then all they need is the password so they can unlock the phone and install that tool.

i believe if you provide proof of death to apple for the icloud account, they'll remove the activation lock. you can then reset the device.

your scenario is a fringe case that has nothing to do with what the person you are replying to was talking about. he was responding to someone claiming this security measure was an anti-first sale doctrine move. the general case of being able to resale an apple device is not harmed by this security measure.

this procedure already exists. if you have proof of death and know the icloud account, apple will remove the activation lock for you. you should then be able to reset the phone.

by your own data, tax receipts have been up every year since 2009. so tax receipts were up for pretty much all of obama's presidency.

deficits were down from the highs of 2009-2012 in 2013 and continued on a downward trend until 2016.
from 2016 until now, they've been on an upward trend. in 2016 the deficit was 585 billion. in 2019 it's 1.091 billion. so it's risen by 506 billion during trump's tenure.

also, the 2019 numbers from your link show that the deficit and total debt have exceeded the 2012 numbers. so the answer to your question is no. they aren't.

correllium is distributing those copies to other people.

none. the only time it becomes a pain in the ass is when you step into a 3rd party library you don't have sources for, which is a problem that exists in any debug process in any compiled language for any paradigm.

apple does not sell user information to marketers and the information it keeps for its own purposes is a anonymized and aggregated with other user information. you can opt out of that by turning it off in the privacy settings in the phone.

the bill was introduced by the joint committee on carbon reduction, which had 8 democrats and 6 republicans on it.

willamette valley has 1.076 million people. oregon has a population of 4.25 million people. the last governor's race had a total of 1,863,963 votes cast. the people appear to have decided they don't want a say and gave their consent through apathy.

addendum -
according to this post :
https://tech.slashdot.org/comm...

Current never registered a trademark on their logo (which is really stupid of them). in trademark law, though, the fact that Current has used it for 3 years will give them rights to it in the financial industry.

Facebook is at fault because Facebook is the one using a logo that infringes on Current's logo. if Character failed to perform as required by their contract in producing the logo, then they can be sued for that breach of contract, but nothing in that contract can absolve Facebook of the legal responsibility to not infringe other people's intellectual property.

the infringement is due to Libra using a confusingly similar logo. Where that logo came from is irrelevant. the use is what infringes on Current's logo, so Libra is liable for that infringement. Libra can then, in turn, go after Character for designing them a logo that was practically identical to the one they designed for Current and recoup any losses they experience as a result of that fraudulent action by Character.

those don't generate revenue for jordan peterson.

if it is subscription based, then you cannot have an anonymous account on the system. if you cannot speak anonymously, it is not providing you the entirety of free speech as defined by the first amendment and interpreted by the supreme court.

apparently, he wants to have a minimum length requirement in an attempt to force people to put thought into what they write. i wonder how he's going to respond if people start putting garbage text to pad out small comments to the minimum length. I wonder how he'd respond if someone wrote an app that appends the appropriate length of lorem ipsum to the post and posts it for you.

i wonder how they are going to respond when actionable harassment and incitements to violence start happening on their service.

i look forward to hearing about them tightening the rules when they find out they can't stop trolls, banning people, and ultimately becoming just another reddit clone.

that isn't what the article you linked says. it says that Apple doesn't compete with Google in the market of licensable operating systems for third party smart phones. the market is operating systems available for people like motorola or samsung to license for their hardware products. in that market, apple does not compete with google because apple doesn't license ios for third party hardware products.

they have to be held to it because in spite of all the moral grandstanding individuals do, when it comes time to buy products, people don't consider the moral position of the company as part of their purchasing decision. if dell took a moral stance that added 50% to the cost of producing their computers, people would stop buying dell products and buy from a cheaper source who was taking advantage of the cost savings of being amoral.

in the absence of regulation that forces everyone onto an even playing field, businesses that are not amoral go bankrupt.