Sorry, why's it a problem? If artificial human-sparked intelligence is the logical replacement for biological evolution of homo sapiens, so be it. Survival of the fittest.
I'd consider opposition of constitutional equal protection to be an extreme view, regardless of who or how many hold it.
Never heard of a steak burger?
Except that's not what's happening here. It's "I'll sell quantities at a higher price you choose at a fixed margin, but you can't sell via anyone else at a lower price or better margin". That's why it's anti-competitive; the new system they put in place prevents their retail competitors from ever competing on price. To me, that seems entirely unreasonable.
Except for books, parallel importing is actually legal in Australia. Most retailers simply choose not to because it's also legal for distributors to refuse to sell to a retailer who parallel imports. For retailers it's often an all or nothing proposition.
Why should a consumer need to go to a manufacturer's website to determine what that manufacturer actually means when they print what are otherwise common terms on their packaging and advertising? It's entirely reasonable for a consumer to be able to expect that a feature with a common definition in their locale actually means what they think it does in their locale.
Anyway, Australian consumer protection and advertising standards law is pretty clear in this case. If a company chooses to use advertising that sets a particular expectation of a product's capabilities, it's deemed to be false advertising if the product does not meet that expectation. The definition of those expectations is based on what the language mean in in Australia - where the advertising is being done - and nowhere in Australia does Apple's "4G" mean what they say it does. It's a pretty black and white case as far as I can see.
Sounds like your area just needs to fix its timezone, or failing that happening just adjust the locale business hours to something more appropriate to the region.
That's because it's also a word.
You spend the required money and/or resources to migrate to a new service to support that business process, and in the process end up with better software and/or process than you previously had. No software can or should exist as-is in perpetuity; change and progress is good for all of us.
Except it's not a problem; many of those sub-par devices are actually affordable for people who'd otherwise be stuck with an even-worse feature phone.
Your entire argument is dependent upon the assertion that Android tables are "not as good as an iPad". Please elaborate.
There is not a single media organisation in the United States that espouses any kind of opinion that's even remotely "left of center". Your nation has drifted so far to the right you've no perspective left.
At some point the "victim" businesses need to be responsible for the physical and network security of their systems. It's unreasonable to expect banks to have to assume that every connection may or may not be coming from a machine not under the control of their customer.
Link to Original Source
Why should people in low population density areas be able to expect the same quality of service as those who live in high density areas without fronting up the additional costs caused by where they choose to live?