• Boot Camp is dead on all new ARM-core Macs

    From Arlen Holder@arlenholder@newmachine.com to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Wed Jun 24 04:32:40 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    "Boot Camp Is Dead On [ARM-based Macs]"

    o *Boot Camp Is Dead on New Macs and 8 Other Things Apple Didn't Say at WWDC* <https://gizmodo.com/boot-camp-is-dead-on-new-macs-and-8-other-things-apple-1844126342>

    "Apple is making a family of custom ARM-based processors for Macs,
    which is a huge shift that brings with it rippling effects.

    One change that some might not be too pleased about is that Boot Camp,
    the free utility that allows you to dual-boot Windows and macOS,
    is going away on the new Macs powered by [ARM-core Macs].

    Intel-based Macs running Big Sur will still support Boot Camp,
    and Apple's chips will still allow you to run virtualization technology
    like Parallels to use Windows and macOS, but Parallels is not free and
    runs on top of the OS while Boot Camp costs nothing and allows you to
    dual, and even triple, boot on a Mac. RIP."
    --
    Bringing TRUTH to the Apple newsgroups, one simple fact at a time.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Alan Baker@notonyourlife@no.no.no.no to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Tue Jun 23 21:50:33 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arlen Holder wrote:
    "Boot Camp Is Dead On [ARM-based Macs]"

    o *Boot Camp Is Dead on New Macs and 8 Other Things Apple Didn't Say at WWDC* <https://gizmodo.com/boot-camp-is-dead-on-new-macs-and-8-other-things-apple-1844126342>

    "Apple is making a family of custom ARM-based processors for Macs,
    which is a huge shift that brings with it rippling effects.

    One change that some might not be too pleased about is that Boot Camp,
    the free utility that allows you to dual-boot Windows and macOS,
    is going away on the new Macs powered by [ARM-core Macs].

    Intel-based Macs running Big Sur will still support Boot Camp,
    and Apple's chips will still allow you to run virtualization technology
    like Parallels to use Windows and macOS, but Parallels is not free and
    runs on top of the OS while Boot Camp costs nothing and allows you to
    dual, and even triple, boot on a Mac. RIP."


    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, using a VM
    is far, far better than using Boot Camp.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Lewis@g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Wed Jun 24 15:28:28 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel:

    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, using a VM
    is far, far better than using Boot Camp.

    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this true?
    Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in there
    is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would not be able to
    run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM.

    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion and
    speculation as fact.


    --
    'Long Live The Changing Things To A More Equitable State While Retaining Due Respect For The Traditions Of Our Forebears And Of Course Not Harming The August Personage Of The Emperor Endeavour!' --Interesting Times
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Jolly Roger@jollyroger@pobox.com to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Wed Jun 24 15:36:42 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
    In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel:

    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, using a VM
    is far, far better than using Boot Camp.

    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this true?
    Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in there
    is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would not be able to
    run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM.

    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion and
    speculation as fact.

    JizzModo is perpetually mad at Apple for calling them out on their
    involvement with that iPhone prototype an employee accidentally left in
    a bar years and years ago. ; )

    --
    E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
    I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

    JR
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Lewis@g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Wed Jun 24 22:33:46 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
    In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel:

    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, using a VM
    is far, far better than using Boot Camp.

    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this true?
    Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in there
    is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would not be able to
    run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM.

    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion and
    speculation as fact.

    JizzModo is perpetually mad at Apple for calling them out on their involvement with that iPhone prototype an employee accidentally left in
    a bar years and years ago. ; )

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen property
    was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.

    --
    Is a vegetarian permitted to eat animal crackers?
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Alan Baker@notonyourlife@no.no.no.no to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Wed Jun 24 16:57:34 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On 2020-06-24 3:33 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
    In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel:

    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, using a VM >>>> is far, far better than using Boot Camp.

    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this true?
    Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in there
    is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would not be able to
    run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM. >>>
    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion and
    speculation as fact.

    JizzModo is perpetually mad at Apple for calling them out on their
    involvement with that iPhone prototype an employee accidentally left in
    a bar years and years ago. ; )

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen property
    was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.


