Skip to content

We Should Immediately Nationalize SpaceX and Starlink

Technology
490 196 26
  • Starlink should be globalized. A planet only needs one low-altitude orbiting communications network. Better to standardize the technology and platform and let them contribute to one system than to have a dozen identical competing systems crashing into each other and fucking things up for everyone.

    Ah. My Kessler syndrome is acting up again.

  • The automotive manufacturers General Motors and Chrysler were partially nationalized in the wake of the 2008 Financial Crisis as were several banks... these were less a full government takeover and more of a government guided restructuring, but the government owned large stakes in these companies. Before that, the only full nationalization of anything substantial was the bankruptcy of the Penn Central Railroad and subsequent establishment of Consolidated Rail (branded as ConRail) the US's only national freight rail company.

    Conrail was later privatized into what is now the private companies CSX and Norfolk Southern. The collapse of Penn Central was the largest bankruptcy in history until Enron in the 1990's. Amtrak, our national passenger rail corporation, is also a nationalized entity created around the same time as ConRail, for similar reasons, and is still nationalized (although the Trump admin wants to privatize it).

    Didn't know about Amtrak. Interesting. Thanks

  • They weren't as typical with previous SpaceX models, Starship is easily their least successful project.

    Since SpaceX is launching large quantities of commercial satellites, big whoop, do you also celebrate when companies buy back stocks?

    Why would I celebrate stock buybacks?

    Also spacex lost like 20 or so Falcons before their first successful mission. Maybe they will explode as many Starships, but they have hit that number yet.

    It’s ok to hate Elon, and there are many valid criticisms to make regarding spacex, but they’re the best in the world right now and it isn’t even close.

    The biggest issue with Spacex is that Elon needs to be removed before he ruins it like he ruined Tesla.

  • you just defend his right to run spacex on specialK.

    Is not the US "the land of the free" ?
    Obviously he has the right to run SpaceX, like you have the right to try to build another one.

    But obviously you seems to not understand what are the implication of setting this kind of precedent and all the implications that will arise. But that's ok, after all the only important thing is to hate Musk.

    ffs have better standards in your selection of contractors. or perhaps you're on too much horse tranq too.

  • you just defend his right to run spacex on specialK.

    Is not the US "the land of the free" ?
    Obviously he has the right to run SpaceX, like you have the right to try to build another one.

    But obviously you seems to not understand what are the implication of setting this kind of precedent and all the implications that will arise. But that's ok, after all the only important thing is to hate Musk.

    But obviously you seems to not understand

    Yeah, and obviously, you only have a passing familiarity with the english language.

  • I don't give two flying fucks who runs space x. Once again. I'm not defending Elon in anyway.

    I am expressing my concern about the United States government nationalizing a private company. You're still making bassless assumptions. Pull your head out of your own ass and actually think about what I'm saying before spouting off at the mouth.

    then defend his drug use. defend doge. come on, make rational arguments for the bullshit, oh, you can't, that's why you're down to insults.

    look fuckwit, you couldn't find your point with a flashlight and a map, and you're telling me to remove my rectum from MY CRANIUM? You want a man addled on horse tranq to run the only company producing orbital launch for the US.

    I think it's your head that's rectum-fied. In fact, this entire discourse is dragging me down to your level. Gonna block you, should have done it before. Enjoy your ketamine kid, hope when he's responsible for killing astronauts you pause and reflect.

    pfft

  • I strongly suspect NASA can manage spaceX better than the ketamine kid. Why don’t you give a fuck about those astronauts who have to put their faith in his hardware? why don’t you give a fuck about the kids who are growing up in an age where that drug addled prick is put up as an icon of success?

    ROTFL, SpaceX managed 259 launch in 2024, show me how many launch managed NASA, if they are more than maybe you are right, else...

    You think my dislike of Musk is all of spaceX. I don't want him ruining spaceX. Musk is responsible for the launch cadence that keeps exploding, if you'd like to make comparisons.

  • then defend his drug use. defend doge. come on, make rational arguments for the bullshit, oh, you can't, that's why you're down to insults.

    look fuckwit, you couldn't find your point with a flashlight and a map, and you're telling me to remove my rectum from MY CRANIUM? You want a man addled on horse tranq to run the only company producing orbital launch for the US.

    I think it's your head that's rectum-fied. In fact, this entire discourse is dragging me down to your level. Gonna block you, should have done it before. Enjoy your ketamine kid, hope when he's responsible for killing astronauts you pause and reflect.

    pfft

    Absolute moron. You absolute moron. Once again my argument is about nationalizing a private company.

