ehartsuyker

I think the ecosystem isn't a zero sum game (not profits, but generally the advancement of software). Apple doing well helps other people do well.

Do you really think that if Apple completely stopped existing right now that it wouldn't have a massive negative impact on consumers and other businesses?

Agreed (on all that).

There'd probably be a whole mess of 0-days that would come out of it which would impact a lot of people as Apple might not be able to patch fast enough. Though I meant the horribleness of tanking an American company just because.

> "no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause"

As a non-legal expert, the way this feels to me is that asking for a backdoor is like preemptively issuing a warrant for everyone on the grounds that they might commit a crime in the future that you'd want to investigate. Thus backdooring iOS is tantamount to issuing an unlimited warrant for everyone, which is exactly what the Fourth Amendment is trying to prevent.

Except that would be absolutely horrible for everyone, so maybe we should hope that doesn't happen.

> The FBI’s brief dismisses all of this as a marketing ploy, and then blasts Apple as a literal threat to American democracy, writing: “Apple’s rhetoric is not only false, but also corrosive of the very institutions that are best able to safeguard our liberty and our rights: the courts, the Fourth Amendment, longstanding precedent and venerable laws, and the democratically elected branches of government.”

Ironically, Apple giving users encryption doesn't weaken the Fourth Amendment; it makes it stronger because it provides the ability for citizens to be "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures" in a way that the courts recently have been unable to.

I know, right? I actually got excited for a second thinking he'd name drop that.

Except they're two different articles posted by two different people. This seems like an amusing coincidence.

In the former, typing '2012.01.01' implicitly creates a date object (probably), and '1m1d' implicitly creates some sort of duration object (probably) and uses an operator to combine them.

The Java was isn't really that different. Just more verbose, but again, I don't mind trading a few key strokes for clarity.

How is "1m" more obvious that "plusMonths(1)"? I mean really, the latter is basically and English phrase. I know it's cool to shit all over OOP and Java these days, but if Haskell/Clojure/Whatever had a function (plusMonths dt 1) or something that, you wouldn't call it a pile of FP.

The Java is clean because it's perfectly understandable. I don't have to think about "+ 1m" meaning month, minute, or milli-. Verbose, yes, but the meaning is 100% unambiguous which I think makes it a better API.

> overloading strings

I'm pretty sure writing "+ 1m" is more of an overloading of a string than ".plusMinutes(1)".