The authenticators are to be paid by the Sellers, not by ebay or the buyers. It's offering the service to someone who already owns the piece and wants to sell it, and presumably is willing to take the risk that what they are selling isn't faked, in order to give buyers more confidence. This "certification model" paid for by the businesses in the hopes that enough will adapt it and it will become mandatory "professional licensing". Ebay is already in that business, via "Powerseller" status.
It appears too general. If I pay to ask ebay to "certify" that a photo I took of a duck was really taken by me, does ebay turn down the money, or admit that they have no expert qualified to determine it was my duck photo.
The story I had always heard from friends in Taipei's Tech Sector was that Apple had long subcontracted the iPod production to Taiwan (Hon Hoi Precision Tech Group, owned by Terry Gou, aka Foxconn) and that the display geeks in Taiwan - who had been trying to improve touch screens for ATM machines moving from CRT to LCD - introduced it in the model. According to my pals (now retired) Apple realized how important the multi device implications could be and hired an insider from the Taiwan shop to move to a Vancouver subcontractor.
The touch screen technology, according to Taipei geeks, was originally German origin, but the German company had never succeeded in finding a profitable use for it, and they had bought it in a bankruptcy and tried applying it to ATM displays. This article doesn't prove this story, but it does appear to fit the iPod demo story. Maybe someone at
Here is the quote from the article you post which says the Two Decisions (Michigan investment in electric and Hermisillo Mexico investment instead of San Louis Potosi Mexico Ford Focus plant:
Ford had planned to build the Focus, a small car, in the new factory. It will instead move production of the model from Michigan to an existing plant in Hermosillo, Mexico, a move that saves money and limits the amount of capacity devoted to the product.
Your ad homimen attack on WaPo may be true. But a decision to make socks in Michigan is unrelated to a decision to make Twinkies in Mexico's Hermisillo instead of Mexico's Potosi. Trump and Ford CEO are apparently palsy, maybe Trump does deserve credit. I'm simply pointing out that the electric car jobs in Michigan have nothing to do with shifting jobs between two Mexico locations (making Ford Focus in an Escort plant)
I have read the linked article and article in WSJ and WashPost. There appears to be some confusion in the Ars Technica article, and in the summary. The investment in the Flat Rock Michigan plant is to create new electric vehicles, to maintain employment for the Ford Escort employees, as Ford continues its plan to move the Escorts to 100% in Mexico. This is similar to the November story, when Ford moved mature Lincoln manufacturing from Louisville KY to Mexico, but invested in a new vehicle manufacturing in KY rather than close the plant.
From the Post https://www.washingtonpost.com...
"At Ford, Joseph Hinrichs, president of Ford in the Americas, said the decision to produce the newly announced cars in the United States was made recently and without consulting people connected to Trump. Ford Executive Chairman Bill Ford shared the news with Trump in a phone call Tuesday morning, though the details of that call were not immediately available.
While the Ford Focus will soon be produced south of the border, Hinrichs said the 3,500 workers who currently make the car at its production facility in Wayne, Mich., will instead build two yet-to-be-named vehicles, and thus those jobs will stay in place."
Trump seems very talented at getting his name into headlines about decisions that have nothing to do with him
You see but you do not observe. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, in "The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes"