Not 100% sure what you wanna tell me, but with FIAT money all the value lies in trusting/believing the "state"(FED) backing it up the point that someday in the future someone else sees enough value to trade some goods for it.
Why do you say I hate Apple? Not being rude, just asking...
The reality is that they have no way of checking the apps but they pretend that they do. The only thing they check the apps for is to make sure that they get all the money they can (Epic is the one good example).
I think you misread what I wrote, but I wouldn't berate you in the same way that you're quick to berate someone who was swindled. I didn't attack Apple, and I didn't call this guy a genius. This person could have gone in with the understanding that he was safe because of Apple's
I think that a lot of people on this forum blindly defend Apple. I understand that some users are devoted to the brand, but Apple can be held accountable when their systems fail
Apple states you can submerge the phone 30 minutes up to six minutes or something like that. I still don’t find the analogy as valid.
As far as shplock is concerned, anyone that questions Apples actions in a negative light is a hater of the company. You are not the only one he has accused of hating Apple for daring to have a negative opinion/view about them, he did the same to me in a post of his.
Generally statements that don't allow for discussion such as the above end up by being false. Apple can do it's part and vet apps, but as the scammers at Epic shows not everything can be caught; and this is likely to be exacerbated if Apple is forced to open up the app store.
The idea again, that it's all or nothing is not realistic when there is no place in the internet that is 100% anything. A company tries to defend its users against malware and other types of scams or advertising, and then is chastised when it's imperfect. This seems ludicrous. I don't care if we're talking Google or Microsoft or Apple, or online car sales for that matter. None of it is perfect, nor could it be, so why is everyone thinking the company is at fault, when the App Developer purposefully set it up to be something it wasn't? Criminals still commit crimes, even with security measures, or life would be much happier. What happened to personal responsibility for one's actions? The people scammed on this app meet someone on a digital street in a digital gated community with security, don't know them, and offer them their own money because they like how the other person is dressed and what they are offering. And somehow it's the security company's fault? The scammer didn't rob them at gunpoint, the scammer offered something and the people handed them their money without blinking.
Apple does not state that you the consumer can submerge a phone. Apples' website clearly states this is tested in laboratory conditions. Nowhere does the website say, you the consumer should (or even can) perform the same tests.
Right, and so it's not all or nothing for Apple. It can still take some accountability and show responsibility. I'm not entirely sure about your analogy, but the criminal is ultimately the problem. Another, not completely equivalent analogy might include students who are assaulted on campus. Schools often try to blame their victims, and a lot of people find that problematic. They may berate those victims while protecting their position and sometimes even the assaulter--as if the victim should have known better. Again, in this case, the victim could have been more prudent, but that person is a victim that was victimized on a platform that Apple monitors
Except that a robbery by gunpoint is the same as a victim on campus of an assault, and that is not what happened. What happened is that the victim got in a stranger's car (the App) and was then taken off the campus where they willingly did whatever (voluntary use of the app), and then it ended badly. No one forced the victim to get in the car. And the security company didn't knowingly let the stranger on campus...the stranger had a good fake ID and talked his way in. Of course it sucks that it happened. And yes, the criminal is the problem, but so is the gullibility of the victim. All decisions have consequences. Some of them have such bad consequences that they are truly awful. You're basically saying that you want personal freedom and a security state for when your personal freedom is in danger. The campus scenario...While I believe there should be more security on campus, you would have to have easily hundreds of security walking campus at night of a campus of 20,000 in order to not have as many crimes. And even then the criminals would find a way.
Sorry, but that is not autocorrect. Autocorrect is typing t-r-e-z and seeing iOS suggest geez.
And so is Apple for failing to protect its users. As you said, it's not all or nothing, including for Apple
And yet in their iPhone page you can read this:
The difference is the Bitcoin scam happened to gullible people, getting hacked does not pertain to a particular user