    I'm not sure "trafficking" is appropriate.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Lewis@g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Thu Jun 25 11:38:31 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    In message <rd0p9f$429$6@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24 3:33 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
    In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel:

    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, using a VM >>>>> is far, far better than using Boot Camp.

    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this true?
    Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in there
    is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would not be able to
    run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM. >>>>
    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion and
    speculation as fact.

    JizzModo is perpetually mad at Apple for calling them out on their
    involvement with that iPhone prototype an employee accidentally left in
    a bar years and years ago. ; )

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen property
    was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.

    I'm not sure "trafficking" is appropriate.

    That's what it is called when you knowingly purchase stolen property,
    IIRC.

    --
    'Where's the gritsucker? And the rock?' 'Ah,' said Vimes, 'you are referring to those representative members of our fellow sapient races who have chosen to throw in their lots with the people of this city?' 'I mean the dwarf and the troll,' said Quirke. --Men at Arms
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Alan Baker@notonyourlife@no.no.no.no to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Thu Jun 25 10:41:13 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On 2020-06-25 4:38 a.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd0p9f$429$6@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24 3:33 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
    In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel:

    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, using a VM >>>>>> is far, far better than using Boot Camp.

    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this true? >>>>> Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in there >>>>> is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would not be able to >>>>> run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM. >>>>>
    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion and
    speculation as fact.

    JizzModo is perpetually mad at Apple for calling them out on their
    involvement with that iPhone prototype an employee accidentally left in >>>> a bar years and years ago. ; )

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen property
    was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.

    I'm not sure "trafficking" is appropriate.

    That's what it is called when you knowingly purchase stolen property,
    IIRC.


    Ummmm.... ...no.

    Trafficking is the dealing in something; buying AND selling.

    Just like someone who purchases and illegal substance for his or her own
    use isn't a "drug trafficker", Gizmodo isn't "trafficking" by buying an iPhone, even assuming they new it was stolen.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Lewis@g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Thu Jun 25 19:38:23 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    In message <rd2njq$je2$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 4:38 a.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd0p9f$429$6@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24 3:33 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
    In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel:

    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, using a VM >>>>>>> is far, far better than using Boot Camp.

    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this true? >>>>>> Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in there >>>>>> is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would not be able to >>>>>> run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM. >>>>>>
    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion and
    speculation as fact.

    JizzModo is perpetually mad at Apple for calling them out on their
    involvement with that iPhone prototype an employee accidentally left in >>>>> a bar years and years ago. ; )

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen property >>>> was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.

    I'm not sure "trafficking" is appropriate.

    That's what it is called when you knowingly purchase stolen property,
    IIRC.


    Ummmm.... ...no.

    Trafficking is the dealing in something; buying AND selling.

    Just like someone who purchases and illegal substance for his or her own
    use isn't a "drug trafficker", Gizmodo isn't "trafficking" by buying an iPhone, even assuming they new it was stolen.

    They absolutely knew it was stolen.


    --
    Q is for QUENTIN who sank in the mire R is for RHODA consumed by a fire
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Alan Baker@notonyourlife@no.no.no.no to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Thu Jun 25 13:07:17 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On 2020-06-25 12:38 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd2njq$je2$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 4:38 a.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd0p9f$429$6@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24 3:33 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
    In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel: >>>>>>>
    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, using a VM >>>>>>>> is far, far better than using Boot Camp.

    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this true? >>>>>>> Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in there >>>>>>> is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would not be able to >>>>>>> run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM.

    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion and >>>>>>> speculation as fact.

    JizzModo is perpetually mad at Apple for calling them out on their >>>>>> involvement with that iPhone prototype an employee accidentally left in >>>>>> a bar years and years ago. ; )

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen property >>>>> was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.

    I'm not sure "trafficking" is appropriate.

    That's what it is called when you knowingly purchase stolen property,
    IIRC.


    Ummmm.... ...no.

    Trafficking is the dealing in something; buying AND selling.

    Just like someone who purchases and illegal substance for his or her own
    use isn't a "drug trafficker", Gizmodo isn't "trafficking" by buying an
    iPhone, even assuming they new it was stolen.

    They absolutely knew it was stolen.

    And as I said, if that's true, it would make it "receiving stolen goods"...

