This is one of the more broadly normal HN-reaction threads to large public news event I've seen in a while. A lot of love for Apple, respect for the decision, and respectfully stated nuance. Surprising and good.
I still haven't scroll down to the bottom, I don't want to spoil my impression. But it's great to see a positive reaction. Good way to mark the moment. Tim has been CEO for 15 years roughly, since Steve's passing. This guy seems much younger than Tim was when he ascended. I hope he really takes it to the next level.
Got a feeling that Apple has some Amazing new hardware category-making products coming out of the 'skunkworks' over the next 3 years.
trying to find the context, saurik seemsto be Jay Freeman[0], known for Cydia[1]; i'm guessing apple was 'unhappy' about his work around software for jailbroken iphones, but nothing immediately popped up, what did they do?
oh i guess it's from a court hearing[2] when his company was suing apple over app store monopoly ("... they are talking about an iOS update that, quote, broke Cydia Impactor. Where they said, it feels too good to destroy someone's spirit. We did something else today that will kill him again with a little smiley emoticon.")
How dare you insult the forty gazillion company! Stand back ma'am I'll protect you from this handsome hacker ruffian!
Jokes aside, I have started to see Microslop as the lesser of two evils (two evils being MSFT and AAPL, Google being its own parallel universe abomination). Their commitment to backward compatibility really paved the way to cheap PCs for the masses. That said, every day Macroslop is working diligently to prove me wrong.
Do they no longer charge annual licenses for Windows Server?
On that topic, it’s always surprised me just how little Apple invest into their enterprise / business backend services. Everything about the way they integrate Macs into businesses is awkward. Apple could make so much money there if they wanted to. It’s a real missed opportunity.
The issue is that nobody (relatively speaking) uses Windows Server.
I don’t even think Microsoft is all that adamant that their customers use it.
It’s just not competitive with Linux and that ship has sailed. Linux is better and costs $0. Microsoft lets you run .NET applications on Linux and they’re better there.
I think the same thing happened with SQL Server. Nobody’s choosing it for new projects, its niche is basically legacy software.
I agree that Apple is missing an opportunity with business and enterprise but I think the issue is that they’re so far behind that catching up would be a massive investment that might never pay off.
This is similar to saying that Microsoft missed an opportunity with smartphone ecosystems. They could spend billions on getting a smartphone back on the market and it would arrive and everyone would ask the question “why am I buying this when my iPhone has X million apps on its store and is a nearly perfect device?”
If Apple Enterprise Cloud was available today who is switching and why? Apple would have to undercut established players to convince businesses to switch via a massive migration effort.
I work with fortune 500 clients, and all of them use Windows server for something. Usually a lot of somethings. For example: Active Directory.
If we look at Microsoft's revenue I think it's pretty clear that they do in fact care an awful lot about Windows Server - or at least should.
In fiscal year 2025, Microsoft Corporation's revenue by segment:
Devices: $17.31 B
Dynamics Products And Cloud Services: $7.83 B
Enterprise Services: $7.76 B
Gaming: $23.46 B
Linked In Corporation: $17.81 B
Microsoft Three Six Five Commercial Products And Cloud Services: $87.77 B
Microsoft Three Six Five Consumer Products and Cloud Services: $7.40 B
Other Products And Services: $72.00 M
Search Advertising: $13.88 B
Search And News Advertising: $13.88 B
Server Products And Cloud Services: $98.44 B
Server Products And Tools: $98.44 B
Windows: $17.31 B
You only need a couple of Active Directory and Exchange servers here and there. But who's using IIS or SQL Server these days? Sharepoint also seems to be on a downturn.
I don’t think this is clear at all because the segments are lumped together and highly unclear.
What’s the difference between “server products and cloud services” and “server products and tools?”
I assume the former is Azure and the latter is on-premise.
In that case if we lump 365 in with server products and cloud tools then it shows that 2/3 of the enterprise revenue is going to cloud and 1/3 is on-premise (and I assume that 1/3 is declining over time)
You’re talking about LAMP-type set ups and I’m talking about Windows Desktop integration services. Smaller orgs will use cloud services but many larger organisations, colleges, and the like will likely have a fleet of Windows servers running in VMs (traditionally VMWare but that might have changed since Broadcom bought them).
