A good approach to appeasing those...
You are probably right to question this.
Apple wants to make Google the default because it benefits them but know that security consciouses people will complain.
A good approach to appeasing those people would be talking about how they did a few things to make people assume they handled and then "bravely" speaking about the need for regulation when the free market fails. In reality, their protection won't do that much and the statement on regulation is fairly neutral.
I don't even like Apple products and I fell for this. Thanks for pointing that out. I'm usually annoyed when people form attachments to brands and are influenced in their option by easy public relation motivated actions.
It is a little surprising to see someone of his position speak so plainly and fairly on the balance between the free market and regulation. In essence, a free market is a good base when there is room for considering when and how to address it failing.
To me this is more notable than the content of the article. Perhaps I'm just biased against successful CEOs of large corporations and this sentiment is more accepted among his class of people than I thought.
Edit: I take it all back, Tim Cook tricked me with with his disarming appearance and clever words. The fact that I felt a need to point out that it was good is a sign of their success.
That seems accurate. I assume those people develop a strong bias against any thing they perceive as either being lower than themselves. Partially as a defense mechanism against their guilt as well as fear of losing their position and isolation from the horrors of the world.
Having your morals and sense of self completely tied to your societal standing effortlessly deludes people who are climbing through the ranks.
Capitalizzzzzt former-IBM exec slanders competitors while doing the exact same thing as them.
What's new, exactly?
Doing exactly what's convenient to them while being largely apathetic toward anything but stock price.
This can be seen directly by how he handled China and iCloud.
Why was this comment collapsed?
Multiple users labeled it as "noise" because it doesn't contribute anything useful to the discussion.
Oh wow, I didn't even realize that was a feature. Neat.
Here's the announcement about implementing this feature and the official documentation about this feature, so you can learn about it.
Thanks for the links. I think this is a great feature, and good to know it's intended use.
You are probably right to question this.
Apple wants to make Google the default because it benefits them but know that security consciouses people will complain.
A good approach to appeasing those people would be talking about how they did a few things to make people assume they handled and then "bravely" speaking about the need for regulation when the free market fails. In reality, their protection won't do that much and the statement on regulation is fairly neutral.
I don't even like Apple products and I fell for this. Thanks for pointing that out. I'm usually annoyed when people form attachments to brands and are influenced in their option by easy public relation motivated actions.