Potando

The newspaper used to cost $1 (each! every day!) and it was full of ads. Probably about as much percentage of area as a typical news site today.

There must be a balance between "no payment" and "no ads" - the optimum profit doesn't necessarily happen at one of the extremes. Do you think you'd choose a higher priced subscription if it offered no ads?

What's wrong with clicking on an unknown link? It can only hurt you by taking advantage of an unpatched security bug in your software. But if you have that, you might be vulnerable doing all sorts of other things on the internet. And you probably do have that and are vulnerable doing all sorts of other things. It's just not very likely to hurt you in either case.

This is a paradox of runners and cyclists too. They use high-tech gear to make running easier - easier than a naked human can do it - but they refuse powered assistance. I don't understand why they make such a clear distinction between using gadgets to save power and using gadgets to provide more power. If it's about natural un-assisted ability, they shouldn't wear shoes either.

By bad luck he happened to be the same person who also did something legal that they really didn't like and also something illegal. So his legal actions have caused an excessive sentence for the relatively minor crimes he was actually convicted of.

If embarrassing people was a crime, the ex-partners who gave him the photos would be charged too. Those people are even more at fault than him.

Sounds like if you pay Cryptolocker to recover your files then you can have you money frozen too. Perhaps this is a good incentive to stop people paying extortionists.

There certainly are. Iphones smuggled into mainland form Hong Kong are sold at a premium. Whatever the reasons for that are among the conditions that Apple must have conceded to to sell legally in the mainland.

Actually, yes. Any water shortage in a developed area with cheap water isn't actually a water shortage, it's a mismanagement or incorrect pricing. California can simply produce more water if they really need it, which they would if everyone was leaving their taps on.

We're fooled into believing water shortages are environmental problems we need to make sacrafices to prevent. But just paying more for more expensive, higher volume production or recylcing would work too. Eg Isreal.

Not stupid, but they either didn't understand or relied on the placebo effect and didn't perform experiments that were actually useful at distinguishing helpful from harmful or useless medicines - AND communicate that information to others. When an ancient remedy turns out to be useful, it's not useful until we rediscover that it actually works. The idea of science and sorting out mysticism from reality is fairly new in most of the world. In China, doctors in public hospitals still prescribe untested herbal remedies and diagnose diseases without any idea of the effectiveness of what they're doing. Patients just trust authority, tradition and popular belief. You could argue that the same is true to some extent in the west today too - see general "have some antibiotics" prescriptions, and cough and cold medicine.

What sexualities do you think he's talking about? Surely not all of them. But he doesn't explicitly say which groups, if any, he supports discrimination against.

Do you mean poorly thought out or just different opinions? If the latter, perhaps you can show why you disagree?

He seems to mainly be talking about discrimination against gays, though doesn't say it directly. I wonder if he really means it that Apple won't discriminate against pedophiles, incestuous couples or the grey areas on the boundaries of age of consent? Or is it like the old "universal suffrage" that turned out only to be universal to men, and not women?

Did you just say that immigration is harmful because workers get most of the benefit and property owners relatively little? This economic perspective seems to be only looking at the economy of one group of people.

People at the lower end of the labor market are also adversely affected by each other. Why are they not proposing deportation of low-skilled Americans? No justification seems to escape from the fact that anti-immigration is fundamentally just discriminatory tribalism no different from racism and homophobia like the OP's father had.

"Logically, if immigrants were “stealing” jobs, so would every young person leaving school and entering the job market"

It's bizarre that people don't see this. Anyone concerned about immigrants is surely, logically, also concerned about people having babies. But somehow people think that limiting birthrates as a bad thing and limiting immigration is a good thing. Just a complete inconsistency.