    Is there anything that you'd like to talk about concerning that!

  • You think my dislike of Musk is all of spaceX. I don't want him ruining spaceX. Musk is responsible for the launch cadence that keeps exploding, if you'd like to make comparisons.

    Wait a minute. It is not that NASA when developed the rocket that culminated with the Apollo V did not even had a rocket exploding, they had their fair share of failures (and some even letal).

    But the main difference is that SpaceX and NASA have different approaches: NASA cannot, for various polical reasons, tolerate a rocket exploding during a test, SpaceX can.
    I would argue that NASA, in its current incarnation and political situation, would never be able to design, build and manage something like the Falcon 9.

    So Musk is not ruining SpaceX with the Starship failures in my opinion, since it is inherent to SpaceX that way to work.

    Then that Musk is sometime a little too borderline is true, but I suppose that now he cannot really ruin any of his companies, for whatever you can think about him I really doubt that he is that stupid.

  • Stop cutting their funding and saying the earth is flat and that global warming is a myth.

    Stop cutting their funding

    Stop electing stupid people and maybe you will get something.

    and saying the earth is flat

    Stop treating every opinion as worth of discussion even if it is clearly stupid.

    and that global warming is a myth.

    Start to propose some reasonable solutions and start to pass over the NIMBY syndrome.
    (and no, only stopping to use ICE cars or fossil fuel is not a reasonable solution until you propose a sustainable alternative solution)

  • Wait a minute. It is not that NASA when developed the rocket that culminated with the Apollo V did not even had a rocket exploding, they had their fair share of failures (and some even letal).

    But the main difference is that SpaceX and NASA have different approaches: NASA cannot, for various polical reasons, tolerate a rocket exploding during a test, SpaceX can.
    I would argue that NASA, in its current incarnation and political situation, would never be able to design, build and manage something like the Falcon 9.

    So Musk is not ruining SpaceX with the Starship failures in my opinion, since it is inherent to SpaceX that way to work.

    Then that Musk is sometime a little too borderline is true, but I suppose that now he cannot really ruin any of his companies, for whatever you can think about him I really doubt that he is that stupid.

    is not that NASA when developed the rocket that culminated with the Apollo V did not even had a rocket exploding

    dude english, wtf is this sentence even supposed to say? are you an LLM?

    fucking hell.

    Then that Musk is sometime a little too borderline is true, but I suppose that now he cannot really ruin any of his companies, for whatever you can think about him I really doubt that he is that stupid.

    again with the word salad. english better be your third or 4th language.

    if you doubt his stupidity, then evaluate the logic of doing large amounts OF HORSE TRANQUALIZER WHILE MANAGING MULTIPLE COMPANIES AND LAUNCHING ROCKETS.

    Come on, make that one make sense word salad llm

  • is not that NASA when developed the rocket that culminated with the Apollo V did not even had a rocket exploding

    dude english, wtf is this sentence even supposed to say? are you an LLM?

    fucking hell.

    Then that Musk is sometime a little too borderline is true, but I suppose that now he cannot really ruin any of his companies, for whatever you can think about him I really doubt that he is that stupid.

    again with the word salad. english better be your third or 4th language.

    if you doubt his stupidity, then evaluate the logic of doing large amounts OF HORSE TRANQUALIZER WHILE MANAGING MULTIPLE COMPANIES AND LAUNCHING ROCKETS.

    Come on, make that one make sense word salad llm

    is not that NASA when developed the rocket that culminated with the Apollo V did not even had a rocket exploding
    

    dude english, wtf is this sentence even supposed to say? are you an LLM?

    Nope, just a regular guy that do not speak English as first language.

    But let me rephrase it, even if i am sure you understand what I mean.
    When NASA was developing the rocket to go to the moon (the Apollo V) they had their large shares of failures, exactly like SpaceX is having now while developing Starship (and before it, the Falcon 9) which is even more complex and bigger than the Apollo V.

    Then that Musk is sometime a little too borderline is true, but I suppose that now he cannot really ruin any of his companies, for whatever you can think about him I really doubt that he is that stupid.
    

    again with the word salad. english better be your third or 4th language.

    You are right. But again, I am sure you understand what I mean, but ok, let me rephrase also this.
    Musk is sometime too borderline but I suppose that actually he really don't want to ruin his companies because, for bad as you can think about him, I think is not that stupid.

    if you doubt his stupidity, then evaluate the logic of doing large amounts OF HORSE TRANQUALIZER WHILE MANAGING MULTIPLE COMPANIES AND LAUNCHING ROCKETS.

