Apple CEO Tim Cook Discusses Privacy, China, Alex Jones and More in VICE Interview

[shareef777]

Even if someone does nothing but speak you can still get in trouble for inciting a riot. Same concept here. He didn't share that info for flowers and candies.

You're talking with someone that probably thinks the earth is flat. There's no reasoning with someone like that.
[doublepost=1538748251][/doublepost]

This hate that you describe is exactly what the protesters on the left do without any downside whatsoever. They advocate violence, show up at political rivals homes, threaten and commit violence daily, and yet they get away with it.

This difference in approach based on ideology is why it is censorship and not civility. There might be a case as you describe if the case applied equally to everyone, but it does not. If you want a civil society you should be a conservative. Oddly enough, conservatives even pick up the trash after their protests, liberals not so much.

You mean like Fox News. They're 100% pro right and shutdown anyone from the left. But it's THEIR business and they have 100% right to run it as they wish. You would think the right of all all groups would be the ones pushing for the right of a business not being forced to do what they don't want to do (hmm, like maybe baking a specific type of cake).

 

[nt5672]

You're talking with someone that probably thinks the earth is flat. There's no reasoning with someone like that.
[doublepost=1538748251][/doublepost]

You mean like Fox News. They're 100% pro right and shutdown anyone from the left. But it's THEIR business and they have 100% right to run it as they wish. You would think the right of all all groups would be the ones pushing for the right of a business not being forced to do what they don't want to do (hmm, like maybe baking a specific type of cake).

No, not a at all. The last time I checked Fox News did not provide cell phones, or was the single source of apps that are commonly used to read news. Apple is in a completely different category, but I do understand that thinking with logic does not fit many peoples ideology.

 

[shareef777]

No, not a at all. The last time I checked Fox News did not provide cell phones, or was the single source of apps that are commonly used to read news. Apple is in a completely different category, but I do understand that thinking with logic does not fit many peoples ideology.

Last I checked "Apple was not the single source of apps that commonly used to read news"

You can literally open up any browser you want on any Apple device and go to Alex Jone's site without issue. Doesn't mean they have to advertise his propaganda on THEIR store. Don't like it, go to any other company or make one up yourself. I'd post his site's link here, but I don't post hate speech or childish drivel.

 

[macduke]

This hate that you describe is exactly what the protesters on the left do without any downside whatsoever. They advocate violence, show up at political rivals homes, threaten and commit violence daily, and yet they get away with it.

This difference in approach based on ideology is why it is censorship and not civility. There might be a case as you describe if the case applied equally to everyone, but it does not. If you want a civil society you should be a conservative. Oddly enough, conservatives even pick up the trash after their protests, liberals not so much.

Proof? You always have fringe people on both sides. As for myself I am a moderate. But what I don't see on the left are influential figures with large followings, podcasts, radio shows, tv shows, or otherwise who are spewing hate and advocating violence, or if they do step out of turn they are usually shut down immediately, like Al Franken. I don't see them foaming at the mouth like this fool who was disgracing dead children and making those who are mourning suffer. This is intolerable. And being intolerant against intolerance is not hate. There are consequences to actions if you want to participate in a society that has rules and systems which must be followed. The virtrol he spews against these grieving families with dead children ought to be illegal, and if it were my child he were talking about, let's just say that I wouldn't be as kind as these families. Once you have kids you will understand what I'm talking about. And if you do have kids and don't understand, then there is nothing that I can do or say that will help you understand how wicked and evil he is.

 

[Tech198]

Vice used to be something great.

He's STILL great today, its only everyone who who has changed.

 

[GermanSuplex]

Banning Alex Jones is like booting an underwear-less ranter from your place of business. You are free to keep an undressed ranting lunatic in your place of business; you should also be free to boot them. What a moron, I underestimated his appeal.

