If you’re willing to ban the NFA/legalize probate nuclear weapons we might be able to talk.
In the mean time I suspect you support at least some level of collective restriction, and that means banning companies from selling locked hardware is fair game.
Because it's anti-competitive. Society is advanced when companies have to compete and not just collect taxes from other companies who are trying to do something.
The Apple tax is not advancing anything. It's just a stranglehold on innovation promoted with FUD about how running programs is insecure despite the fact that this isn't applied to desktop/laptop computers.
Apple developing a more secure platform is an innovation and advancement. If the iPhone isn’t the right choice for you buy one of the other thousand phones on the market, and leave other people alone.
> I suspect you support at least some level of collective restriction
Locked mobile phones don’t hurt people other than the people who choose to use them. That’s different to for example a gun.
The only reason to ban iPhones is because you know other people like them as they are and you’re in a minority! You want to enforce a minority opinion on others. That’s morally wrong.
If you seriously think is a majority opinion you need to get out more. The average person wants strong device security, look at the press and angst attracted by cybercrime in recent times.
The discussion is about control. No one is saying devices should be less secure.
If you ask people "should you be able to run any program you want on your devices?" I doubt people would answer "yes, on computers, but on phones I should only be able to run what Tim Apple allows me to".
Clearly not signed everyone - I don’t sign it.