Clent

Making up reasons to assert gaslight is occurring is gaslighting. There is no proof Apple is lying.

This is an excellent example of not being able to reason someone out of a position they didn't use reason to get into.

Belief is not proof. If you want to pettle conspiracies, try 4chan.

Apple: We're a search engine company and we don't want to be.

You: Zomg, gaslighting. Based on information I want to be true, Apple totally wants to be a search engine and wants to be!

The only one doing any gaslighting here is you.

Copyright predates corporations. Many corporations need copyright to extract profit. If you're anti-corporation but pro-copyright, you're the only with the big ol' giant hole.

That what's the reason? You haven't proposed their true motive, what sanity are they attempting to make us question because you don't appear to understand what gaslighting means. At best you think they are lying, which isn't gaslighting and is a really stupid thing to do around federal investigations.

Even nomadic culture have housing they carry with them.

This is hardly a new business model. In the olden days there were 900 numbers for this. Commercial shows hot sexy women. Actual person on the line was not.

I'm guessing the difference here is lack of disclosure.

Why spend billions a year on a search engine when someone will pay you billions a year to use theirs?

This isn't gaslighting, it's the basics of tenet capitalism.

In what scenario does Apple generate 20 billion a year by owning a internet search product?

Search engines are a dead end. The future is a LLM that can tie its results to sources.

I have more confidence in Apple getting that right than Google. Google doesn't even have the confidence in themselves to brand their product with Google in the name.

Literally one of the bullet points:

In order to create a "viable" search engine business, Apple would be required to "sell targeted advertising," which is "not a core business" for the company and would go against its "longstanding privacy commitments."

The laws around copyright are designed to prevent citizens from doing things.

The laws around human rights are designed to preventing the government from doing things.

The later expands your agency while the former restricts it.

Did you happen to get Jump to Conclusions Mat for Christmas?

This post is about what is missing from this perp walk so clearly it's you who failed to recognize the nuance.