Apple is already forbidden from requiring any special tracking links, or anything similar, and can't restrict outside links or add scare screens in any way at all. The appeals court didn't change any of the injunction, with the sole exception of saying that apple could charge a fee for whatever it costs them for a user to click a link.

What that amount is, is entirely at the judge's discretion. They've already done a pretty good job showing this judge that they're totally willing to blatantly lie to the court about what their actual costs are, they'll abuse any wiggle room the court gives them, they'll likely ignore any injunction handed down, and they'll likely delay injunctive relief for as long as they can if they do something wrong. What you (and apple) are doing here is asking the court for leeway that the appeals court said it's not even required to give.

This is a situation entirely of their own making. iFans tend to think that the judge is being unfair, but they need to remember: The 9th circuit unanimously agreed with all of the judge's findings and injunction, they only gave apple a long-term bread crumb to help ensure they're not effectively paying money each time a payment is processed, which they already weren't anyways, and they gave this judge sole discretion to determine how much it costs apple for users to click a link. If the judge finds that it's zero, then that's what it is.

If they wanted the same deal Google got, simply not lying to the court would have gone a long, long way.

You're already the slashdot granddaddy and undisputed champion of manufactured disinformation and comments that just plain age poorly. So why the need to compete with yourself so fiercely?

You're 20 years older than me. You keep trying to appeal to the youth, exactly like every bad communist and fascist dictator in history does, yet just like them, you're the old fart who has all of these grandiose ideas about how great an authoritarian government will be, how ending capitalism will save everyone from some nameless bad guys, only to kill everybody who merely disagrees with you.

First, you're a moron if you spend more than $50k on college, and you have no business going to college at all because you never were the kind of person who would ever benefit from it well enough to begin with.
Second, I don't need nor care about your life story either.

I never said nor implied that at all.

What I am saying is we don't need a police state just to help you feel a false sense of security. His idea is to literally ban this outright. All of these things are going to happen whether you like it or not. That's just a fact. China literally implements the death penalty over this, yet it still happens there. So get over this authoritarian bullshit already.

Prohibition doesn't work, don't be a fucking moron.

Just because you have no self-control doesn't mean the rest of us are in need a police state. Even if alcohol was illegal when you were conceived, prohibition showed us that you'd still have been born with FASD. At the same time, if there was no alcohol involved, it's unlikely you'd have been conceived at all.

People do as they will, for good or for worse. What other people do is none of your business. You claim they'll be desperate, yet at the same time you claim that people wearing nice clothes while using a nice car to run over a lady just to steal her Rolex means they did it out of desperation. That's not desperation for the same reason you're not desperate for that second cheeseburger you ate while that skinny hobo next to you had nothing at all. That emotion you're feeling is called greed. You feel that you don't have enough, so you want more. Even though you're already fat, you think it's only fair that somebody with more money than you pays for your third cheeseburger. It's not fair, it's just your greed getting the better of you and making you even fatter.

The whole reason these came about to begin with was WIPO was penalizing the US for not allowing online gambling within its borders. That's part of a treaty obligation, so federal law is going to win here. Nothing NY does can change that, the best they can do is delay it.

But conspiracy theory buzzwords are? Either way, I don't deal in conspiracy theories, nor will they get a dignified response.

I see you've never heard of Anheuser-Busch or Target.

If you read a history book, you'll find:

- The US has always been infighting
- Outsiders who physically attack us suddenly find all of that infighting energy channeled directly into their faces

That's sugar-coating it -- this IS a long-term decline for Hollywood. If this was a pandemic blip, it should have already recovered, just as everything else has done long since then. The film industry itself is fine, just away from Los Angeles.

They probably already wanted to do that anyways. Probably to Atlanta. I've lived in LA for the past 4 years, and pretty much everybody in the movie business is talking about how they can't really get any work here. Main reason why is it's cost prohibitive and overregulated, a lot of both having to do with FilmLA, but a lot of other reasons as well. California is very hostile to its bread and butter industries overall, and I think the government has it in its head that nobody will ever leave. The problem with that *ahem* theorem is many already have. Some have gone to other states, some have gone to Canada and Eastern Europe. See for example, Kobra Kai, which was done almost entirely in Georgia, yet the setting is present-day California. The main thing stopping a major tech exodus is the VC investment is still centered there. That could change after California successfully evicts its resident billionaires, which it seems hell-bent on doing.

One way or another, the problem will self-correct, either in California's favor...or...in California's favor.