However if you do want to talk about services outside of fleet management, then there are plenty of niches where Windows Server has a surprising foothold. Though typically they’re domains which haven’t been disrupted by “tech bros”, which is why you don’t read about it much on HN.
> This is similar to saying that Microsoft missed an opportunity with smartphone ecosystems.
They did. But we are talking specifically about fleet management and not any random tech-adjacent industry.
> If Apple Enterprise Cloud was available today who is switching and why? Apple would have to undercut established players to convince businesses to switch via a massive migration effort.
The existing players only exist because Apples default offering is basically non-existent. Apple wouldn’t need to undercut them, just be comparably priced. The reason being that if you already have a business account with Apple then you don’t need to go through the pan of getting a new supplier approved by the board (etc).
As for existing businesses, if they’re already large enough that fleet management is a concern then they’re large enough to have people on payroll who manage that fleet. And thus to perform that migration. It might even be part of their laptop refresh program.
And if Apple had an enterprise fleet management service then they’d be able to offer tools that are locked to their fleet management (eg remote wipe). Which would heavily incentivise businesses not to go with 3rd parties.
I don't disagree. A big reason 2026 is the Year of the Desktop Linux is that MSFT lost any interest in the Desktop PC platform. Outside selling more of my data and filling it with AI Slop.
But if, say, AAPL had won the PC wars, we'd be staring at a much more locked-down, much more expensive OS experience.
Well, before Apple, most phones were appliances with fixed software; there was no openness to speak of. That said, I wish they hadn't continued this trend and instead took inspiration from Windows Mobile.
Before iphone mobile phones were running Java applets, which were sometimes even compatible across different phone manufacturers and users even could exchange them over infrared. In contrast first iPhone initially had no support for third party software, only web apps.
> Before iphone mobile phones were running Java applets, which were sometimes even compatible across different phone manufacturers and users even could exchange them over infrared.
"Sometimes" doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Nokia had an app store, and before you could see the available apps you have to first choose your phone: because even with-in Nokia's own product range there was so much variation in screens, keyboards, and general capabilities that they had to pre-apply a filter to show you what would actually work.
But then came Java and Wap. You could, in theory, download a jar from a site and try to run it. God knows if it would run. But it wasn't a locked-down app store that bypassing would land you in hot water.
Excuse me while I get permission from sixteen levels of managers inside Cingular, U.S. Cellular, Cincinnati Bell, PrimeCo, and the fifty different regional carriers calling themselves "Cellular One" to offer my app on their networks.
I'm not claiming that iPhones are open to the extent that HN griefers want it to be, but you must have been freshly hatched in the years before the iPhone to think the ecosystem was open.
I say this as someone who developed some of the first mobile phone weather apps. (Before "app" was even a word.)
I may be guilty of the same thing you're mentioning (I'm in the USA), but my Nokia 6210 came with a carrier lock and I wasn't even able to visit websites via the WAP browser unless my carrier approved of them because WAP acted like a sort of mandatory vendor operated proxy that allowed them to see and filter everything the phone did. They would, for example, filter out websites about ringtones to try and force you to buy theirs for $0.99/piece.
My experience with a Nokia 6210 was very much the opposite of what you describe.
That's very much a product of the American oligarchy - with Apple, MSFT and Google at the forefront. Yes, these particular restrictions were the gifts from the US Telco industry. But the corporations in the US behave practically all the same - abuse the customers as much as possible, in every conceivable manner. This is partly due to the fact that these incumbents don't allow smaller ethical competitors to survive.
Granted that there are variations of these abusers in every country. But the US companies are on a whole different level. They practically own the ostensibly democratic government. I'm sorry to break the top commenter's bubble of bliss. But these companies have depleted any goodwill and benefits of doubt a long time ago to deserve any kind mention.