 

[nt5672]

Proof? You always have fringe people on both sides. As for myself I am a moderate. But what I don't see on the left are influential figures with large followings, podcasts, radio shows, tv shows, or otherwise who are spewing hate and advocating violence, or if they do step out of turn they are usually shut down immediately, like Al Franken. I don't see them foaming at the mouth like this fool who was disgracing dead children and making those who are mourning suffer. This is intolerable. And being intolerant against intolerance is not hate. There are consequences to actions if you want to participate in a society that has rules and systems which must be followed. The virtrol he spews against these grieving families with dead children ought to be illegal, and if it were my child he were talking about, let's just say that I wouldn't be as kind as these families. Once you have kids you will understand what I'm talking about. And if you do have kids and don't understand, then there is nothing that I can do or say that will help you understand how wicked and evil he is.

Censorship for the kids sake will never work. I have kids and grandkids and the best way forward is to teach your kids how to deal with this kind if stuff. They may see it at school, friends, at city parades, on the web, etc. Keeping them away from it is no different than sex education. Secrecy never worked for sex will not work for political speech.

I am also not a fan of Jones, but this is pure censorship and does not have anything to do with the kids. Why? Because your kids need your permission to install apps on the iPhone (or at least should). If you are relying on Apple to protect your kids then IMO you are shucking your parental responsibility. This political censorship and nothing more, so don't hide behind the kids.

 

[macduke]

Censorship for the kids sake will never work. I have kids and grandkids and the best way forward is to teach your kids how to deal with this kind if stuff. They may see it at school, friends, at city parades, on the web, etc. Keeping them away from it is no different than sex education. Secrecy never worked for sex will not work for political speech.

I am also not a fan of Jones, but this is pure censorship and does not have anything to do with the kids. Why? Because your kids need your permission to install apps on the iPhone (or at least should). If you are relying on Apple to protect your kids then IMO you are shucking your parental responsibility. This political censorship and nothing more, so don't hide behind the kids.

I never said anything about protecting kids from his hate speech, I was saying that he shouldn't be allowed to harass grieving families whose children were shot and killed by a mad man. They had to bury their kids and now they have to deal with this clown and his followers harassing them for the rest of their life. You're going off on a tangent that was never a part of my stance, venturing into strawman territory. I think you misread what I said. What I was saying is that if I had children who had been killed, and this guy was harassing my family, I wouldn't be so kind and would likely end up in prison. Nobody would be allowed to go after my dead children and remaining family and see another day. Haven't these people suffered enough?

Private companies are allowed to do whatever they want on their platforms because they are providing the services at-will. They have terms which must be followed. For instance, many of these platforms don't allow pornography including in textual form. But is that violating their freedom? No, because it's against the terms. These people are free to go create their own platform with no rules, there is nothing stopping them. They just won't get the coverage because by nature their platform won't be as popular. But there is no freedom to get coverage for your speech. Previously these people were relegated to street corners passing out pamphlets. The kind of person who you see and immediately know they're bad news and should be avoided, shouting crazy things while twitching and looking all shifty. Yet now those same people are hiding behind the internet, and suddenly we're obligated to provide them with megaphones and national coverage? How do you figure that? Nobody is stopping them from talking. They can talk and print out pamphlets and put their own server online all day. Doesn't mean we have to let them into our social group. It doesn't mean they get front page coverage on USA Today. Do you see the difference now?

 

[Rajani Isa]

Censorship for the kids sake will never work. I have kids and grandkids and the best way forward is to teach your kids how to deal with this kind if stuff. They may see it at school, friends, at city parades, on the web, etc. Keeping them away from it is no different than sex education. Secrecy never worked for sex will not work for political speech.

I am also not a fan of Jones, but this is pure censorship and does not have anything to do with the kids. Why? Because your kids need your permission to install apps on the iPhone (or at least should). If you are relying on Apple to protect your kids then IMO you are shucking your parental responsibility. This political censorship and nothing more, so don't hide behind the kids.