Seriously? That guy is putting meaning into words that he doesn't even know is there, making tons of references to turner diaries, despite saying this:

More than that, he's making a ton of leaps in logic that amount to what is indistinguishable from a conspiracy theory. In fact, I'd say it IS a conspiracy theory. Chief among them being his commentary about an Elon post that just has the word "yes" in response to a picture of a guy holding a gun saying "traiters then invaders" which somehow relates to turner diaries. As for me personally, until I actually looked at the movie poster it came from, I would have had no idea where it actually came from. I think this is the most plausible explanation he has come up with in that entire article:

Unlike you, I don't entertain conspiracy theories. He's awkward. As somebody with ASD, this is something I can personally relate to, and I've literally had people (on here, no less) take something I said to mean something completely different than the actual intent. In my case, it's likely the difference between the way I speak in person, compared with my writing style, which tend to be very different in tone due to a lack of vocalization, which I tend to rely on a lot while speaking. When watching Elon's interview earlier, I can see how much of what he said would come out differently if it was written rather than spoken.

As for your second article, I basically stopped reading right around here:

That page they linked to explicitly says it's a projection. A projection isn't something that has already happened like they're stating matter-of-factly here, which is what they're making it out to be. Is Elon's claim inaccurate? I don't know for certain, but probably. But what they're doing here goes well beyond that. Even the onesie-twosie's they cite don't look conclusive to me either, rather that the possibility exists to the point where in my mind, it amounts to a probability. Just like you, they have no moral high ground. /thread

I mentally left this behind until I noticed the the Economist posted the entire interview, which I listened to, so now I can respond in more detail...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Where does this "meltdown" happen? At worst I've seen a case where he trips over his words, part of which is due to the modern lack of the word 'thou' in our vocabulary, and other parts look like my own ASD symptoms. The conversation heats up a little in parts, but no more than you'd see in a typical debate, and it's mutual between both speakers. Beyond that, he seems calm and collected throughout the whole thing. I like the part where she was complaining about how he owns Starlink, how that's too much for one person to have control over (Note: without him, nothing like that would even exist right now, for more reason than one, including the lawsuits he had to defend) so he asks "What would you have me do differently?"

I was somewhat taking your word for it, but you just reminded me of why I take your two-bit "hate Elon no matter what" fruity little club with less than a pinch of salt.

Not the first time I've heard anybody say that about another person. Shit, your friends always call me a "class traitor" even though I never signed up to be in your club to begin with. Just the mere fact that I won't sign up for it is why you guys do that.

So I'm trying to find out where this actually happened, and I'm not seeing it. From what I can tell, it originates here:

https://x.com/DougJBalloon/sta...

And guess what? That's a satire account. Congratulations, you've been had.

As for this:

In the Economist interview, I don't see what's racist about it. He was describing the schism between western culture and other cultures. He's not the only one who notices that. You probably took that to mean "it's racist because it's eurocentric, meaning non-westerners are brown!" in which case, how typical, but also...ah...no. We see the exact same thing with Russians, who I've been paying the most attention to recently. As Sarah Paine said "western culture is like battery acid on other cultures" and as an example she spoke about the large differences between westerners and middle-east cultures on women's rights. To many of them, we're "backwards" on that topic. He then was talking about how this is turning into a flashpoint in Britain, saying a civil war would happen if things continue as they are. I personally don't think it will reach that point, but at the same time, he's not wrong either. This HAS been an issue there. How big of one? I don't know, but I've heard this even from the BBC.

Nor do I want to take the side that "the west is right, others are wrong" as most westerners seem to do without even realizing it. Shit, in western sci-fi, especially Star Trek (which I'm a fan of, by the way) what are obviously westernized alien cultures are always the most "advanced" and morally in the right.

Earlier I said you were eating rsilvergun's shit. Well, I was wrong there, you are in fact full of it already, so that should have been past tense. So congratulations, you're already worse than whatever it is you think about Elon.

The premise of both of these is false. Not only is the commentary about spacex false, (again, this is based on absolutely nothing) but your posts didn't even talk about that. In case you've already forgotten:

You said it yourself.

Everything you're saying here is consistent with what I've heard from him in the past, dating at least as far back as 2018, and realistically much earlier. What "decline", specifically?

You know why that is? Because this is just a variation of exactly the same shit he has been repeating for years. All you've done here is contribute to disinformation about SpaceX, and for what? Just to satisfy your insecurities? Everything I've said is warranted.