    ..."not trafficking".
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Jolly Roger@jollyroger@pobox.com to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Thu Jun 25 22:08:54 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On 2020-06-25, Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 12:38 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd2njq$je2$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 4:38 a.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd0p9f$429$6@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24 3:33 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen
    property was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.

    I'm not sure "trafficking" is appropriate.

    That's what it is called when you knowingly purchase stolen
    property, IIRC.


    Ummmm.... ...no.

    Trafficking is the dealing in something; buying AND selling.

    Just like someone who purchases and illegal substance for his or her
    own use isn't a "drug trafficker", Gizmodo isn't "trafficking" by
    buying an iPhone, even assuming they new it was stolen.

    They absolutely knew it was stolen.

    And as I said, if that's true, it would make it "receiving stolen
    goods"...

    ..."not trafficking".

    Your pedantry is fucking lame. What Gizmodo did was unethical and
    illegal. They claimed to have paid the guy who found it in the bar $5000
    for it, and at any point any one of them could have done any number of
    things to try to return it to its owner. But instead, they took it with
    them, left the bar with it, fucked around with it, and even disassembled
    it. They even obtained the name of the engineer who lost the device and
    doxxed them, publishing their name and other details about them online.
    Apple naturally considered pressing charges, and Gizmodo has had a raging
    hate boner for Apple ever since. Bunch of losers.

    --
    E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
    I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

    JR
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Arlen Holder@arlenholder@newmachine.com to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Thu Jun 25 23:36:49 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On 25 Jun 2020 22:08:54 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

    Apple naturally considered pressing charges

    If that quote is true...

    Apologists own extremely strongly held belief system which are
    ... ... completely imaginary ... ...

    That quote, if accurate, is infinitely revealing about Apologists' minds:
    o "Apple naturally _considered_ pressing charges..."

    that's it?
    O that's all they have?

    And yet, with absolutely nothing, they're so _sure_ of themselves?
    o What kind of strange brain do these Type III apologists own anyway?

    Apple, armed with one of the most powerful legal teams on the planet...
    o Only "considered" pressing charges?

    That's how _weak_ these arguments are by these Type III apologists!
    o Apple couldn't even press charges, if all they could do was "consider" it.

    While the topic of this thread is clearly too complex for the Type III apologists, Lewis, Jolly Roger, and Alan Baker... (which is that the new
    Mac ARM is rendered back to the Stone Age of dual-booting functionality)...

    The _best_ that these Type III apologist can come up with is... that...
    o *The best legal team on the planet only "_considered_" pressing charges?*

    Meanwhile, the point is that the Mac ARM is brain dead for dual boot
    o Out of the box.
    --
    The _best_ case these Type III apologists can make is Apple "considered" pressing charges (and yet, that flimsy evidence doesn't stop these
    child-like apologists from owning very strong beliefs, which, if this is
    true, turn out to be completely imaginary).

    Jolly Roger sets a no-archive bit, so here is his post in its entirety:

    On 2020-06-25, Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 12:38 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd2njq$je2$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 4:38 a.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd0p9f$429$6@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24 3:33 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen
    property was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.

    I'm not sure "trafficking" is appropriate.

    That's what it is called when you knowingly purchase stolen
    property, IIRC.


    Ummmm.... ...no.

    Trafficking is the dealing in something; buying AND selling.

    Just like someone who purchases and illegal substance for his or her
    own use isn't a "drug trafficker", Gizmodo isn't "trafficking" by
    buying an iPhone, even assuming they new it was stolen.

    They absolutely knew it was stolen.

    And as I said, if that's true, it would make it "receiving stolen
    goods"...

    ..."not trafficking".

    Your pedantry is fucking lame. What Gizmodo did was unethical and
    illegal. They claimed to have paid the guy who found it in the bar $5000
    for it, and at any point any one of them could have done any number of
    things to try to return it to its owner. But instead, they took it with
    them, left the bar with it, fucked around with it, and even disassembled
    it. They even obtained the name of the engineer who lost the device and
    doxxed them, publishing their name and other details about them online.
    Apple naturally considered pressing charges, and Gizmodo has had a raging
    hate boner for Apple ever since. Bunch of losers.