PS: I get downvoted every time I express this sentiment here. That's not surprising, given the strong representation that these rogue players have on HN. Fair enough! But the downvoters would do well to realize that no amount of such anonymous disapprovals are going to reverse the course of the global tech community's steadily souring opinions and hostility towards such companies. It won't take very long for this to hit their markets too, if the boycott hasn't already started in several parts of the world. So they might as well take the message and take the steps to repair their damaged reputation and trust, though it's going to be a long road ahead to recovery.
It was exactly like the GP described in the UK too. All-powerful carriers at a time when Apple was almost bankrupt, before Google was a verb and before Microsoft made phones that would crash just sitting waiting for a call.
> Apple basically spearheaded the war on general computation. Before them, phones used to be more or less open, Apple cracked down on that very quickly.
Hopefully the Neo is the beginning of Apple making useful and affordable products for all users, instead of walling their garden to squeeze out every last penny via Cook's 'premium'-upwards-screwdriver tactics ... the history of market-dynamics suggests otherwise, but let's hope and wait there's a mindset change as well.
I think it might be the opposite. You make cheap products for everybody because you are going to make money off subscriptions. Personally, I think it's a reasonable strategy, but it might mean they lose their focus on high-end craftsmanship.
I'm sorry, are my MacBooks Pro, Air, and (my spouse's) Neo not some of the best built laptops you can buy? Maybe there's something better, but these are inarguably some of the best. Absolute top of the line.
See the Verge (I think) reviewing similarly priced laptops priced around the Neo. They were plastic crap, even if they had better specs elsewhere.
the M line of macbook pro's are beautiful, well crafted, long lasting machines.
MacOS might not be your preferred way of working, and you might prefer cheaper options or USB-A ports, but there is really nothing you could arguably call bad craftmanship in those machines.
In addition to the sibling comment, I would point out the touch bar was poor craftsmanship and the butterfly keyboard was also poor craftsmanship. They both are addressed now, but there were several years where we had to live with them.
Their software craftsmanship has really suffered in the last 10 years.
I thought the touchbar was pretty neat, it was just a mistake to replace the function row with them. It also was hard to get adoption because it wasn’t available on desktop Macs or their cheaper laptops so developers had no incentive to really do anything interesting with them.
I think a better implementation might have been to have it be an alternate mode for the trackpad and sell external trackpads that also had it so it could be used everywhere. But I get why that didn’t happen, the touchbar was basically being run with a mini Apple Watch SOC built into the MacBook Pro, and it’s primary use was to have the Secure Enclave on it. The touchbar itself was a deal where they could find a use for having an otherwise idle smartwatch’s worth of computing power in there, but that wouldn’t be doable if it’s sold as an external device.
I mean, they're not bad, but they have spicy chargers, the corners are uncomfortably sharp, the keyboard often doesn't register, the LCD is prone to vertical bars and other issues even without physical damage and is extremely sensitive to bumps and other minor damage elsewhere on the laptop (not even the display itself), and so on.
Some of these are consequences of what makes them feel "premium" or even "solid". Aluminum is a terrible material for bumps and drops because it dents, and that often damages the internal components.
I've never bought a Mac, I have used them for work. They are the best built laptops on the market, bar none. Too bad their OS is awful. Its not just marketing.
Have you actually looked at apple products and compared them to the competition? The different in quality of finish is really stark in my experience. Some other manufacturers have some products which have some nice features. Whatever you think of the software or ecosystem, almost Apple hardware is just nicely made.
Is that really true? The price of Macs today is far lower than it used to be when adjusted for inflation. I know this is true of all computers, but you can get a really good Mac computer without spending a lot of money, historically speaking.
The Macbook Air, the best computer for most people, starts at $1099. I paid something like $2,700 for my computer, which I brought to college in 2002. That's about $5,000 in today's money.
All the C-suits in Apple that normally does the presentations look completely LA style artificial. Nothing looks human about them, they always give off the same feel of un-personal, robotic, snake oil sales people; not someone that you actually would like to lead a company, as in someone who actually understands what it means to be human.
> This is one of the more broadly normal HN-reaction threads to large public news event I've seen in a while. A lot of love for Apple, respect for the decision, and respectfully stated nuance. Surprising and good.
