Would you elaborate? Because my understanding is that Apple has offered outstanding support for older devices in terms of iOS support for quite old devices.
You can't release all the documentation just because the entire phone isn't supported. Many of the components come from other suppliers and aren't obsolete, and you can't just reveal all your suppliers' IP.
They don't have to - just give an option to unlock the device when it's EOL.
It's not a security problem, since they don't support it anylonger anyways!
They could even make it so, that iOS itself refuses to boot if the device is unlocked. That way you can't accidentally have an iOS running that's compromised in some way.
But you can still boot Linux or Android or whatever you want to do to it.
Apps that connect to a service over the Internet (maps, music iMessage) could stop working if Apple changes the APIs that those apps use. This is even more likely to happen to third party apps.
You won't get updates to the trusted root CAs, which means you won't be able to visit sites with certificates signed by CAs created or renewed after support is dropped. And your browser will continue trusting CAs that have had their trust revoked.
And as web standards evolve there will be websites that use features and APIs that your browser doesn't support and may break in subtle, or not so subtle ways. And there is no way for you to install a more up to date browser.
And then of course, you won't fixes for any new security vulnerabilities that are found.
So yeah, it's not as bad as getting bricked, but it as also worse than continuing to work as it always has, but with no new features.
The original post was about Apple not giving proper support to after-EOL phones.
Saying "could stop working" and "won't get updates to the trusted root CAs" is all future issues.
How long should Apple be required to provide updates, both security/vulnerability and future API support?
Currently, iPhone 6S, released in 2014, can run iOS 15, which received its latest update in 2025. The iOS 15 apps work with Apple's services, some with reduced functionality because it was never in iOS 15.
Apple don't give people the tools/keys/etc to load new OS (etc) onto a device once it's no longer supported.
So, at best the device can just be used with the latest version of the software Apple allows until it's a security nightmare and better off no longer used.
Instead, if Apple gave people the ability to load something (prob a Linux) onto those old devices, then those old devices could be used usefully for quite a few more years.
true inflection point of the already prolonged withering away and inevitable death of one of America’s great art forms.
yes i’m aware of the proud film traditions of france, italy, england, & japan (among others). nevertheless the paradigms of popular film are uniquely homegrown.
netflix is not in the film business. they are in the streaming business.
yet another example of the rape aka “enshittification” of culture. why share an experience together as a public in front of the silver screen? much easier to sit alone on our fucking couches while we doomscroll and dick around.
last sentence in your first paragraph has nothing to do with the current state of the internet and certainly not AI. first sentence? turns out governments can still get away with pretty much anything and propaganda is easier than ever.
It is so much harder now. There are people who are willfully ignorant now, almost proud to be; snooty about it. But it's impossible for governments and institutions to lie like they used to be able to. People are trading primary source documents online within the day.
It's why the popularity of long-ruling institutional parties is dropping everywhere, and why the measures to stop people from communicating and to monitor what they're saying are becoming more and more draconian and desperate.
beyond irony that you pose as some tech optimist while also mentioning “western collapse” and then speak about a uniquely American pessimism, a nation that is presently under the thumb of a government that does not respect the rule of law and actively manipulates capital/big business.
and you cannot simply hand-wave away the massive acceleration of the surveillance state and characterize it as a tool of the “institutional parties”
the article explicitly states that this original Superman #1 is the highest graded copy of all-time
it’s valuable for the same reason the mona lisa is valuable. it’s iconic, it is a singular object, it is one of a kind, it is a stable investment vehicle. they ain’t making more of them.
Stable investment vehicle I am not so sure. I think an index fund or even gold will outperform it over 100 years. Superman comics rely on people giving a shit about superman which will fade over time. Superman isnt a big thing for gen z for example.
I always wonder exactly how difficult it would be to get the paper, ink, staples, etc exactly right. I'm sure it would be difficult but 9m is a big payoff if you can.
I assume the content isn't as important as the fact the object itself is the original. Original paper, original ink, original release date. The object itself comes from the original factory, survived through time etc. I would expect some tests will verify it uses the correct paper, has the signs of age, etc.
Even if you could duplicate it down to the molecule I would assume it wouldn't hold the same value since it doesn't have the same history. Assuming you'd want to sell it in good faith as a replica.
