Steve Jobs is one of the most important historical figures of our lifetime, if not the most. Here is why. He broke the hold the carriers had over phones. In doing so changed the world and ushered in the mobile economy.
Remember back to pre iPhone days. Each carrier had their own version of the phone. That phone came with bloatware and a curated list of possible apps you may download … from the carrier. The carrier had total control and say of the phone, it’s functionality and the apps installed.
Imagine a world today where the phone App Store and phone function itself was controlled by the carrier. The carrier dictates if Uber or Lyft is available to “their” customers. Only certain banks or restaurants are available based upon agreements with the carriers.The carrier picks the winners and losers in this new mobile economy and the world is fragmented based upon your cell phone carrier.
Things we take for granted like maps, messaging and FaceTime would be additional costs you pay to the carrier.
Because of Steve Jobs and his vision, that dystopian carrier controlled world does not exist. The new mobile and gig economy is all because Steve Jobs had the vision to wrestle control from the carriers. Name one other person in the last 50 years that has had this much effect on the world and how society has changed.
This is an US specific issue - in Europe it was common to just buy the device outright and use it with whichever carrier. And whilst it's cool that Apple was against the tyranny of carriers, it's very obvious it has no qualms about being the tyrant itself.
Wait, wasn't iPhone an AT&T/Cingular exclusive for awhile? I feel like this is kind of antithetical to the idea of escaping the tyranny of carriers. Unless escaping the tyranny of carriers means that between 2007 and 2011, iPhones were tired to one carrier.
Then there is the side loading apps issue. There is only one true source for apps on iPhone, but someone can actually build an alternative app store for android phones. This seems more like walled garden activity.
At least with carriers we'd have more competition, now everything you mention is basically controlled by two companies. I'm not sure if that's any better.
In the absence of a court injunction, those currently holding the money get the benefits of the money at least until final appeals are settled. The courts may decide that some interest is part of the end settlement, but as far as I've read, those currently holding the money haven't been required to set aside any interest in anticipation of any settlement.
Acetone will only work with ABS which has another set of issues. Reducing the layer height and a coat of paint will accomplish almost the same thing using PLA.
Disagree, and I used to run a company that did FDM printing. If you look at this design it's packed with tons of overhangs regardless of printing orientation, and a particularly nasty undercut ending in a sharp point (see right side view). This is actually a great example of where FDM is a bad solution and the part should be redesigned (ex. split it into multiple pieces or find a way to re-engineer it so it can be printed in some good orientation) or you should pick a different method. Yes, you could FDM print this, but the end quality would be garbage, the tolerances would be poor, and you'd end up with a lot of support material cleanup and probably failed/unacceptable prints.
If you print this angled so the curved side is down and the two sides are at 45 degrees to horizontal, it should print more or less fine without any support whatsoever.
Agreed. I’ve printed dishwasher replacement parts using ABS that hold up perfectly in high temps soaking in water. PLA is also great for certain applications and can look and feel very nice when done right.
I disagree with his assumptions and logic. Basically he is saying because you don’t need to live near work, people will not live in Manhattan.
There are plenty of jobs outside of NYC. Always has been. People live in NYC for the culture and lifestyle. It is a fun place to live. It will absolutely rebound.
This is trivial compared to 9/11. Yet NYC rebounded.
This article seems to be saying the rich are leaving New York. And the world that caters to them (expensive restaurants, etc.) is suffering. This is true.
But as you say falling rents offer more opportunities for the culture and lifestyle aspects of the city.
Also, this post rattles off a bunch of negatives, but fails to offer any alternative to rival NYC. South Florida or Phoenix? Maybe one, but certainly not yet.
Wealth is moveable, but often not very far. Closely packed states have a big issue of people moving across state lines to escape taxes; think of hedge fund managers moving to New Jersey.
California is big, and has a lot of stuff in it people find desirable. Moving from CA is to commit to moving hundreds of miles to get to another state, which is a pretty extreme ask comparatively.
Historically CA has managed to get away with high taxes and disastrous housing policy because it was desirable; good jobs, weather, etc. With remote work it’s yet to be seen exactly where the balance of desire and cost will settle back out to.
I can assure you, that what was once luxury beach front properties in Venezuela and the islands it controls in the Caribbean are now but a couple weeks wages for someone working in SF.
I can assure you that if that house gets frequently robbed or has large homeless encampment of heroine users and drunks on the same street you wouldn't be saying it.
Then again...if you're from SF that's your daily life. So yeah....sweet house in the beach woot!
And I can assure you that what were once huge estates of wealthy barons of Russia and France, where wealth was concentrated in the hands of a few due to a lack of redistributive taxation and where there was an utter lack of social safety net due to a lack of state revenue resulting from such tax policies. People revolted, those barons were killed and their estates were confiscated.
I can assure you that I do not want Venezuela or Cuba of today. But I can also assure you that I neither want Russia of 1917 or France of 1789. Let's trudge down the middle road.
This is not taxing income, it is a tax on net worth. This is not done because it is completely unworkable. If I own a successful business, who gets to decide what it is worth?
> If I own a successful business, who gets to decide what it is worth?
The market, if its publicly traded. This proposed law is about taxing the Zuckerberg's and Musk's in the State, not worrying about putting a precise value on smaller assets.
Remember back to pre iPhone days. Each carrier had their own version of the phone. That phone came with bloatware and a curated list of possible apps you may download … from the carrier. The carrier had total control and say of the phone, it’s functionality and the apps installed.
Imagine a world today where the phone App Store and phone function itself was controlled by the carrier. The carrier dictates if Uber or Lyft is available to “their” customers. Only certain banks or restaurants are available based upon agreements with the carriers.The carrier picks the winners and losers in this new mobile economy and the world is fragmented based upon your cell phone carrier.
Things we take for granted like maps, messaging and FaceTime would be additional costs you pay to the carrier.
Because of Steve Jobs and his vision, that dystopian carrier controlled world does not exist. The new mobile and gig economy is all because Steve Jobs had the vision to wrestle control from the carriers. Name one other person in the last 50 years that has had this much effect on the world and how society has changed.