In other words, nothing insightful or worth talking about. I don't want to read news for feelgood vibes.
But there is interesting information in lots of the comments. Like the quote from Ternus about Apple Maps in one of the comments. This gives relevant insight of how he thinks and how he might handle problems when he takes over.
If it's interesting to note that there are mostly nuanced takes and positive vibes in the thread, and an otherwise low-value meta comment is deemed to be a worthy top comment for saying so, then I suggest an auto-generated AI summarization comment pinned to every long HN thread. This will surely save everyone the trouble of doing so...
(I am not claiming the top comment is AI generated, only that an AI generated summarization of the thread can function just as well in its stead, despite the occasional inaccuracies)
Critical thought is not about negativity, it is about evaluation. You take a statement and evaluate it based on its merits using an epistemic system which prioritizes consistently, evidence, and logical coherence.
Saying it is disagreeable is like saying that honestly is disagreeable. Sure, it can be, but it is not an inherent feature, and a lot depends on how it is delivered.
This is the ideal: friendly criticism. But first you have to make friends. If your audience aren't your friends, you can exercise your silver tongue to charm them while still delivering your criticism. If they aren't your friends and you unfortunately don't have a silver tongue, you can be negative, or be quiet, or stick to subjects they won't feel defensive about. You can't have the ideal in practical reality.
If you don't have a silver tongue, say what you mean without denigrating anyone or anything, or just don't comment at all. There is no requirement to be negative for the sake of being negative.
Yes, as algorithmic engagement has proven, most people want to read the news to get angry about stuff.
But I don't like hanging around that. I'd rather talk about tech news with nerds (old HN) and not just talk about coastal filter-bubble US politics with big tech worker bees (new HN).
US politics has definitely captured the crowd here lately. Half of the comment threads somehow devolve from discussions of Javascript frameworks into hysterical left-populist struggle sessions over the perceived political injustice of the day.
Maybe some feel good vibes and some apolitical news for the day aren't a bad thing.
Sometimes the commenters actually have genuine insights that must reports/articles will never mention. Sadly, I'm quite a cynical person that expects everything to have a spin unless it comes from an authoritative source.
In general, I'd say it's about confirmation bias and having a fluffy statement that confirms preconceived notions is hardly interesting to me. If there is anything of substance that contradicts any narrative or general consensus than I find the signal in the noise highly valuable.
But I can't speak for the general case because I don't use any social media and find rage bate quite cumbersome.
Your statement implies that positivity equals to normality. This is the same kind of statement that would imply that negativity or evil is normal.
All those statements are psychological manipulation. Being too positive or too negative makes people blind and mendable by silently suppressing their will to be themselves.
> With a new boss, Apple may be showing its strategic interest in deeper integration of AI into its hardware, said Hubbard. "The very strengths that made Apple dominant - their discipline, polish, and control - could become constraints if the next era rewards openness and faster iteration," he said.
The opposite of the basic human interface quality and consistency improvements that several commenters here hope for.
(Admittedly "Hubbard" here is just the first pundit they could grab, an Assistant Professor of Management and Organization, so this isn't the best informed prognostication.)
There are plenty of other big companies that people love too. Off the top of my head: Nintendo, AMD, Disney.
In the case of all of them, they may make some questionably ethical business decisions but at the same time do genuinely care about the craft they're in, pushing boundaries and making quality products.
To a large extent: the product, the gloss, the luxury-item impression. People generally aren't looking beyond that deeper into the company behind.
You can see a similar thing in the 3D printing world with Bambu Lab - people love the product (my A1 has been excellent value, very reliable, and I despite preferring my fancy more expensive toy for most tasks I would still recommend it to those starting out without specific needs that such a design can't provide), and any concern about the company behind it (slowly closing off the ecosystem, initially trying to make out that their obviously-inspired-by-the-fullspectrum-scorca-fork colour mixing option was their own original stroke of genius) doesn't matter to them.