    --
    E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
    I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

    JR
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Lewis@g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Fri Jun 26 10:05:57 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    In message <rd305n$ar4$3@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 12:38 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd2njq$je2$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 4:38 a.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd0p9f$429$6@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24 3:33 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >>>>>>>> In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel: >>>>>>>>
    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, using a VM
    is far, far better than using Boot Camp.

    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this true? >>>>>>>> Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in there >>>>>>>> is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would not be able to >>>>>>>> run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM.

    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion and >>>>>>>> speculation as fact.

    JizzModo is perpetually mad at Apple for calling them out on their >>>>>>> involvement with that iPhone prototype an employee accidentally left in >>>>>>> a bar years and years ago. ; )

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen property >>>>>> was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.

    I'm not sure "trafficking" is appropriate.

    That's what it is called when you knowingly purchase stolen property,
    IIRC.


    Ummmm.... ...no.

    Trafficking is the dealing in something; buying AND selling.

    Just like someone who purchases and illegal substance for his or her own >>> use isn't a "drug trafficker", Gizmodo isn't "trafficking" by buying an
    iPhone, even assuming they new it was stolen.

    They absolutely knew it was stolen.

    And as I said, if that's true, it would make it "receiving stolen goods"...

    Still a crime. Still a felony. And trafficking is in the eye of the
    prosecutor who could easily say that "You intended to generate profits
    from the knowing purchase of stolen goods, therefore you were
    trafficking."

    --
    'Listen,' said Rincewind. 'It's all over, do you see? You can't put the spells back in the book, you can't unsay what's been said, you can't-' 'You can try!' --The Light Fantastic
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Arlen Holder@arlenholder@newmachine.com to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Fri Jun 26 16:09:51 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 10:05:57 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

    Still a crime. Still a felony. And trafficking is in the eye of the prosecutor who could easily say that "You intended to generate profits
    from the knowing purchase of stolen goods, therefore you were
    trafficking."

    Apologists's entire belief systems almost always turn out to be imaginary.
    o This thread is filled with Type III Apple apologists stupidity

    Type III apologists agree with themselves on their sheer ignorance.

    But where are the facts?
    o If it was a crime, then where's the prosecution of that crime?
    --
    Apologists's entire belief systems almost always turn out to be imaginary.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From nospam@nospam@nospam.invalid to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Fri Jun 26 12:26:42 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    In article <rd56ke$84p$1@news.mixmin.net>, Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> wrote:

    Still a crime. Still a felony. And trafficking is in the eye of the prosecutor who could easily say that "You intended to generate profits
    from the knowing purchase of stolen goods, therefore you were
    trafficking."

    Apologists's entire belief systems almost always turn out to be imaginary.
    o This thread is filled with Type III Apple apologists stupidity

    Type III apologists agree with themselves on their sheer ignorance.

    But where are the facts?
    o If it was a crime, then where's the prosecution of that crime?

    <https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2024997/iPhone-4-leak-2- men-charged-finding-prototype-Silicon-Valley-bar.html>
    The San Mateo County, California District Attorney's Office said that
    22-year-old Brian Hogan - the man who allegedly found the device
    in a Silicon Valley bar - and his friend Sage Wallower, had both been
    charged with misappropriation of lost property.

    Wallower, 28, was also charged with possession of stolen property. No
    one from Gizmodo - the site that eventually bought the prototype --
    will be charged.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Arlen Holder@arlenholder@newmachine.com to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Fri Jun 26 17:19:28 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 12:26:42 -0400, nospam wrote:

    <https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2024997/iPhone-4-leak-2- men-charged-finding-prototype-Silicon-Valley-bar.html>
    The San Mateo County, California District Attorney's Office said that
    22-year-old Brian Hogan - the man who allegedly found the device
    in a Silicon Valley bar - and his friend Sage Wallower, had both been
    charged with misappropriation of lost property.

    Wallower, 28, was also charged with possession of stolen property. No
    one from Gizmodo - the site that eventually bought the prototype --
    will be charged.

    Hi nospam,

    Yet again, everything you apologists believe, turns out to be imaginary.

    What you quoted was a simple case of misuse of known lost property.
    o Literally, for both men in selling it & for one in not returning it.

    Please bear in mind Jolly Roger's claim was:
    "*What _Gizmodo_ did was unethical and _illegal_.*"

    Gizmodo.

