He was going to give it to whoever won. Of course he wants to be on the good side of those in power. It’s not about the president, it’s about Tim Cook.
If you are in charge of a company whose market cap is larger than most nations’ GDP, you have to engage in diplomacy. Sometimes that’s blatant and overt corruption.
Most also did. Techbros back them mostly used to be rright-libertarian, they just pivoted more and more to republicans once non-right leaning people showed an extreme distaste for GenAI.
Crypto has been leaning right for years and it’s a damn shame IMO. The initial motivation was to create a money supply without automatic annual pay cuts, without corporate bailouts, where we aren’t forced to either invest in a business or work until we die. All humans should share a FOSS money supply. A large percentage of us were leftists or (actual) anarchists.
Then it appreciated really fast and attracted a bunch of get-rich-quick crypto bros who understand nothing and want you to buy their latest shitcoin. And it’s hurt adoption in the long term as a consequence.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they started distancing themselves from the darknet drug markets that got us here.
Recent happenings among payment processors making me considering amending some changes to my open source game engine’s branding guidelines, that I’ll allow projects accepting crypto etc. (still no NFTs), and I will only intervene if people involved with the projects are also involved in rugpulls, or similar scams.
Tim Cook is really playing both sides of the fence here.
The real fence is capital vs labor, and he doesn’t play both sides of that one
I mean, he did give a generous “personal donation” to the Trump inauguration.
He was going to give it to whoever won. Of course he wants to be on the good side of those in power. It’s not about the president, it’s about Tim Cook.
Really? Because he didn’t the last time.
It’s about him being a dipshit.
If you are in charge of a company whose market cap is larger than most nations’ GDP, you have to engage in diplomacy. Sometimes that’s blatant and overt corruption.
It’s a payoff so Muggsy brown pants doesn’t torch your business.
He wasn’t going to give a million dollars to Harris.
Maybe his interpretation of DEI would be more H1Bs from India?
He always has.
Capitalism, and… what’s the other side he’s playing?
Fair
Most also did. Techbros back them mostly used to be rright-libertarian, they just pivoted more and more to republicans once non-right leaning people showed an extreme distaste for GenAI.
Crypto has been leaning right for years and it’s a damn shame IMO. The initial motivation was to create a money supply without automatic annual pay cuts, without corporate bailouts, where we aren’t forced to either invest in a business or work until we die. All humans should share a FOSS money supply. A large percentage of us were leftists or (actual) anarchists.
Then it appreciated really fast and attracted a bunch of get-rich-quick crypto bros who understand nothing and want you to buy their latest shitcoin. And it’s hurt adoption in the long term as a consequence.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they started distancing themselves from the darknet drug markets that got us here.
Recent happenings among payment processors making me considering amending some changes to my open source game engine’s branding guidelines, that I’ll allow projects accepting crypto etc. (still no NFTs), and I will only intervene if people involved with the projects are also involved in rugpulls, or similar scams.
If I recall he said they were going to remove it and the board said no
Citation needed.
IIRC it was a bunch of shareholders who demanded removal.
Oh ok maybe I’m misremembering