With both Bambu and Apple part of why they get this attention is the end-to-end polish that people feel in the product experience (to be fair is a valid reason to choose those products) and a certain amount of luck in them bringing their show to market at the right time, where other companies are seen as producing more interchangeable commodity items. Without that distinction giving people a higher view of the product range, the other companies struggle to get away from the fact that we don't naturally, for good reason, trust nor love commercial entities.
The other thing working in favour of some companies is momentum: some were worthy of some adoration for higher quality products and/or greater customer care than the competition, but are no longer and it takes a while for everyone to realise how much things have changed. Disney is definitely a company that I would add to this pile, and there are others.
Another big company that seems to get a lot more adoration than any of their competition is Nintendo, though I'm not in the gaming market any more so I don't know how much of that they still earn and how much of it is just that at least they aren't Sony or Microsoft!
This reads like a good example of how prestige brands flatten people critical faculties. :-)
"A lot of love for Apple" is not evidence of wisdom or merit. It is evidence that Apple has been extraordinarily successful at converting ordinary consumer electronics into a moral aesthetic identity for its customers... Once that happens, public praise stops being about products and starts being about selfregard.
That is why Apple gets discussed in a register normally reserved for institutions that have actually earned public affection. In reality, it is a company that charges luxury prices for tightly controlled products, then persuades customers that the control is sophistication and the markup is virtue. :-)
This is mostly a case study in prestige bias. People are not just evaluating a company but protecting a status hierarchy in which buying Apple signifies discernment.
And the something amazing must be in the skunkworks line is the usual theology that means when the present is overpriced iteration, redemption is always scheduled for a few years from now.
I made this because I thought it would be cool to see how far you can get using CloudFlare pages to serve videos as JPEGs. It worked. Then extended to PDFs, XLS etc. Finally added a tie-in to BrowserBox so you can replay browser sessions.
My expectation: demand going up, prices will rise, supply will saturate to the point of ubiquitous "utility" status, and prices will drop, probably a bell curve shape with sine-wave undulations along the way.
I like how HN has shifted from hating everything about AI, refusing to use it because HNers are 'too smart'/'too good', to now using it for everything and having strong opinions about it. It was inevitable, I suppose.
- Pay attention to your emotions and body. When you're tired, or scared you are making no progress, stop. Think. How can you delegate more? How can you drive the agent without your input? No micromanaging, the golden rule. If there's discomfort in this process that's more than just momentary, you're doing it wrong. I really believe that. Agents are the ultimate unlock. Think, then free your time to do other things, while the team works. Done well, it's incredibly liberating and satisfying.
- Use Copilot. 39/month for Copilot Pro+. 1500 Premium Requests. Oh look I'm all outta my "5 hour/weekly" limit after being a little too chatty with Opus, or seending Codex down a little too deep of a rabbithole. Fret not - the backup solution, ol Trusty Copilot is the way. Oftimes in recent days ye may have felt the CLI was doomed, buggy, crap. But trust me, Copilot has improved rapidly over the last few weeks. To me, much less buggy. And no limits. Only Premium Requests. And all the models you want, at least that I use. It's really good and useful.
Funny, I just made https://model-tracker.com because model performance change all the time, and it would be good to have a subjective signal of what people are actually feeling today. And also, benchmarks are flaky af as this paper shows.
The idea is knowing what to try first today saves a bit of time.
I would love to see a stable test over time with a hold out set of easy/medium/hard challenges. I, like many others, have noticed a large drop in recent performance w/ Claude Opus (and Sonnet) and more sites like these would hold the labs more accountable to sneaky backend changes that nerf/degrade performance.
working on something similar to evaluate model performance over time using tasks based on your own code. obviously this is still susceptible to the same hacking mechanics documented here, but at a local level, it's easier to detect/fix, and should give a stronger signal of subjective harness/agent/context performance than these large generic benchmarks
also I keep hearing complaints that opus is nerfed, but IMO it's nice to have objective data to back that. I feel like half of the nerfing complaints are people getting past honeymoon phase...
