[a-user-you-like]

[flagged]

[amelius]

> to coerce men to do what you want

You make it sound as if it's their god given right to make products as they please but that is not how the law works, and it's a good thing, because without laws we'd end up with stuff that works only in the vendor's best interest and ends up as e-waste sooner than necessary. It is also fair, because society is what ultimately allows these companies to exist.

[a-user-you-like]

Of course it’s their God given right. It shouldn’t be their right to violate God’s law, but “my totes fav phone provider totes doesn’t have side loading” is just entitled, and an unjust use of coercion.

[Woeps]

" that it’s immoral to coerce men to do what you want"

Wait what? but that's what community and laws are all about.

[a-user-you-like]

Generally laws should protect negative rights, not enforce positive ones. I can’t think of a more entitled law than “my fav phone maker totes doesn’t have side loading”. What an egregious use of force.

[westernpopular]

Not men, businesses. And businesses can and should be coerced to serve the people.

[a-user-you-like]

Men own and work at the business, so a useless distinction.

[globular-toast]

Nobody is forcing anybody. Apple is free to pull out of the phone market entirely.

[a-user-you-like]

Hah, I laughed at that one. Good one. Of course the needless regulation and coercion is forcing Apple to act.