Right now they are considered a platform, not a publisher. Platforms can't be sued for libel. They are acting as a publisher. Remember the Covington Boys, CNN (A publisher) etc. got the pants sued off of them for Libel. That is one rich kid. Anyway if it is determined they are a publisher they can be sued. So if you were to post that I'm an Orange NAZI on twitter. I could essentially sue you and twitter, if I prove that I am not an Orange Nazi I could win millions. Both you and twitter would pay. No one knows if you have enough money to pay out 8 figures but everyone and his lawyer knows twitter does.
I think this falls under a reasonable interpretation of the unlimited.
a reasonable person would understand that there are bandwidth limits both technological and environmental. A reasonable person would expect that the level of service they signed up for would continue or get better over time.
I see two issues.
One is that after a certain amount of data is used they limit bandwidth. If you limit something it is hard to call it unlimited.
The other issue is that early on throttling was not in place. They specifically added throttling to entice users to switch to more lucrative data plans.
A back door is a vulnerability regardless of its intended use. There is no way to assure it can't be used elsewhere. I would be shocked if the existing decryption method used internally at Apple wasn't fully available to other agencies. How hard would it be for a three letter agency to get someone in the right position to obtain the keys and tools?
The closing of this vulnerability makes business sense for Apple. Considering how connected these devices are only, marooned data would not already be available elsewhere. Perhaps a photo that wasn't uploaded or a note taken. Everything else is accessible. Location data is available via cell tower logs. Voice calls, call history, SMS, email, web history, etc... all available already...
They mostly use mules, they get the mules from phishing too. So the money is transferred from one victim to one mule, the mule agrees to send 90% of the money via a non traceable method. The mule is eventually on the hook for 100%.
This is slightly off topic but may be of value. When I solve a particularly difficult problem, I stop and ask myself a couple of questions that help me grow as a developer.
* If I created the problem, How could I have avoided creating this problem? Was it a design error, was I careless or sloppy, did I fail to test or understand something?
* How did I solve the problem? What steps did I take to solve it? How can I optimize my problem solving skills to solve problems quicker. Does this apply to a broad range of problems or is likely a unique problem?
I once did a fixed bid contract that was sized by someone else at $150K.
I completed the bulk of the work over three days. I spent about 40 hours on it total including the production roll out.
I most likely could not pull that off again because I had very specific domain knowledge. I knew the software I was modifying and I knew exactly what to do over all of the various systems.
I don't think it is as black and white. It could be a signal that they aren't a real buyer, or it could be a signal that they do want to buy.
This is what I say when a potential customer of significant value asks for a feature. "That is an interesting feature. That is the first time someone has requested that feature. I think it might have some value in our core code base and other customers might find it useful. I can build the requirements for the feature into your PO. I'll find out when we can deliver that functionality and we can start working on it as soon as the PO is signed."
That is strange. I worked on the NPAC (Number Portability Administration Center) software. I also worked on WLNP. There isn't a technical reason why this won't work. Full number portability is supported in the US and Canada. Wireless porting simplified the process and eased the requirements to port numbers. My best guess is that, they would be able to port land lines in the not too distant future, once they meet the requirements for land line porting.
It is hard enough to pick a winning portfolio of companies. Would anyone really intentionally handicap themselves and not try to pick the best ones? At the expense of their portfolio?
If a green woman walks in with a hockey stick graph, VBM, kicking ass, they will line up to write her a check.
From the perspective of working on file systems, I don't see a viable way to innovate and monetize. I completely see the OP point of view, from his perspective. I disagree with the conclusion though.
It is true that a lot of the big startups aren't innovating in technology. They are innovating in the business model space. But that doesn't mean you can't create some innovative technology to build a startup around it.
If company A has $1M in expenses and $1M in investment, after the tax change it will need ~$5M in investment.