This is super cool. I love that look. Something about classic black & white macos has a timeless "alternative timeline" L'Air de Panache aesthetic that to me says credibility and stability. Maybe it's the memory of the rows of Macintosh SE or Plus, those solid little upright beige bricks, in the computer room at my elementary school.
Oh wow. Once I saw the smiling machine and empty progress bar, I went straight to NoScript and enabled your domain without a moment's hesitation — highly unusual for me. It's charming! I laughed out loud when I saw your screen-saver.
It's familiar and alien at the same time, like I'm seeing an alternate universe.
It was a way to become more familiar with CSS and JS (and indulge my classic Mac OS nostalgia), but my biggest takeaway was that the web wasn't a foundation I wanted to build complex structures on, and indirectly helped spur me to create Advanced Mac Substitute.
Sharing our Mac themes simulators? Here is my entrant: https://hcsimulator.com/ Full compatibility with HyperCard stacks, including their resource forks if they are in StuffIt archives.
I take pentoxyfylline (a synthetic substituted xanthine, caffeine is a natural substituted xanthine) occasionally as a nootropic and supplement for vascular health and anecdotally for me it has several nice caffeine like properties without the jitters/ long tail, sleep effects etc.
I find the listed side effects don’t happen for me besides occasional flush/blush. Which at my age is more like youthful vigor.
Caffeine is is 1,3,7-trimethylxanthine, pentoxyfylline is
3,7-dimethyl-1-(5-oxohexyl)xanthine.
Good effects are: sustained mental clarity, focus and energy with a smoother more stable baseline than caffeine’s bursty performance; good sleep, but strangely you can also stay up, if you prefer; feeling similar to “after exercise”. Half life is listed as under 1 hour, but beneficial effects can be felt for half a day after 400mg (a standard dose). So maybe there’s something like metabolite dynamics occurring here too.
This ends my erowid/hive style “trip/nootropic” report ;)
Do you know how much it affects your deep sleep duration?
People who drink caffeine at night may claim to be able to sleep still, but they will find that deep sleep stages are shorter, which is significant because it may be the most important type of sleep.
I can’t accept the theocratic tyrants who implement terrorism, execute their own people and slaughter them as they protest remain in charge. They should be forced out of power.
I wonder if the US had struck when momentum was high during the popular uprising, it could have being self sustaining, with arms and logistics setup to feed the resistance advance.
Your post is ambiguous until the second part, FYI. In this conflict, it's a good idea to be clear on which nation you are talking about from the start.
The delusional idea that one can affect regime change through bombing is the cause of quite a bit death and destruction throughout the world.
Maybe the problem wasn't the timing, but the fact that thousands of people were killed and millions lived in fear for the future for the past month? That's enough to cause most people to stand behind their government, no matter how reviled they might be.
The second day of the war Israel gave everyone in Tehran a day-long oil shower. Imagine cleaning that out of your kid's hair, you're not going to overthrow the government that's shooting back.
The civilian casualties of the war is still significantly lower than the number killed by the regime (according to Amnesty International with conservative number). So while I agree that people don’t want bombing, I highly doubt that the war makes them like their oppressors. They love their country and Iran and islamic regime are not the same exactly.
The idea there was bombing to support the popular uprising that does the actual work. I think that might have been the fantasy here, too, but it seems like the window closed.
I'm not arguing that Iran has been executed well, but military force has topled MANY regimes. If you're arguing "bombs" specifically and only, the U.S. won the war with Japan by dropping just two big ones. If you'd like a more contemporary example: Libya, 2011. NATO’s campaign relied overwhelmingly on air and missile strikes, and NATO officially did not deploy a conventional foreign ground force. The regime was finished by Libyan rebel forces on the ground. This is likely the scenario Trump was hoping for.
Japan was on its last legs was and the US had already gone all-in with a war machine unlike anything seen before. At that point no one was going to lose elections about lost lives while invading Japan. The bombs were a time and life saving device. And the US army still had to actually occupy Japan after that (much smaller than Iran)
You may be right about the political challenges (and I'm neither arguing for or against them), I'm simply pointing out that the war was won with two bombs. Perhaps it was wise to station troops in Japan after victory, but I don't think it was necessary. Even if it were, the peacekeeping forces were far smaller and there was almost zero violence. This would be politically palatable to Americans.
