If labeling it helps you to understand it, sure.
mako
joined 10 months ago
Agreed. This is what I was implying by citing their OS market share in mobile devices in the US and I could have clarified better.
I don't get the aggression people have for someone using different brand.
People identify the business decisions that Apple makes to be anti-consumer. They then feel frustration and anger for users of Apple products as support for their products only emboldens Apple to continue making anti-consumer decisions, such as the subject of this article.
Apple is a microcosm representation of the evils of capitalism for many people and they project their feelings about it - powerlessness, disgust, anger, etc. - onto users of Apple products. People associate support for iPhones which enjoys a 61% US market share as support for the boot of capitalism on our throats regardless of whether the Apple user doesn't know, doesn't care, or doesn't agree.
And he knows how many seconds it'll take to kill a room of armed thugs
FontMasterFlex, you're clearly missing the point. It's an unjust law that exists to keep people like her out of office. It's another Christian right wing - sorry, I mean government - tactic to keep the other team from being allowed to play.
It's the same as the laws that were passed requiring abortion clinics to have 18 ft wide hallways. "We're not banning abortion! We're just concerned about the rights of all the 18'+ women seeking treatment!"
Fuck unjust laws that keep people from getting into positions to overturn unjust laws.
What knowledge do you have?
I don't know if you understand the point. I and other users have tried to help. If you have any more specific questions, just ask.