When? Where? The instances listed in the article are not compelling.
Here’s an excerpt from the second article:
> According to Homeland Security deputy secretary Tricia McLaughlin, officers were trying to conduct a “targeted traffic stop” of a car registered to a “female illegal alien,” but the male driver “refused to pull the vehicle over.”
> “Law enforcement pursued the vehicle before the assailant sped into a shopping plaza where he and the female passenger fled the vehicle,” according to McLaughlin.
> “They ran into a daycare and attempted to barricade themselves inside the daycare — recklessly endangering the children inside,” she said.
From the third article:
> The agents, who were armed but did not draw their weapons, pushed other people who were looking to intervene, he said.
[…]
> The woman who was arrested is from Colombia and does not have legal immigration status, Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said.
If you have information about this issue that isn’t present in the articles linked, feel free to provide it.
ok great, you made it all the way to the second article before you found something you thought you could pull a misleading quote from. Said quote is, appropriately enough, from a woman in the administration whose job is to provide "cover" for her own agency.
and you not-so-gracefully just elide key facts in the same article like:
"the agents were not invited inside the building, did not have a warrant, and were armed with guns while walking into the school with children and teachers present"
&
"the woman [...] is a prekindergarten teacher at the school"
even if you think this is someone who ought to be deported, there are many less violent, less traumatic, and far more dignified ways to go about it. Or would you like to endorse masked men with military-grade equipment storming into daycares to arrest women who work with children there?
> before you found something you thought you could pull a misleading quote from
Do you have any information not presented in the article that suggests that this woman had legal status to reside in the country, and / or that she was not apprehended during a pursuit?
I’m not putting it past an official to lie about these kinds of things, but if this woman had the facts on her side you would usually have heard about it faster.
> the building, did not have a warrant,
Law enforcement officials do not need a warrant to enter private property while they are engaged in the active pursuit of someone suspected of having committed a crime.
> and were armed with guns while walking into the school with children and teachers present"
Per my last comment:
> The agents, who were armed but did not draw their weapons, pushed other people who were looking to intervene, he said.
You’re trying to give a very particular account of these events that the facts are not supporting.
> even if you think this is someone who ought to be deported, there are many less violent, less traumatic, and far more dignified ways to go about it.
I agree, a school isn’t the place for it. So I ask again: Do you have information that would suggest this woman was not being actively pursued by law enforcement officials prior to entering the daycare?
> Or would you like to endorse masked men with military-grade equipment storming into daycares to arrest women who work with children there?
I could (accurately) refer to this woman as an undocumented criminal who barricaded herself in a daycare after being pursued by law enforcement agents, but it’s completely hyperbolic versus just saying “a woman ran into a daycare and was arrested.” There’s nothing to suggest that these officers “stormed” the building like marines kicking the doors in at Fallujah. As was explicitly mentioned in the article (and my previous comment), their guns were never drawn. None of the three articles related to this incident suggest that the officers were masked.
There are multiple videos of ICE leaving an arrest in such a hurry they ram into a passing car that had the right of way. Unmarked cars with no lights follow normal traffic laws. They proceeded to yank the US citizen driving it out of her car and take her with them. She was detained without access to representation and then released without charges. That is unlawful arrest, and probably reckless endangerment. It is claimed that ICE does not need a warrant to enter a place. The fourth amendment says otherwise whatever other laws say. If they enter a place without a warrant seeking evidence, that is unlawful search and seizure. They laughed as they shot multiple people in the head with pepper balls. Some of them were not even near protests, they were just having fun. The training for those rounds explicitly calls out not to do that as it can be lethal. That is assault with a deadly weapon. If it could be proved they had that training, it might be argued as attempted second degree murder.
> It is claimed that ICE does not need a warrant to enter a place.
That was never claimed. What I said was that a warrant is not required when officers are pursuing the suspected perpetrator of a crime. You can feel however you want about it, but that is how the law works.
> They laughed as they shot multiple people in the head with pepper balls.
Are you relating this to the arrest that is being discussed in this thread? There was nothing in the linked articles that suggested this was anywhere near a protest, nor that tear gas was fired.
Yup immigration was arguably the concrete issue of the election and these were the campaign promises. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knew that this is what mass deportation would look like.
