Letters to the Editor
jdmf
Published Letters: 99 Editor's Choice: 11
-
Not so fast: This just smells illegal
[Read the article: If you care about your rights, don't buy an iPhone]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What Apple is doing may very well be illegal depending on what it knows and how it has structured its updates.
If it is deliberately or knowingly making unlocked iPhones inoperable it may be tortiously interfering with the contracts that its customers have entered with other wireless providers.
Apple is also knowingly "breaking" its customers' phones. The last time I checked, knowingly destroying someone else's property -- or depriving them of the lawful use of their property -- was a tort too.
Depending on the facts, of course, Apple may have violated various federal and state consumer protection laws (NY's for instance provides for treble damages) or be on the hook for punitive damages.
Not to mention a possible violation of federal antitrust laws, which also classically provide for treble damages.
It starts to add up to real money pretty fast.
If I were an Apple investor, I'd get ready to see an SEC filing from the company announcing that a class-action suit of iPhone owners has been filed for this behavior.
-
Apple may well have broken them
[Read the article: If you care about your rights, don't buy an iPhone]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Oh, I wouldn't be so quick to conclude that Apple didn't break the phones.
It really depends on what Apple knew about the phones and the update. If Apple developed its update in such a way that it knew it would make the phones inoperable, it broke them.
-
Heartfelt films about how Christians deal with their gay kids?
[Read the article: Beyond the Multiplex]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I really don't care about "how they deal with" finding out that their kids are gay or how hard it may be for them. As far as I can tell such films merely pander to the idea that religion -- or specifically Chrisitianity -- makes it particularly hard to come to accept a gay kid.
Bullshit. Bigotry, not religion makes it hard to accept a gay kid.
Why are there no heartfelt films about how hard it is for Christians to deal with their kids who are murderers, or who covet, or who take the name of the lord in vain?
-
Ahhh... the warm glow of right-wing Jewish hypocrisy
[Read the article: Follow-up to the silence from the ADL regarding Fox News and right-wing talk radio]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's what gives the glow to my family memories of sitting around the Seder table, openly discussing the topics raised by Pesah, and bathing the the warmth and love that only a complete, rage-infused screaming match can evoke.
-
Aravosis' Venom...
[Read the article: Why the T in LGBT is here to stay]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I found myself reacting very strongly to Aravosis' piece -- and that surprised me. Why? It was Aravosis' viciousness toward transgendered people, his lack of empathy, sympathy, and his downright crudely egocentric sense of entitlement ("What could *I* possibly have in common with them...?") that caused my stomach to turn.
It's an appeal to the basest insincts, to the most divisive understanding of identity.
In other words, Aravosis is a selfish, small-minded twit. And quite probably a nasty piece of work. It's not surprising that he was a Republican staffer.
So, I'd just like to say it is with profound sadness that I see gender equality removed from ENDA. But if that is what is necessary to pass the legislation, so be it.
Aravosis is right about one thing, and one thing only: Legislation is a series of imperfect incremental changes. If ENDA is passed without protections for transgendered folk, we -- all together -- will just have to start the enducational process and political process to get transgender included in the next bill.
Without rancor. And nuts to John.
-
@ Hankest
[Read the article: Nepotistic tough guys and their coddling parents]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm sorry. I fail to see how Hillary Clinton is at all the same as the nepotistic beneficiaries that GG has identified. Whatever family capital and connections have helped her are connections that she worked for and helped to build *alongside* and *with* her husband. She has not inherited them.
Would she have come as far if Bill had not been President? I doubt it. But would Bill have been President if she had not sweated blood with him? I doubt that too.
You're simply confusing inherited privilege with earned privilege -- and I'll hazard a guess here that you're not married or in a long-term relationship.
As someone who has been partnered since 1991 and married since 2003, I can say in all honesty that my spouse probably wouldn't have come as far as he has without me. And I would not have come as far without him.
-
Thank you, Senator Dodd!
[Read the article: Chris Dodd to block FISA bill]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]One must ask, however -- and this is not directed at Senator Dodd -- why no other Democratic Senators have bothered to put holds on any of the other disasterous legislation that has gone through Congress?
-
Obama's McClurkin fiasco is the politics of hope?
[Read the article: The politics of hope]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Tim -- Perhaps Clinton should be less cynical and more open to dialogue, but its hard to look at the Obama campaign's embrace of Donny McClurkin as the politics of hope...
So forgive me if the Clinton campaign strikes a bit of chord this week.
-
I am so disgusted, I can barely stand to call myself a Democrat.
[Read the article: What happened to the Senate's "60-vote requirement"?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Really.
-
Will is a hypocritical prostitute?
[Read the article: George Will's preemptive strike]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]That's news?
-
So NYT runs journamalism and WR blames HRC?
[Read the article: Sloppy attacks from the Clinton campaign]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Right? The NYT ran a journamalistic piece about how HRC may hurt dems downticket, but quoted no dems. HRC called the NYT out on its piece and you're saying that HRC inaccurately portrayed the NYT?
Get a grip, kid.
-
It is time for Reid to go.
[Read the article: Harry Reid -- compare and contrast]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It is unacceptable and outrageous that a Democratic majority leader would respect the holds placed by the minority while ignoring a hold placed by one of the members of his own caucus.
Does Reid really think that a hypothetical furture Majority Leader McConnell will respect a hold from the Democratic side of the aisle when his own constitutents are worked up about the issue?
Reid must go.
-
Grey Lady Jumps Shark
[Read the article: Bloggers mature, the New York Times stumbles]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Yup. That's it. Final straw.
I had sort of gotten to the point where I could look at the NYT and have the first thing to run through my mind be "Judith Miller." Now the first thing to run through my mind will be "Bill Kristol."
I'm done with them. Cancelling my subsciption (again), and moving on to greener pastures entirely.
Bye, Bye, NYT...