If you don't care who does it as long as it does what's expected, that's common carrier.

I don't care how my phone calls get routed and I don't care how my internet gets routed. That's because it's common carrier. There is no value add beyond basic "latency is bad" type of deals but that's table stakes.

You're thinking short term. After we "win", everyone loses.

I'm not sure I agree with the search warrant, but this wasn't the only evidence used here. No one is getting murder charges ONLY based on search history.

There's a board of directors that agreed with the price change that aren't resigning.

He's just the scapegoat.

The US absolutely has actual due process in almost all cases.

While nothing is perfect, there are multiple steps to ensure the system generally works as it should.

Two things being imperfect does not make them equally imperfect.

If they see an encrypted (essentially random) data stream to a location they don't know about, they can just come get you if they want. They don't have to prove anything.

So anyone who thinks they can say "Well, they can't KNOW I'm accessing a VPN because it's encvrypted" isn't understanding how Russia works. All they have to see is that they don't know what you're doing.

Trust shouldn't be a part of any decision like this.

You should be locked in to terms when you start and not need to "trust" anything going forward. You never know when something drastic could change even if those you "trust" now don't break that trust. Someone could buy a company. Someone could oust the CEO. So many things could change.

That's why you need to be guaranteed ahead of time what the terms are up front.

And it sounds like that's what they're doing, which is the right thing and now it doesn't matter if they are trustworthy or not.

It's the *LOWER* of the two, so per-install fees are fine - because the % of revenue part caps it.

No one should ever have to "trust" a vendor. All they have to do is say "we won't change the pricing on a version that's already out" and you no longer have to "trust"

They should also clarify that within a major version, bugfixes won't change the pricing.

There was no confusion.

You were greedy and got called the fuck out.

Only a shortage of REFINED lithium and refined lithium-making capacity.

More raw lithium doesn't do much.

...not a product.

Between the price and the limited ability to produce them at all, it's not a real product and not something likely to be supported long term. It's more like the touchbar... they'll push it hard ... hard... hard... gone.

Requiring payment is not DRM

Usually you're paying a slice to epic for sales and another to epic for the engine. They're just saying "give us a higher multiplier on our store cut % (i.e. more sales) and you can keep the engine part"

This is anti-competitive behavior and should be stopped. If you have two products in two categories, it shouldn't be legal to use them to multiply lock in between each other.

why did apple feel the need to go backwards back to magsafe? Makes no sense to me.

Also you can get magnetic breakaway usb-c charging wires, so it's not a safety thing.

I get for gaming laptops (with beefy GPUs) you need something more than 100w, but apple doesn't make those.

With laptops, having charging on both sides is the real game changer.