SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
El Reg reports:
Apple has gone full swivel-eyed, control-freak crazy on its own employees with a demented internal memo decrying information leaks.
"In 2017, Apple caught 29 leakers. 12 of those were arrested", says the terror missive from Cupertino, ironically leaked to Bloomberg. "Among those were Apple employees, contractors and some partners in Apple's supply chain."
It then threatens long-lasting harm to anyone stupid enough to let anyone know anything about its products before, you know, it launches them and tries to sell as many as humanely possible.
"These people not only lose their jobs, they can face extreme difficulty finding employment elsewhere", the letter rants.
[...] "Leakers do not simply lose their jobs at Apple. In some cases, they face jail time and massive fines for network intrusion and theft of trade secrets both classified as federal crimes."
What a lovely company.
Unless you're the FCC.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Virindi on Sunday April 15 2018, @07:13AM (1 child)
HAH! No, sir. I am a Ron Paul voter, a Gary Johnson voter.
I believe strongly in free association, economic or otherwise. The problem I am talking about here, though, is one of the practicalities of government. In a perfect world, companies would be allowed to do whatever they wanted in a voluntary marketplace, and the huge would never be able to win by thuggery because they would have just as much legal backing as Joe's corner shop. And they would only be able to keep winning in the marketplace as long as they sold the best products and services (best defined as what people want to buy at the price people are willing to pay).
However, real government is messy. In practice, how do you propose to create a legal system where a company with billions of dollars is equal under the law to one with $10? Such a system would have to be COMPLETELY different than anything on the planet right now. I am not sure how it could be done. And because of this reality, entities which are large enough get to operate in many ways which are contrary to ideal minarchist principles (such as intimidation, being given special treatment because they are "the biggest employer in town", etc). It is a completely natural consequence of human nature.
To put it another way, I believe the purpose of government is to shield the public from attacks by others, and to create a level playing field of fair laws. The reason I am not an anarchist is that in the absence of government, some other entity would become the de facto government. This is the same thing that happens with huge companies, on a lesser scale, and more subtly. It comes down to the definition of government: government is not really just the group of people who fly a particular flag, but the entire system which can exert control over an individual. The flag, or name, is immaterial to me; I desire the system under which each individual has the maximum capability to direct the course of their own life.
Consider a 19th century "company town". Does it matter at all that the company is not "the government"? The person working there has to live by the rules of the company, and it is maintained by coercion. The way the company keeps things running is by keeping people from leaving. From a realistic perspective, this is no different from living under an oppressive government.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday April 15 2018, @10:25AM
Ah, so a classical liberal instead of what gets called one today. Er, that's even worse. You're falling into the same trap as the AC above when you damned well know better than to think that bigger government is the answer to your big government woes.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.