Readit NewsAt the same time, I can see Apple caving to Iran governement - or China's - and restrict this feature to countries where it is legal.
Irredentist pro-war language, Tim Cook? I am so done with Apple. They knew what they did when they chose the words; they certainly spent thousands of hours deliberating them.
This is Lebensraum with Chinese Characteristics.
> "The term is often used to avoid invoking sensitivities over the political status of Taiwan.[16] Contrastingly, it has been used in reference to Chinese irredentism in nationalist contexts, such as the notion that China should reclaim its "lost territories" to create a Greater China.[17][18]"
[1] https://careers.microsoft.com/v2/global/en/locations/gcr.htm...
[2] https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/intl/en-apac/collections/gre...
But at the same time, the reason Docker won was not because it was groundbreaking tech or because it was amazingly well tested or anything. Just as one example, it has a years old bug which actively gets more comments every week having to do with Docker grossly mishandling quotes in env files.
No, the reason it won is because the development experience and the deploy experience is easy, especially when you are on Linux AND on macOS. I can’t run FreeBSD jails or ZFS on macOS, can I? Definitely not with one file and one command.
Jails and ZFS are amazing tech but they are not accessible. Docker made simple things very simple while being cross-platform enough. Do I feel gross using it? Yeah. It’s a kludgy solution to the problem. But it gets the job done and is supported by every provider out there. I am excited that it is being ported to FreeBSD though I know it will be a very long process.
On macOS, docker actually launches a Linux VM to run containers. If this counts, then yes, you can run FreeBSD jails or zfs on macOS, by running a FreeBSD VM.
I don't understand how the things presented in this article are surprising. Zig has several nice features shared by many modern programming languages?
like, if the direction came down from on high, to copy it ... how few things would have to get flipped on to have roughly the same thing in the united states?
i'd really appreciate an insider's summary. a lot has changed since 2004. probably.
The first part is GFW, with which people outside of China is more familiar. It operates at every international internet cable, analyzing and dynamically blocks traffic in realtime. China only have few sites that connects to international internet, with very limited bandwidth (few Tbps in total), so it's more feasible. But overall speaking, this is the easy part.
The second part of walling a garden is about controlling what's inside the garden. Every website running in China mainland needs an ICP license from the government, which can take weeks. ISPs must be state-owned (there are 4 of them in total, no local small ISPs whatsoever). Residential IPs cannot be used for serving websites because the inbound traffic of well-known ports are blocked, which is required by the law. VPN apps are illegal. etc. These are things that are much harder to do in other countries.
Deleted Comment
Apple could take just 7% cut and still make 20% profits.
Fun Fact: During the Epic trial, it was revealed that Apple's profit margins on the App Store were so high that even Apple's own executives were sometimes surprised by the internal financial reports.
---
edit: There is no ideological argument for voluntary action here. The entire goal is to force regulators to step in. The debate over 'good vs. bad companies' is just online noise and rhetorical trik, no one on either side of the political spectrum wants these systems to be fixed voluntarily with corporate altruism.
We can say this to any company, "$X could reduce price by $Y and still make $Z profits", but it doesn't really make any sense. Making profits is what makes a company a company instead of a non-profit organization.