Needs to be bigger and brighter imo. It looks like standard nutrition info which I omits never look at.
Fairphone had audits that prove it’s an improvement in both sustainability and worker conditions.
key word there is 'improvement'. it's still a for profit company and they will ultimately make whatever decisions are in the best interest of the company to make a profit.
they are undoubtedly better, but their baseline is still the same, to make money.
there is no nuance, at all, to the fact that there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. it's pretty black and white. there are ways to be less unethical (e.g., fairphone), but not to be ethical.
Calling reality for what it is isn’t an insult
I’ve got the 15 Pro Max, do use instagram, and haven’t had these overheating problems. So I def don’t think it’s a uniform issue.
hot take.
When did Apple claim to innovate USBC? Was it when they said that USBC has become the standard and so they’re adopting it? Or was it the rest of the presentation where they didn’t mention it at all?
They decided on 10 years for lightning and stayed with 10 years.
That’s my whole argument and I thought I made that clear.
I’m willing to bet Apple will adopt RCS as soon as it can be implemented seamlessly.
Feel free to point out where that was referenced in the comment I was replying to.
I didn’t ignore it, it wasn’t relevant.
Yea I didn’t convey myself well.
Our ability to observe the effect, at this point in time, results in us disturbing the thing.
Like with Schödinger’s cat, in order to observe the outcome we have to open the box which may result in the poison being released and killing the cat. So if we open the box and the cat is dead, it may be due to our interference rather than the gas being released by the radioactive decay. In order to know the position of the cat, we’d have to be able to see through the box in a way that doesn’t impact the outcome of the experiment. Yet, the cat is either dead or alive, it’s just unknowable to us due to our inability to observe the cat without disturbing the scenario. Only the cat really knows if it’s alive.
Similarly, we largely don’t have great ways to observe quantum happenings because our technology to measure the outcomes disturbs whatever we’re observing. Yet, the thing a we’re looking at either are or are not happening the way we posit, our ability to know doesn’t change that.
Ok so here’s my take: Apple implemented a secure messaging system in 2007 with iMessage. Then, in 2011 Google started to implement RCS, which then took several years for it to begin rolling out and being adopted.
Why doesn’t google push to adopt iMessage instead? It was implemented first and has been being constantly developed for 16 years and is certainly more well rounded than RCS.
Now, everyone is angry that Apple won’t switch to a standard that’s not fully supported by all android devices or carriers, that is potentially less secure, AND takes away a competitive advantage and calls that ‘holding back RCS? I’ve been hearing about RCS for some 10 god damn years, back before I switched to iOS and it’s still not fully adopted across domestic carriers.
Not to mention, I and many others are working to de-google our lives and I frankly don’t want my messaging going through google backends, even if they do assure me that it’s encrypted. If there’s one thing I know about Apple, it’s that they don’t share my data because it’s a competitive advantage not to. Google on the other hand seems to be happy to give it to anyone that wants it.
Though I do think it’s funny how your article talks about all the problems with RCS adoption lying with everyone (carriers namely) centering around Google’s implementation of it and then lands on ‘Apple is making it lucrative for 3rd party apps like WhatsApp’ as it’s summary for how Apple is holding back RCS. The article and the headline don’t match.
I’ll leave this here, not as a counter to yours, but as a more complete picture: https://www.androidpolice.com/google-rcs-messaging-feud-apple-imessage/
Ultimately, Google is as much at fault as Apple for RCS' low penetration. However, Apple's reluctance to support RCS for iMessage and using the latter as an ecosystem lock-in is bad for consumers.