Clent

• Listening to the same song on repeat so you can focus.

That's now poe's law, it would be Occam's razor.

The most likely scenario here is not many puppet accounts spreading sarcasm or parody but rather that there are many actors that all true believers in what they are all saying. They sound the same because they are feeding off the same talking point.

You started with the statement, "as always, Apple is gaslighting you" -- that is quire the statement, you cannot support it but you are insist it's true, insisting that I accept it as part of my reality.

That is gaslighting.

One of the fun things with people who gaslight is their inability to recognize their gaslighting. It's also possible you don't understand the term.

You refusing to back down from such a strong and unsupported statement makes me think it's the later and that I'm involved in the sort of argument one is never supposed to involve themselves them in. Something about taking you down to their level and betting you with experience.

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."