    I repeat:
    o Gizmodo

    What Jolly Roger claimed is what the law says about what Gizmodo did.

    The "ethics" are those of Jolly Roger alone, where lots of people think
    lots of things are unethical (e.g., sodomy or inter-race marriage, etc.),
    so we can ignore "ethics" since we're talking about the law here.

    Jolly Roger claimed what Gizmodo did was "illegal", did he not?

    Where is the cite for the prosecution of Gizmodo, nospam? <https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2024997/iPhone-4-leak-2-men-charged-finding-prototype-Silicon-Valley-bar.html>
    Both men were "charged with misappropriation of lost property."
    One man was "charged with possession of stolen property."
    --
    Yet again, everything you apologists believe, turns out to be imaginary.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Jolly Roger@jollyroger@pobox.com to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Fri Jun 26 18:25:45 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On 2020-06-26, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
    In message <rd305n$ar4$3@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 12:38 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd2njq$je2$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 4:38 a.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd0p9f$429$6@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24 3:33 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >>>>>>>>> In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel: >>>>>>>>>
    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, >>>>>>>>>> using a VM is far, far better than using Boot Camp.

    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this >>>>>>>>> true? Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in >>>>>>>>> there is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would >>>>>>>>> not be able to run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that
    matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM.

    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion >>>>>>>>> and speculation as fact.

    JizzModo is perpetually mad at Apple for calling them out on
    their involvement with that iPhone prototype an employee
    accidentally left in a bar years and years ago. ; )

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen
    property was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.

    I'm not sure "trafficking" is appropriate.

    That's what it is called when you knowingly purchase stolen
    property, IIRC.


    Ummmm.... ...no.

    Trafficking is the dealing in something; buying AND selling.

    Just like someone who purchases and illegal substance for his or
    her own use isn't a "drug trafficker", Gizmodo isn't "trafficking"
    by buying an iPhone, even assuming they new it was stolen.

    They absolutely knew it was stolen.

    And as I said, if that's true, it would make it "receiving stolen
    goods"...

    Still a crime. Still a felony. And trafficking is in the eye of the prosecutor who could easily say that "You intended to generate profits
    from the knowing purchase of stolen goods, therefore you were
    trafficking."

    Thanks goodness Alan is here to defend the poor, mistreated dip shits.

    --
    E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
    I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

    JR
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Alan Baker@notonyourlife@no.no.no.no to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Fri Jun 26 12:13:48 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On 2020-06-26 11:25 a.m., Jolly Roger wrote:
    On 2020-06-26, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
    In message <rd305n$ar4$3@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 12:38 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd2njq$je2$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 4:38 a.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd0p9f$429$6@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24 3:33 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel: >>>>>>>>>>
    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, >>>>>>>>>>> using a VM is far, far better than using Boot Camp.

    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this >>>>>>>>>> true? Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in >>>>>>>>>> there is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would >>>>>>>>>> not be able to run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that
    matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM.

    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion >>>>>>>>>> and speculation as fact.

    JizzModo is perpetually mad at Apple for calling them out on >>>>>>>>> their involvement with that iPhone prototype an employee
    accidentally left in a bar years and years ago. ; )

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen >>>>>>>> property was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.

    I'm not sure "trafficking" is appropriate.

    That's what it is called when you knowingly purchase stolen
    property, IIRC.


    Ummmm.... ...no.

    Trafficking is the dealing in something; buying AND selling.

    Just like someone who purchases and illegal substance for his or
    her own use isn't a "drug trafficker", Gizmodo isn't "trafficking"
    by buying an iPhone, even assuming they new it was stolen.

    They absolutely knew it was stolen.

    And as I said, if that's true, it would make it "receiving stolen
    goods"...

    Still a crime. Still a felony. And trafficking is in the eye of the
    prosecutor who could easily say that "You intended to generate profits
    from the knowing purchase of stolen goods, therefore you were
    trafficking."

    Thanks goodness Alan is here to defend the poor, mistreated dip shits.


    I just prefer to call things what they actually are.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Arlen Holder@arlenholder@newmachine.com to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Fri Jun 26 20:57:57 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On 26 Jun 2020 18:25:45 GMT, Jolly Roger wrote:

    Still a crime. Still a felony. And trafficking is in the eye of the
    prosecutor who could easily say that "You intended to generate profits
    from the knowing purchase of stolen goods, therefore you were
    trafficking."

