DeadlineX

That doesn’t change the claim that the vending machine is GDPR compliant, though.

My point stands that smart phones and guns comparisons are a false equivalency and should never be made.

I’m curious what you mean by the quality of learning data. People are getting smarter* on average than ever before. Young folk are more inclusive that ever before. As far as mental health goes, the general acceptance of mental health has caused an increase, and I’m not convinced social media has as much of an impact as that.

Access to mental healthcare has been hugely improved in the last two decades, and we no longer assume people are inherently bad or problematic when they have treatable mental conditions.

Either way, there’s just not enough data and understanding to make sweeping statements, and it reminds me of when rock and roll was evil, dungeons and dragons was turning kids into devil worshippers, tv made kids stupid, and video games made kids violent.

*smarter isn’t a great term here. Information and data is becoming widely available, increases knowledge and capability for every generation. IQ score are continuously going up and needing to be readjusted to keep 100 at average, but IQ is hardly a realistic measurement of… pretty much anything more than problem solving skills.

Right? Before that it was tv. Before that it was rock and roll. I was actually told to go outside more because I was READING TOO MUCH. Idk why everyone feels like their way of entertainment is better than everyone else’s. It’s so weird that we can’t let people enjoy themselves unless they do it our way.

Yeah I remember that story about those kids killing an entire school with their smartphone.

That’s definitely not a flash equivalency at all.

Remember when video games were making kids kill each other? Because when I was a kid, that’s what people were trying to ban instead of smartphones.

Surprisingly, all music purchases through apple’s store are DRM-free (now, though it wasn’t always that way. They got in early on the DRM wagon in fact until iPods stopped mattering).

My Americanism got in the way I guess. My politicians are doing their best to not enact a law that went in the ballot as a citizen led initiative and received a majority vote. So saying “America thinks this thing because some politicians did a fucked up thing” would be disingenuous.

My point was that I won’t speak for everyone in the eu, but the members of the European Parliament involved in this directed do want, have wanted, and continue to want this regulation. Saying the “eu” didn’t want this, but “well Apple” is just ridiculous, and the directive I would argue affects other products significantly more simply because of all the laptops switching to usb c. If we just go around pretending the “eu” had their hand forced by one company’s cellphone business (large or not), then we are pretending the other massive corporations are *not committing an infraction against humanity with the large amount of ewaste they are producing.

So I could have worded “the eu doesn’t want anything) better. I just didn’t want an already long post to be even longer. I wrote a book here before I had to erase it and trim it down and I still feel like it’s too long and maybe doesn’t even effectively explain my position l, so maybe I just suck at communicating.

Nope. The members of the parliament and council want things. And unlike what the previous commenter said, the vast majority of them did want to regulate this, have wanted to regulate this, and desire regulation independent of Apple’s stubborn refusal to join the 2020s (and late 2010s truthfully).

This was my point. The EU isn’t an amorphous blob, and the individuals involved with this decision do and have wanted this.

The distinction there is just that your statement about the eu NOT wanting to regulate this is incorrect. This is something the members of the eu have wanted regulation on for some time. And not because of Apple, but because of most major manufacturers.

Again, no. It’s not because Apple didn’t change their plug for their mobile devices. It’s because of every device using different chargers. Again, laptops are much worse than a single cable that hasn’t changed in a decade.

By blaming one corporation alone, you are giving every single bad actor a pass. This is how they get away with shit like this.

I’d argue notebook chargers are even MORE awful at this because they’re usually at least $50 for an off-brand and significantly more from the manufacturer.

Looks like you are correct mostly. It looks like it was actually the character and persona from the Colbert report that he can’t use. It would be like taking the show to a different network I guess would be the argument which usually involves the show being bought. It’s also weird because the company was basically suing itself.

It also led to Colbert mentioning that he didn’t know how to act as the normal him, so I think it’s cool he at least got something positive out of it, even if it’s a huge blow for sure.

It’s weird, because if the character was named like Sean Spencer, it would be expected that you couldn’t just use the same character. I’m surprised he didn’t have a legal leg to stand on given the character has his name, and he could argue that it’s simply his own personality, but if he and his lawyers didn’t expect it to be winnable I’ll take their word on it.

Either way, it’s interesting information. Thanks for the correction.

That’s not quite accurate. The EU doesn’t want anything, but the people involved in this decision absolutely wanted to regulate this. It’s been an issue for decades at this point.

It’s also not because of “well, Apple”. This law doesn’t apply to phones alone, it’s pretty much any mobile device.

It also, and this is one of the big and important parts, requires manufacturers to offer the option to NOT have chargers included. The goal here is to reduce the MASSIVE amount of e waste generated by tablets, phones, cameras, and even (especially in my mind, as these are often not compatible even amongst single manufacturers) laptop chargers. That’s an awesome part of the rule, even if it has a larger compliance window.

Lastly, while the law itself doesn’t require USB C, the legal annex absolutely and quite explicitly DOES state that manufacturers must use USB C. There is a provision that reports must be made every 5 years or so, and consideration will be made concerning the required standards (wireless is mentioned as not being able to effectively be regulated in this way as of yet).

This is a huge win in terms of the reduction in e waste, and the option to not receive a charger is, in my opinion, one of the best parts. I have way too many USB C cables that I can’t find a place to use them all, and I’ve got them in every room.

Wouldn’t the issue there be the fact that “of the Colbert Report” is using the actual name of the show in a way that would create profit for him? This, profiting off of someone else’s IP? It’s not the fact that he is “Stephen Colbert”. It’s the part that isn’t his name.

When I think of impersonator personally, I go straight to Elvis impersonators. It’s a running joke in movies, they’re all over Las Vegas, and you can rent an Elvis impersonator for various events, including weddings, in just about any major city.