Shows like The View, Good Morning America, or The Tonight Show are all on broadcast TV in the USA. Broadcast airwaves are considered public property leased to private corporations and the restrictions on what they can and cannot do reflect that. Would you say that if Alex Jones wanted onto one of those shows and was refused, that it was censorship?

Would say that if he did get on, but then was asked to leave after doing something such as "Buy guns! Take control! By my pills! By the way, this man was mean to me, here's his home and work addresses - and don't forget, his kid isn't real and therefore never died!" would that be censorship?

 

[nt5672]

Shows like The View, Good Morning America, or The Tonight Show are all on broadcast TV in the USA. Broadcast airwaves are considered public property leased to private corporations and the restrictions on what they can and cannot do reflect that. Would you say that if Alex Jones wanted onto one of those shows and was refused, that it was censorship?

Would say that if he did get on, but then was asked to leave after doing something such as "Buy guns! Take control! By my pills! By the way, this man was mean to me, here's his home and work addresses - and don't forget, his kid isn't real and therefore never died!" would that be censorship?

Nope not censorship in the first case, unfortunately yes it is censorship in the second unless he violates the law. The law dictates what is allowed. If he violates the law, then he should be sued or arrested as appropriate for his jurisdiction. It should not be up to petty CEOs and bureaucrats to try to be legal judges.

Apple's response is really the same as Samsung putting code in the TV to make it refuse to play Jones content no matter where it comes from or what it is. If Apple has a problem with some specific content of Jones then ban that particular content.

 

[Rajani Isa]

Nope not censorship in the first case, unfortunately yes it is censorship in the second unless he violates the law. The law dictates what is allowed. If he violates the law, then he should be sued or arrested as appropriate for his jurisdiction. It should not be up to petty CEOs and bureaucrats to try to be legal judges.

Apple's response is really the same as Samsung putting code in the TV to make it refuse to play Jones content no matter where it comes from or what it is. If Apple has a problem with some specific content of Jones then ban that particular content.

So if we have a party at your house and don’t break the law you won’t kick us out if we do stuff you don’t like such as insulting yourself or other guests? That once someone gains access to a place nobody has the right to remove them?

 

[nt5672]

So if we have a party at your house and don’t break the law you won’t kick us out if we do stuff you don’t like such as insulting yourself or other guests? That once someone gains access to a place nobody has the right to remove them?

My house is not some thing that most educated people in the world use to get their news. If half the world was using my house to get their news then I would have responsibilities that I do not have currently. It is really easy to understand when one takes off the blinders.

 

[Rajani Isa]

So you use the App store to get your news?

If you kicked me out of your house while I was watching your TV to get news, that doesn't mean I can't get news anymore.

Wal-Mart isn't required to sell newspapers - much less the newspaper of my choice.

AJ is still available on the web. Nothing guarantees his right to be in ANY store.

Now, if Apple pushes an update that blocks any browser - or even just Safari - from looking it up/accessing it, I can't promise I'll be next to you on their lawn with a pitchfork - but I'd probably offer to help buy you a pitchfork.

 

[amegicfox]

a communist network talking to a communist CEO about how it is great to censure people they don't like

censuring anyone for ANY reason it is ALWAYS wrong and illegal and it is against USA's 1st amendment

anyone has the right to free speech even when some people don't like it

meanwhile Timmy is putting Apple servers and data in communist china
and agreeing on all the censure being imposed by the communist chinese government
as well as countries like saudi arabia

Tim would sell his mother to the devil if he could

 

[Rajani Isa]

a communist network talking to a communist CEO about how it is great to censure people they don't like

censuring anyone for ANY reason it is ALWAYS wrong and illegal and it is against USA's 1st amendment

anyone has the right to free speech even when some people don't like it

meanwhile Timmy is putting Apple servers and data in communist china
and agreeing on all the censure being imposed by the communist chinese government
as well as countries like saudi arabia

Tim would sell his mother to the devil if he could

Governmental censorship is against the first amendment.

And selling one's mother to anyone sounds capitalist, not communist.