Sorry I should have been more nuanced. Bombing can win conflicts but one thing is does not do is regime change.
I'd argue the occupation was necessary: The political system that led to militarism was still intact and there were still factions against surrender until the very end. It was regime change per se but a regime transformation and I don't think it would have been possible without an occupation.
I think that's fair. The leadership remained in power. However I would argue that in the case of Iran, Trump doesn't care if leaders remain in power, as long as they do what he wants. Specifically on uranium enrichment. I think he wanted to follow the Venezuela example, but this is not that.
This definition is perfectly congruent with a regime losing all autonomous power and becoming subservient to a foreign power. I would argue the U.S. "toppled" Venezuela's regime despite the existing party remaining in power. They do as they are told now.
There was, and still is, no scenario in which US and/or Israel attacks Iran and effects regime change. Come on, we've been over this multiple times over the past few decades.
Any direct military action will galvanize population against the existential threat, not against the tyrant who's still your countryman, no matter how rotten.
If they wanted true change, grassroots support was the only way. Was, because at this point more than likely any revolution has been pushed back by a few years at least, probably decades.
I see your point. You don’t think most Iranians want freedom from tyrants? I see 90% dislike the tyrants, and 80% want Trump to eradicate them. Leveling the field for the popular revolution I hope takes over.
Iranian here, no we don't want Israel and United States to bomb our children to "free us".
We already have 90M intelligent people in the country and can figure it out eventually.
We still has ways to go to develop, IRAN lacks some women's rights (however it's not as bad as people make it to be) and freedom of speech (similar to other Gulf nations). Most people have major grievances regarding the economy.
After the uprising of "Woman, Life, Freedom" in 2022, followed by the Mahsa uprising, the government started to loosen the Hijab laws for example. They stopped enforcing it severely (though they can change it at any time), the clerics have realized that theocratic laws will backfire with young people. I think the future of Iran is going to look like other nations, where religion becomes a "cultural thing".
The biggest blockers at the moment are sanctions and the ongoing issues with Israel.
We've survived for 3,000 years, we can survive for another 3,000 years without the help of US.
90m imbecilles that rather have sharia law and complete utter opression and deconstruction of the persian DNA. you are so full of shit its incredible, any iranian that took refugee in europe can contest your so full of propaganda shit.
Go die for allah that is what you love and 90m of your fellow brothers.
This is a very naive view. Things do not happen like that, especially in the Middle East, where killing a tinpot dictator just causes two more radical ones spring to usurp his place. We've been over this where US military interventions in this century alone caused ISIS to spread like wildfire, and make things worse long term in many of the countries affected.
I think some Iranians, perhaps even a vast majority of them, would like freedom from Khomenei, but the westerners have just conducted massive bombing operations, killing many innocent civilians at the behest of their mortal enemy Israel, so any freedom movements are at the very least very unpopular now, with people becoming radicalized by deaths of their loved ones, especially their children, pushing them into the arms of those in power, who can justifiably point and say "see? They are the enemy, not us!". One almost wonders if that wasn't also one of the goals of the invasion, preventing the formation of a secularized and stable Iran.
That’s OK, you may be right. And all my comments here on the Iranian situation may be wrong. Which is also perfectly okay because I don’t have to make any decisions affecting the Persian people.
Would you want Americans to take Trump down yourselves, or would rather China come and take him down for you? Iranians have as much agency as Americans do. Denying them that never ends well.
It could be real. Or it could be a smokescreen for their remote viewing program. But isn’t the most likely explanation that pilots carry a radio/gps device and that’s how rescue found him?
I still haven't scroll down to the bottom, I don't want to spoil my impression. But it's great to see a positive reaction. Good way to mark the moment. Tim has been CEO for 15 years roughly, since Steve's passing. This guy seems much younger than Tim was when he ascended. I hope he really takes it to the next level.
Got a feeling that Apple has some Amazing new hardware category-making products coming out of the 'skunkworks' over the next 3 years.
reply