613 karma · joined May 21, 2018
There's not much scientific evidence for "set point weight" or "starvation mode" or other similar concepts. People regain weight after dieting most likely because they go back to their old eating habits rather than making a lasting diet changes. But it's more convenient to blame their body stubbornness than their own lack of discipline.
On the other hand we just do not have the technology for a full humanoid robot, neither now nor the near future. An AI that can do mundane tasks like ironing and folding clothes is way beyond our grasp, and then there are the issue of limbs and power too.
So now they altered the agreement. And they can because you bought a device that you agreed you wouldn't own.
They'll ditch privacy in a second if they can sell you enough ads, just as they ditched privacy for Chinese customers when the Chinese government asked them to.
But even if that was the case, the tool will now exists for any dictatorial government to spy on "troublemakers". The Chinese government, which has already gotten full compliance from Apple, would be foolish not to use it.
> But would it be able to say no to China?
In order to keep selling on the Chinese market, they already agreed to host their Chinese customer data inside China with a local cloud provider, and censor content according to Chinese requirements, and fully comply with the CCP requests. So once the "tank man" photo is added to the list of banned pictures, there's no doubt they'll happily comply.
How about not moving forward with this system?
Corporations have to obey the law, but they don't need to be zealous and build spying infrastructure when they aren't required to.
But here they'll scan the local files on your own device, that you supposedly "own" (but not really, because Apple already locked it up to make sure you can only install stuff they have approved and taken a cut off)
But Apple iCloud for ex doesn't intrude on your privacy any more or less than Google Photos.
That's true in the US, but not in the EU. And not operating in the EU is not really an option for any of the FAANG.
That's because other OEM have worked hard NOT to be vertically integrated. There are benefits to splitting the value chain and letting each supplier concentrate on what they are best at, and get economies of scale from selling to multiple clients.
It seems to me that Tesla lack of focus is actually one of their biggest problem. You can't the best at making cars, batteries, solar panels, etc. all at the same time.
Apple owns your phone.
In contrast, Apple retain full control of the phone. You buy it, but you don't control it.
I feel the difficulty of making EVs has been vastly exaggerated - any manufacturer that knows how to make an hybrid knows how to make an EV.
No - the ~50% margin Apple makes on the phone pays for the ecosystem. Apple could charge nothing for inclusion in the app store and still be by far the most profitable electronic device maker on the planet.