    Thanks goodness Alan is here to defend the poor, mistreated dip shits.

    *Yet again, everything you apologists believe, turns out to be imaginary.*

    What's amazing about the Type III apologists such as Jolly Roger & Lewis
    o Is how very sure of themselves they are (and yet, they're dead wrong).

    They're so far to the left in Dunning Kruger Quadrant One of ignorance
    o That they don't even realize how ignorant they really are.

    They're literally too stupid, to realize... how stupid they are.

    FACT:
    Gizmodo didn't commit a crime as far as _anyone_ has shown in this thread.
    o *The prosecutor even said there was no evidence of a crime by Gizmodo*

    Certainly Gizmodo published what they published, which is obvious to all
    o It's clear they obtained that information from the iPhone in question

    And yet, there was no evidence presented of a crime committed by Gizmodo.
    o Fancy that.

    *Yet again, everything you apologists believe, turns out to be imaginary.*
    --
    What is petrifying is that these Type III apologists are allowed to vote!
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Lewis@g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Fri Jun 26 23:41:04 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    In message <rd5hdd$itn$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-26 11:25 a.m., Jolly Roger wrote:
    On 2020-06-26, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
    In message <rd305n$ar4$3@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 12:38 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd2njq$je2$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 4:38 a.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd0p9f$429$6@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24 3:33 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel: >>>>>>>>>>>
    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, >>>>>>>>>>>> using a VM is far, far better than using Boot Camp.

    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this >>>>>>>>>>> true? Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in >>>>>>>>>>> there is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would >>>>>>>>>>> not be able to run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that
    matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM.

    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion >>>>>>>>>>> and speculation as fact.

    JizzModo is perpetually mad at Apple for calling them out on >>>>>>>>>> their involvement with that iPhone prototype an employee
    accidentally left in a bar years and years ago. ; )

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen >>>>>>>>> property was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.

    I'm not sure "trafficking" is appropriate.

    That's what it is called when you knowingly purchase stolen
    property, IIRC.


    Ummmm.... ...no.

    Trafficking is the dealing in something; buying AND selling.

    Just like someone who purchases and illegal substance for his or
    her own use isn't a "drug trafficker", Gizmodo isn't "trafficking" >>>>>> by buying an iPhone, even assuming they new it was stolen.

    They absolutely knew it was stolen.

    And as I said, if that's true, it would make it "receiving stolen
    goods"...

    Still a crime. Still a felony. And trafficking is in the eye of the
    prosecutor who could easily say that "You intended to generate profits
    from the knowing purchase of stolen goods, therefore you were
    trafficking."

    Thanks goodness Alan is here to defend the poor, mistreated dip shits.


    I just prefer to call things what they actually are.

    But you were wrong.

    --
    "Are you pondering what I'm pondering?" "I think so, Brain. But if he left chocolate bullets instead of silver, they'd get all runny and gooey!"
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Alan Baker@notonyourlife@no.no.no.no to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Fri Jun 26 17:08:54 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On 2020-06-26 4:41 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd5hdd$itn$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-26 11:25 a.m., Jolly Roger wrote:
    On 2020-06-26, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
    In message <rd305n$ar4$3@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 12:38 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd2njq$je2$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 4:38 a.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd0p9f$429$6@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24 3:33 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel: >>>>>>>>>>>>
    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, >>>>>>>>>>>>> using a VM is far, far better than using Boot Camp.

    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this >>>>>>>>>>>> true? Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in >>>>>>>>>>>> there is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would >>>>>>>>>>>> not be able to run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that >>>>>>>>>>>> matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM.

    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion >>>>>>>>>>>> and speculation as fact.

    JizzModo is perpetually mad at Apple for calling them out on >>>>>>>>>>> their involvement with that iPhone prototype an employee >>>>>>>>>>> accidentally left in a bar years and years ago. ; )

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen >>>>>>>>>> property was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.

    I'm not sure "trafficking" is appropriate.

    That's what it is called when you knowingly purchase stolen
    property, IIRC.


    Ummmm.... ...no.