    Come on, make that one make sense word salad llm

    Wait, do you really think that Musk is the one that is doing all the jobs at Tesla and SpaceX ?
    Again, you can think what you want about Musk himself, but the track record for SpaceX (over 250 launch in 2024) and Tesla (it demostrated something that every other car manufacturer deemed impossible) does not seems too bad.
    And I would like to have an estimate about the "large amounts"

    But feel free to attack my grammar and hate Musk.

  • It is usually due to "budget cuts" as the easiest way to kill a project is to defend it.

    Juno Jupiter flyby

    Maven mission to mars

    New horizons kbo flyby

    Terra mission-earth science satellite

    Aqua mission -earth science satellite

    DSCOVR

    SLS-which may actually be a bad program but is a good example of the political issues with NASA vs senate.

    Juno Jupiter flyby

    But Juno went to Jupiter?

  • Juno Jupiter flyby

    But Juno went to Jupiter?

    These programs require continuous funding. The probe went to Jupiter. The scientist and listening stations back on earth still have to run to receive the data.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Don't buy into the grifts. Dismantle them.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    we should probably invest in making sure people have affordable housing, food, and healthcare before worrying about militarising space.

  • is not that NASA when developed the rocket that culminated with the Apollo V did not even had a rocket exploding
    

    dude english, wtf is this sentence even supposed to say? are you an LLM?

    Nope, just a regular guy that do not speak English as first language.

    But let me rephrase it, even if i am sure you understand what I mean.
    When NASA was developing the rocket to go to the moon (the Apollo V) they had their large shares of failures, exactly like SpaceX is having now while developing Starship (and before it, the Falcon 9) which is even more complex and bigger than the Apollo V.

    Then that Musk is sometime a little too borderline is true, but I suppose that now he cannot really ruin any of his companies, for whatever you can think about him I really doubt that he is that stupid.
    

    again with the word salad. english better be your third or 4th language.

    You are right. But again, I am sure you understand what I mean, but ok, let me rephrase also this.
    Musk is sometime too borderline but I suppose that actually he really don't want to ruin his companies because, for bad as you can think about him, I think is not that stupid.

    if you doubt his stupidity, then evaluate the logic of doing large amounts OF HORSE TRANQUALIZER WHILE MANAGING MULTIPLE COMPANIES AND LAUNCHING ROCKETS.

    Come on, make that one make sense word salad llm

    Wait, do you really think that Musk is the one that is doing all the jobs at Tesla and SpaceX ?
    Again, you can think what you want about Musk himself, but the track record for SpaceX (over 250 launch in 2024) and Tesla (it demostrated something that every other car manufacturer deemed impossible) does not seems too bad.
    And I would like to have an estimate about the "large amounts"

    But feel free to attack my grammar and hate Musk.

    When NASA was developing the rocket to go to the moon (the Apollo V) they had their large shares of failures, exactly like SpaceX is having now while developing Starship (and before it, the Falcon 9) which is even more complex and bigger than the Apollo V.

    this is a specious comparison. NASA was racing the soviets using 1950 and 60's tech, and it cost lives, but there was a driving motivation for the tempo (kennedy's goal of humans on the moon first). There's no contemporary equivalent. And no NASA director was EVER ON HORSE DRUGS. Period.

    Nor did any NASA director ever try to manage multiple fortune 500 companies WHILE on ketamine while DANCING AROUND WITH A CHAINSAW and fucking with our government.

    Your comparison is invalid.

    Wait, do you really think that Musk is the one that is doing all the jobs at Tesla and SpaceX ?

    No, I think he's distorting the work of thousands of talented people (Shotwell down) for EGO. If he truly cared he'd step down.

    None of this is complex. I'm glad you speak english well enough to reorder your thoughts in a comprehensible manner, but the premise remains unchanged. Musk represents a larger threat to SpaceX and NASA and the US than any potential benefit to those same parties.

    I will feel free to attack musk, didn't need your permission but thanks!

  • When NASA was developing the rocket to go to the moon (the Apollo V) they had their large shares of failures, exactly like SpaceX is having now while developing Starship (and before it, the Falcon 9) which is even more complex and bigger than the Apollo V.

    this is a specious comparison. NASA was racing the soviets using 1950 and 60's tech, and it cost lives, but there was a driving motivation for the tempo (kennedy's goal of humans on the moon first). There's no contemporary equivalent. And no NASA director was EVER ON HORSE DRUGS. Period.

