It's no different now as it was then. Apple reduced the costs for schools so they'd buy them, which would lead the kids to wanting one at home. And if the parents DID look into a personal computer, of course the kids would want the Apple because that's what they played with.

No, it isn't that they wanted the Apple because that is what they played with. They wanted it to remain compatible with the platform they had at school. It's the same reason Microsoft wants its Office suite used by businesses. The words you are looking for are "lock in".

The situation here is quite different in the internet services provided are pretty much platform independent. The idea being the hardware is less of a focus than the Apple case you cite.

The way I am reading the quote in TFS seems reasonable to me. Others here are claiming it has to do with advertising. That's not only what I read but that the provider of the service, not just Google, can't use the data the kids are saving for data mining purposes whether that mining is used for advertising purposes or not. I don't find this requirement as a bad thing and honestly wish it was made broader to include everyone. Why should Google or any internet services provider be allowed access to data I store on their service whether that access is benign or not? Documents I store there are not the provider's property. This is a major reason a lot of people refuse to use "cloud" services me included. Because once you put it out there there is no retracting it.

Since when is it the responsibility of a company to tell customers what exactly they need?

Since it was a part of their contract as well as the law in WV. ( See: http://www.legis.state.wv.us/wvcode/ChapterEntire.cfm?chap=05a&art=3&section=33D )

That was the code section of WV law that the auditor's office is recommending the Purchasing Division look into.

I suspect it's more about the negative publicity than "Please don't sue us". Cisco has incredibly deep pockets (mostly cost they sell $20k routers to 2 person part time libraries), and could tie anything like that up on court till the cows come home.

Well considering this was one of the recommendations from the auditor's report:

The State Purchasing Division should determine whether the actions or inactions by the Cisco representatives fall under the purview of 5A-3-33d of the West Virginia Code and are grounds for debarment.

I would say they are trying to keep their current contract with the state. It is about trying to bail out of this remedy.

I strongly suspect Cisco did absolutely nothing wrong. They simply made the decision to make money for the company (however much), rather than making nothing.

That's not what the legislative audit found. They found the following:

The Legislative Auditor believes that the Cisco sales representatives and engineers had a moral responsibility to propose a plan which reasonably complied with Cisco's own engineering standards. It is the opinion of the Legislative Auditor that the Cisco representatives showed a wanton indifference to the interests of the public in recommending using $24 million of public funds to purchase 1,164 Cisco model 3945 branch routers.

No, what he is saying is that criminals (gangs in the case you are deriding) are using technology such as FB more to organize those crimes. I suspect he is also trying to say that the police and DA offices are having a difficult time keeping up with the advances in technology.

What happened to the WV's bid process?

I work in government too and more specifically in WV in the office where this occurred. I'll tell you what happened to the bid process. The incompetence of the state purchasing division is what happened. Their process is so painful and long that state agencies do everything they can to avoid using them. Even the former governor Joe Manchin got caught stringing contracts to avoid them when he was in office. I've had contracts languish over there for over a year.

In this case, an existing contract the state has to purchase minor items with Cisco was used for these big ticket items. So technically it was bid out. It just wasn't bid out for these routers. The agency got dinged for this misuse of the system and the spirit of the law.

Having said that, the whole process here in WV needs to be overhauled. It is too complex and way too lengthy to be useful especially when the funding is on a tight timeline like the stimulus funding was. That complexity and duration is what makes purchasing something to be avoided. It is only human nature to try to avoid the pain. I don't have a choice but to use them and dread it every time I do.

Unfortunately, there seems to be too few of us who have actually ever read the US Constitution.
Governments are instituted by PEOPLE to PROTECT PEOPLE. Corporations should are NOT people and
they sure as hell don't PROTECT people.

That is rich... You are arguing that you have a Constitutional right to violate the Constitution...

Article 1 Section 8 Clause 8:
The Congress shall have Power...

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

You may not like it but to argue that trying to enforce this clause of the Constitution is unconstitutional is the weakest argument to make.