    Trafficking is the dealing in something; buying AND selling.

    Just like someone who purchases and illegal substance for his or >>>>>>> her own use isn't a "drug trafficker", Gizmodo isn't "trafficking" >>>>>>> by buying an iPhone, even assuming they new it was stolen.

    They absolutely knew it was stolen.

    And as I said, if that's true, it would make it "receiving stolen
    goods"...

    Still a crime. Still a felony. And trafficking is in the eye of the
    prosecutor who could easily say that "You intended to generate profits >>>> from the knowing purchase of stolen goods, therefore you were
    trafficking."

    Thanks goodness Alan is here to defend the poor, mistreated dip shits.


    I just prefer to call things what they actually are.

    But you were wrong.


    No... ...I really wasn't.

    I said that Gizmodo wasn't "trafficking in stolen property"...

    ...and they weren't.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Lewis@g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Sat Jun 27 02:14:34 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    In message <rd62mm$87i$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-26 4:41 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd5hdd$itn$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-26 11:25 a.m., Jolly Roger wrote:
    On 2020-06-26, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
    In message <rd305n$ar4$3@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 12:38 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd2njq$je2$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-25 4:38 a.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <rd0p9f$429$6@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24 3:33 p.m., Lewis wrote:
    In message <hlha8aF20l4U1@mid.individual.net> Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
    On 2020-06-24, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <rcum2r$115$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
    On 2020-06-23 9:32 p.m., Arshit Trollboi posted mindless drivel: >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    I've used both, and except in some very extreme edge cases, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> using a VM is far, far better than using Boot Camp. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Also, Gizmodo has no idea what they are talking about. Is this >>>>>>>>>>>>> true? Maybe. Probably? Sure. Fact? Not a chance.

    But since Apple's new machines will have vitalization built in >>>>>>>>>>>>> there is no reason (other than Microsoft) that Windows would >>>>>>>>>>>>> not be able to run just as well as Ubuntu (or, for that >>>>>>>>>>>>> matter, Mac OS Mojave) in a VM.

    Gizmodo, like our resident troll moron, likes to post opinion >>>>>>>>>>>>> and speculation as fact.

    JizzModo is perpetually mad at Apple for calling them out on >>>>>>>>>>>> their involvement with that iPhone prototype an employee >>>>>>>>>>>> accidentally left in a bar years and years ago. ; )

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen >>>>>>>>>>> property was OK because they are "journalists".

    Assholes.

    I'm not sure "trafficking" is appropriate.

    That's what it is called when you knowingly purchase stolen
    property, IIRC.


    Ummmm.... ...no.

    Trafficking is the dealing in something; buying AND selling.

    Just like someone who purchases and illegal substance for his or >>>>>>>> her own use isn't a "drug trafficker", Gizmodo isn't "trafficking" >>>>>>>> by buying an iPhone, even assuming they new it was stolen.

    They absolutely knew it was stolen.

    And as I said, if that's true, it would make it "receiving stolen
    goods"...

    Still a crime. Still a felony. And trafficking is in the eye of the
    prosecutor who could easily say that "You intended to generate profits >>>>> from the knowing purchase of stolen goods, therefore you were
    trafficking."

    Thanks goodness Alan is here to defend the poor, mistreated dip shits. >>>>

    I just prefer to call things what they actually are.

    But you were wrong.


    No... ...I really wasn't.

    Yes, you really were.

    I said that Gizmodo wasn't "trafficking in stolen property"...

    ...and they weren't.

    That is not for you to decide, prosecutors decide what crime they can prosecute. Buying stolen property with the intent of profiting from
    that purchase could easily be considered trafficking

    --
    'It's time to-' 'Prod buttock, sir?' said Carrot, hurriedly. 'Close,' said Vimes, taking a deep drag and blowing out a smoke ring, 'but no cigar.' --Feet of Clay
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Alan Baker@notonyourlife@no.no.no.no to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Fri Jun 26 19:27:27 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On 2020-06-26 7:14 p.m., Lewis wrote:

    I do find it hilarious that they thought trafficking in stolen >>>>>>>>>>>> property was OK because they are "journalists".

    You wrote that, right?

    I said that Gizmodo wasn't "trafficking in stolen property"...

    ...and they weren't.