    Nor did any NASA director ever try to manage multiple fortune 500 companies WHILE on ketamine while DANCING AROUND WITH A CHAINSAW and fucking with our government.

    Your comparison is invalid.

    Wait, do you really think that Musk is the one that is doing all the jobs at Tesla and SpaceX ?

    No, I think he's distorting the work of thousands of talented people (Shotwell down) for EGO. If he truly cared he'd step down.

    None of this is complex. I'm glad you speak english well enough to reorder your thoughts in a comprehensible manner, but the premise remains unchanged. Musk represents a larger threat to SpaceX and NASA and the US than any potential benefit to those same parties.

    I will feel free to attack musk, didn't need your permission but thanks!

    When NASA was developing the rocket to go to the moon (the Apollo V) they had their large shares of failures, exactly like SpaceX is having now while developing Starship (and before it, the Falcon 9) which is even more complex and bigger than the Apollo V.

    this is a specious comparison. NASA was racing the soviets using 1950 and 60’s tech, and it cost lives, but there was a driving motivation for the tempo (kennedy’s goal of humans on the moon first). There’s no contemporary equivalent. And no NASA director was EVER ON HORSE DRUGS. Period.

    Your comparison is invalid.

    Only if you could link the fact that Musk is on horse drugs with the fact that Starship explodes.
    The starting point was that I dismissed the point that Musk is ruining SpaceX (since Starship's test are not that good) and the fact that he is on drugs.

    Nor did any NASA director ever try to manage multiple fortune 500 companies WHILE on ketamine while DANCING AROUND WITH A CHAINSAW and fucking with our government.

    I don't see the problem: NASA was a state agency, SpaceX is private.
    What I can see from here is that Musk is doing the right thing (trying to make the government more efficient and cheaper) using a completely wrong method, to which I agree.

    Wait, do you really think that Musk is the one that is doing all the jobs at Tesla and SpaceX ?

    No, I think he’s distorting the work of thousands of talented people (Shotwell down) for EGO. If he truly cared he’d step down.

    I don't think it could do it anymore, at least not to the level you think.

    Musk represents a larger threat to SpaceX and NASA and the US than any potential benefit to those same parties.

    I am not sure. What I think from here (Europe) is that, as I said, Musk is doing the right thing in the wrong (very wrong) way if we speak about DOGE. If we speak about SpaceX and Tesla, well, it don't seems to do that bad after all.

  • When NASA was developing the rocket to go to the moon (the Apollo V) they had their large shares of failures, exactly like SpaceX is having now while developing Starship (and before it, the Falcon 9) which is even more complex and bigger than the Apollo V.

    this is a specious comparison. NASA was racing the soviets using 1950 and 60’s tech, and it cost lives, but there was a driving motivation for the tempo (kennedy’s goal of humans on the moon first). There’s no contemporary equivalent. And no NASA director was EVER ON HORSE DRUGS. Period.

    Your comparison is invalid.

    Only if you could link the fact that Musk is on horse drugs with the fact that Starship explodes.
    The starting point was that I dismissed the point that Musk is ruining SpaceX (since Starship's test are not that good) and the fact that he is on drugs.

    Nor did any NASA director ever try to manage multiple fortune 500 companies WHILE on ketamine while DANCING AROUND WITH A CHAINSAW and fucking with our government.

    I don't see the problem: NASA was a state agency, SpaceX is private.
    What I can see from here is that Musk is doing the right thing (trying to make the government more efficient and cheaper) using a completely wrong method, to which I agree.

    Wait, do you really think that Musk is the one that is doing all the jobs at Tesla and SpaceX ?

    No, I think he’s distorting the work of thousands of talented people (Shotwell down) for EGO. If he truly cared he’d step down.

    I don't think it could do it anymore, at least not to the level you think.

    Musk represents a larger threat to SpaceX and NASA and the US than any potential benefit to those same parties.

    I am not sure. What I think from here (Europe) is that, as I said, Musk is doing the right thing in the wrong (very wrong) way if we speak about DOGE. If we speak about SpaceX and Tesla, well, it don't seems to do that bad after all.

    I don’t see the problem: NASA was a state agency, SpaceX is private.

    lives are literally at stake, grow the fuck up.

    Elon Musk decided to wreck USAID. The death toll is ghoulish. This dickwad said "the fundamental weakness of western civilization is empathy".

