More than that, it could shine a light on any improper (aka corrupt) dealings occurring between Apple and Google and the Trump administration. Also exploring this is:
Masimo suing the CBP and Kristi Noem alleging the CBP improperly intervened on behalf of Apple and unilaterally ended a patent ban following $600 billion in investment pledges (ignoring the many dinners together and the golden gift)
Senators questioning big tech about their ballroom donations investigating if this is a mechanism to undermine their antitrust issues
CEO of JPMorgan saying he refused to donate to the ballroom because a future DOJ may investigate it as a possible quid-pro-quo.
“So, we’re quite conscious of risks we bear by doing anything that looks like buying favors or anything like that,” he continued. “So, do we do things like that? And by the way, we also have policies where we don’t do certain things because it makes it easier for us.”
Am I the only one who sees it as taking an assured L trying to raise things through the courts like this during this administration?
Like the developer was resistant to the idea of a PWA and didn't seem to want to involve others who wanted to help him come up with a more takedown-resistant design and lift this out of an app store where there's already a precedent of removals at the behest of governments for other butthole nations. In case it wasn't obvious to this guy, we are that butthole nation now.
Like. We all saw this coming. There was definitely some main character syndrome going on with the app dev. I do acknowledge that he was, in fact, providing a good service that deserves to exist.
However, it just feels like a dumb idea to try and raise this through the courts directly at this administration with all major court levels captured. Lower courts are repeatedly getting run over by clarence thomas' luxury winnebago. I'm sort of apprehensive that things like this could backfire and cause the SC to create new precedent that might not currently exist that won't easily be rolled back.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. We have the bill of rights. We have constitutionally protected speech, we have the right of association, we have free expression. Or we don't. Our rights need to be vindicated especially when they are under attack by the government, such as so blatantly like government censoring speech or demanding apps to be removed. Or putting pressure on companies to do so, therefore chilling speech. It is more imperative to protect the first amendment than any other amendment. It's also the one under attack the most. So yes Sue them all.
I support these apps. Any type of law enforcement or immigration enforcement is a tax payer funded employee. We the people should always have the right to openly discuss these individuals and that includes discuss their locations or where we see them.
The government censored free speech by forcing big tech companies to remove the app.
This is also why I think side loading needs to be permitted on every device. We should be able to decide what we use our devices for.
this is the most predictable combo ever. government that cant stand being watched. plus a trillion dollar company that doesnt want problems. guess who loses. spoiler its never ice
Communities should create shared lists on Google Maps. They’re not going to take down Google Maps! And every time a list is deleted at the request of the government a new list can be created by another user.
If the claims hold up, it could reopen the debate on how much influence governments should have over app store decisions.
More than that, it could shine a light on any improper (aka corrupt) dealings occurring between Apple and Google and the Trump administration. Also exploring this is:
Masimo suing the CBP and Kristi Noem alleging the CBP improperly intervened on behalf of Apple and unilaterally ended a patent ban following $600 billion in investment pledges (ignoring the many dinners together and the golden gift)
Senators questioning big tech about their ballroom donations investigating if this is a mechanism to undermine their antitrust issues
CEO of JPMorgan saying he refused to donate to the ballroom because a future DOJ may investigate it as a possible quid-pro-quo.
Dimon’s quote is so chaotic to me:
Am I the only one who sees it as taking an assured L trying to raise things through the courts like this during this administration?
Like the developer was resistant to the idea of a PWA and didn't seem to want to involve others who wanted to help him come up with a more takedown-resistant design and lift this out of an app store where there's already a precedent of removals at the behest of governments for other butthole nations. In case it wasn't obvious to this guy, we are that butthole nation now.
Like. We all saw this coming. There was definitely some main character syndrome going on with the app dev. I do acknowledge that he was, in fact, providing a good service that deserves to exist.
However, it just feels like a dumb idea to try and raise this through the courts directly at this administration with all major court levels captured. Lower courts are repeatedly getting run over by clarence thomas' luxury winnebago. I'm sort of apprehensive that things like this could backfire and cause the SC to create new precedent that might not currently exist that won't easily be rolled back.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. We have the bill of rights. We have constitutionally protected speech, we have the right of association, we have free expression. Or we don't. Our rights need to be vindicated especially when they are under attack by the government, such as so blatantly like government censoring speech or demanding apps to be removed. Or putting pressure on companies to do so, therefore chilling speech. It is more imperative to protect the first amendment than any other amendment. It's also the one under attack the most. So yes Sue them all.
With how many fed employees were given jobs back after illegally being fired by the trump administration, there is some hope in the courts.
I support these apps. Any type of law enforcement or immigration enforcement is a tax payer funded employee. We the people should always have the right to openly discuss these individuals and that includes discuss their locations or where we see them.
The government censored free speech by forcing big tech companies to remove the app.
This is also why I think side loading needs to be permitted on every device. We should be able to decide what we use our devices for.
The discovery phase of this case should be fascinating.
What they’re up against https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/justices-side-with-biden-over-governments-influence-on-social-media-content-moderation/
Anyone know if there is an app like that for android?
this is the most predictable combo ever. government that cant stand being watched. plus a trillion dollar company that doesnt want problems. guess who loses. spoiler its never ice
I mean yeah that’s dumb
I wonder - not apologizing for apple at all - if they deleted the app rather than be forced to provide a list of who downloaded it.
“Nope.”
—Tim Apple
Yeah, if it were Steve I might believe it. Maybe.
Apple most likely gets massive tax breaks, so it's all just a numbers game.
Communities should create shared lists on Google Maps. They’re not going to take down Google Maps! And every time a list is deleted at the request of the government a new list can be created by another user.