    That is not for you to decide, prosecutors decide what crime they can prosecute. Buying stolen property with the intent of profiting from
    that purchase could easily be considered trafficking


    Funny how you first declare it's not for me to decide...

    ...ignoring that YOU decided.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From Arlen Holder@arlenholder@newmachine.com to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Sat Jun 27 03:39:13 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    On Sat, 27 Jun 2020 02:14:34 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

    That is not for you to decide, prosecutors decide what crime they can prosecute. Buying stolen property with the intent of profiting from
    that purchase could easily be considered trafficking

    Yet again, everything you apologists believe, turns out to be imaginary.

    I point out for the permanent Usenet record, that Lewis has declared what Gizmodo did was illegal, as did Jolly Roger, both of whom are often proved, then, as now, to own completely imaginary belief systems.

    While both Lewis and Jolly Roger are Type III apologists (i.e., they
    actually _believe_ what they write, they're _that_ stupid), the fact is
    nobody showed _any_ evidence that Gizmodo committed a crime.

    In fact, the prosecutor said they don't have a case against Gizmodo, and, clearly Apple's lawyers are some of the best on the planet, where we don't
    even know of a _civil_ suit, which certainly Apple could afford if they
    thought they had even the remotest chance of a civil case.

    The fact is that these Type III apologists, Lewis & Jolly Roger again
    proved, for the umpteen time to own the cognitive abilities of a child.

    Yet again, everything you apologists believe, turns out to be imaginary.
    --
    It's petrifying that they allow apologists to have the same vote as adults.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113
  • From rlhamil@rlhamil@smart.net (Richard L. Hamilton) to comp.sys.mac.apps,comp.sys.mac.advocacy on Tue Jul 14 03:25:52 2020
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.apps

    In article <rd5amv$h7h$1@news.mixmin.net>,
    Arlen Holder <arlenholder@newmachine.com> writes:
    On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 12:26:42 -0400, nospam wrote:

    <https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2024997/iPhone-4-leak-2-
    men-charged-finding-prototype-Silicon-Valley-bar.html>
    The San Mateo County, California District Attorney's Office said that
    22-year-old Brian Hogan - the man who allegedly found the device
    in a Silicon Valley bar - and his friend Sage Wallower, had both been
    charged with misappropriation of lost property.

    Wallower, 28, was also charged with possession of stolen property. No
    one from Gizmodo - the site that eventually bought the prototype --
    will be charged.

    Hi nospam,

    Yet again, everything you apologists believe, turns out to be imaginary.

    What you quoted was a simple case of misuse of known lost property.
    o Literally, for both men in selling it & for one in not returning it.

    Please bear in mind Jolly Roger's claim was:
    "*What _Gizmodo_ did was unethical and _illegal_.*"

    Gizmodo.

    I repeat:
    o Gizmodo

    What Jolly Roger claimed is what the law says about what Gizmodo did.

    The "ethics" are those of Jolly Roger alone, where lots of people think
    lots of things are unethical (e.g., sodomy or inter-race marriage, etc.),
    so we can ignore "ethics" since we're talking about the law here.

    Jolly Roger claimed what Gizmodo did was "illegal", did he not?

    I think "journalists" that will do anything for a trophy hunt are not
    only unethical, but deserve at the minimum a double dose of the same
    treatment they dish out: steal the goods on them, doxx them, and paint
    big fat targets on them.


    Apologists, non-apologists, whatever; NOT YOUR JOB to correct other
    people's thinking (or alleged lack thereof). As for companies, for all
    their faults (which all mortal activities have), Apple just sucks less
    than Microsoft, Oracle, HP, and a number of others in the IT field.

    I'll never forgive Oracle for what they did to Sun after buying it
    (alienate and get rid of Joy and Gosling, not to mention a bunch of
    younger OS developers that came up with the likes of ZFS and dTrace,
    not to mention back out of the whole OpenSolaris thing), nor HP for
    what they did to Apollo (Domain/OS had WAY more potential than
    HP/SUX). And Microsoft+Intel, with IBM's assistance (the choice of
    8088 CPU for the IBM PC, and DOS for it's OS) set computing back 30
    years.
    --- Synchronet 3.18a-Linux NewsLink 1.113