It is simply what all software companies want. A subscription based platform where they can nickle and dime you to death. And you know what? It works. Just look at the thousands of apps for phones that do just that with recurring charges. I have a crap ton of apps on my Nokia (yeah, I know but it works for what I need it to do) that are subscription based. Worse, they are considered a part of the system and cannot be removed. So yeah, a sucker and his money are soon parted.

As I said in a previous post, the reason for the single source was the fact that WV has an existing contract with Cisco and instead of going the proper route of purchasing, a very, very painful and dreadfully long process, they simply used the existing contract route. It was improper bidding but it was bid out at one point. The real problem is with the purchasing division here in WV making the entire process something that people want to avoid. Agencies actively seek ways to avoid having their contracts tied up in purchasing red tape for months and even years. Even the former governor Joe Manchin got caught stringing contracts to avoid the limit required to trigger the purchasing rules (Then it was $10,000.00).

For those that don't know, stringing is the process of breaking down large dollar contracts down below the limit required by law for the bidding process. So a $50,000.00 contract would be split into 6 with each being below $10,000 which means no bids were required. They would then be awarded to the contractor one after the other until the true agreed upon amount has been reached. It is skirting the law that was done to keep it out of purchasing. It is the WV purchasing process that is mostly at fault. It shouldn't be that difficult or take as long as it does to get a job done or equipment procured. But here in WV it does!

Disclaimer: I work in the office where this occurred although NOT a part of this mess...

Having said that, if anyone has ever tried to work with the WV purchasing division you come to realize they practice real hard to rise to a level of incompetency the likes of which would make a pinhead blush. This isn't the first time officials have tried to "get around" them. Joe Manchin himself used a practice called stringing to avoid using them when he was governor. Projects languish over there for years meanwhile the clock is ticking on the funds available. I have had a contract sit there for 18 months with no end in sight.

I am not trying to excuse what was done simply trying to get others to see a broken system in this state. When you make things so difficult to work with of course people try to find a way a way around it. That is human nature. This incident has less to do with any sort of corruption (although some did exist in the Cisco sales rep and his representations) than it had to do with trying to meet the conditions of the grant quickly which was one of the conditions itself. Remember, stimulus funds were supposed to be used for "shovel ready" projects. Few states met that requirement....

There is no law in the United States which generally prohibits storage and processing of medical information. It does not apply to you or to a company making security devices.

You know, that is the funny thing about laws.... They can and often do change. I believe all biometrics stored electronically should have the protections of HIPPA. So much can be learned from them that if they fall into the wrong hands can be just as devastating as if a hospital released all your files. Things like this scanner that can detect hemoglobin states is one example of the technology going in a scary direction. What's next, one that detects blood sugar level or cholesterol levels?

One can agree or disagree with Apple's infringement claims, but the analogy with SCO is unfounded.

How so? They both are using the courts to try and extort money out of their competitors. They both are using flimsy excuses to do the extortion. How are they different? Oh, I see, because Apple continues to manufacture something they are no longer considered trolls... Anyone who uses the legal system as a club to extort money using legal trickery is a troll in my eyes even if they were bloody Mother Theresa otherwise.

And it would serve Apple right if Samsung refused to renew any contracts with them to supply their technology to Apple. It would also serve Apple right if Samsung ended any license Apple may hold for for the use of any of Samsung's patented technology. Good luck building that iPhone without a screen...

But what Musk does not describe is how the test vehicles are picked to begin with. It wouldn't be the first time a manufacturer rigged a test for a favorable review. I remember quite a few years ago some video card manufacturers got caught rigging their chipsets to detect when they were being tested and report better numbers. Just the simple fact that he states they rig the cars they give to reporters is enough to question the whole test from the start in my eyes.

Or getting married, having children, owning or renting a house or any other thing society requires for living in its world.

ftfy

Having a house, a baby, a spouse, Social Security, or any other form of government interaction. It is all public record and "in the Database" as you put it.