    If we speak about SpaceX and Tesla, well, it don’t seems to do that bad after all.

    haha tesla is cratering in the EU and that cybertruck sure is a winner. pfft

    You are so detached from reality it's disgusting. This discussion has been absolutely pointless.

  • I don’t see the problem: NASA was a state agency, SpaceX is private.

    lives are literally at stake, grow the fuck up.

    Elon Musk decided to wreck USAID. The death toll is ghoulish. This dickwad said "the fundamental weakness of western civilization is empathy".

    If we speak about SpaceX and Tesla, well, it don’t seems to do that bad after all.

    haha tesla is cratering in the EU and that cybertruck sure is a winner. pfft

    You are so detached from reality it's disgusting. This discussion has been absolutely pointless.

    I don’t see the problem: NASA was a state agency, SpaceX is private.

    lives are literally at stake, grow the fuck up.

    And incidentally SpaceX is the only US entity to have a ship certified for human flight. Where is the Dragon's equivalent of NASA ? Or any other company/state agency.

    Elon Musk decided to wreck USAID. The death toll is ghoulish.

    An agency created in the 1960's to fight URSS influence. Maybe it is time to let it go and start with something else, don't you think ?
    Or maybe it is time that US start to think that without everyone else it is nothing and begin to be an reliable ally and not one that can change idea every 2 years.

    This dickwad said “the fundamental weakness of western civilization is empathy”.

    To be honest, empathy is something you should be aware of after a certain point.

    But whatever...

  • 288 Stimmen
    46 Beiträge
    166 Aufrufe
    G
    Just for the record, even in Italy the winter tires are required for the season (but we can just have chains on board and we are good). Double checking and it doesn’t seem like it? Then again I don’t live in Italy. Here in Sweden you’ll face a fine of ~2000kr (roughly 200€) per tire on your vehicle that is out of spec. https://www.europe-consommateurs.eu/en/travelling-motor-vehicles/motor-vehicles/winter-tyres-in-europe.html Well, I live in Italy and they are required at least in all the northern regions and over a certain altitude in all the others from 15th November to 15th April. Then in some regions these limits are differents as you have seen. So we in Italy already have a law that consider a different situation for the same rule. Granted that you need to write a more complex law, but in the end it is nothing impossible. …and thus it is much simpler to handle these kinds of regulations at a lower level. No need for everyone everywhere to agree, people can have rules that work for them where they live, folks are happier and don’t have to struggle against a system run by bureaucrats so far away they have no idea what reality on the ground is (and they can’t, it’s impossible to account for every scenario centrally). Even on a municipal level certain regulations differ, and that’s completely ok! So it is not that difficult, just write a directive that say: "All the member states should make laws that require winter tires in every place it is deemed necessary". I don't really think that making EU more integrated is impossibile
  • uBlockOrigin is porting uBOL to iOS and macOS

    Technology technology
    30
    325 Stimmen
    30 Beiträge
    14 Aufrufe
    C
    Will never happen unfortunately
  • Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    14 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.
  • 16 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 54 Stimmen
    18 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    halcyon@discuss.tchncs.deH
    Though babble fish is a funny term, Douglas Adams named the creature "Babel fish", after the biblical story of the tower of Babel.
  • 142 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    4 Aufrufe
    P
    The topic is more nuanced, all the logs indicate email/password combos that were compromised. While it is possible this is due to a malware infection, it could be something as simple as a phishing website. In this case, credentials are entered but no "malware" was installed. The point being it doesn't look great that someone has ANY compromises... But again, anyone who's used the Internet a bit has some compromised. For example, in a password manager (especially the one on iPhone), you'll often be notified of all your potentially compromised accounts. [image: 7a5e8350-e47e-4d67-b096-e6e470ec7050.jpeg]
  • Windows Is Adding AI Agents That Can Change Your Settings

    Technology technology
    26
    1
    103 Stimmen
    26 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    T
    Edit: no, wtf am i doing The thread was about inept the coders were. Here is your answer: They were so fucking inept they broke a fundamental function and it made it to production. Then they did it deliberately. That's how inept they are. End of.
  • 12 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    C
    Sure, he wasn't an engineer, so no, Jobs never personally "invented" anything. But Jobs at least knew what was good and what was shit when he saw it. Under Tim Cook, Apple just keeps putting out shitty unimaginative products, Cook is allowing Apple to stagnate, a dangerous thing to do when they have under 10% market share.