4 ms·

It feels like I'm living in a bizarre world where this event is being parsed by so many people as "Apple can't lock any account they want, force them to apologi

by hnarn 7y ago

It feels like I'm living in a bizarre world where this event is being parsed by so many people as "Apple can't lock any account they want, force them to apologize!", when what people should be saying is "Wow, monolithic software pipelines controlled by a corporation sure are bad and this is just one of many entirely predictable consequences"

SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago
To be fair, having a contract terminated by violating it isn't really the result of "monolithic software pipelines controlled by a corporation".
- hnarn 7y ago
  I feel like you're missing the point. A "contract" with a company shouldn't be at the center of the question of whether you can develop software for a specific platform or not to begin with. It feels like this was understood and controversial only ten years ago, while nowadays people all over the Internet will argue with you to defend Mordors god-given right to rule over every single behavior in the world's most popular smart phone. It's quite worrying to be honest, of this continues people won't know there even was a debate about net neutrality and software freedom a few decades from now.
  - slavik81 7y ago
    It reminds me of something out of The Right to Read. > Programmers still needed debugging tools, of course, but debugger vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only, and only to officially licensed and bonded programmers. The debugger Dan used in software class was kept behind a special firewall so that it could be used only for class exercises.
- sanxiyn 7y ago
  On the other hand, after terminating the contract, saying "you would be getting an e-mail with instructions to get your access restored", without doing so, is pretty weird. I mean, lying is not illegal, but still.
s_dev 7y ago
If he broke Apples ToS then fair enough terminate the account however it isn't clear this is what happened. If Apple terminates an account they should be obliged to provide a reason as to why the account is being terminated, otherwise it's a clear cut refund of the $100 for the dev account at the very least.
- izacus 7y ago
  Except that terminated account now also means that he and other people aren't allowed to run his code on their own hardware at home.
jdgoesmarching 7y ago
It’s weird to see this whole thread jumping to Apple’s defense because “he broke the rules.” Feels hilariously similar to the human centipede episode of South Park. The fact that this company can rip away his work and livelihood because he’s clever enough to find clues in their betas is crazy. Everyone here acting like it’s ok because the world’s richest company has a team of lawyers building the justification are even crazier. Especially when this community eats up his leaks and reporting, it’s sad to see everyone turn their backs on this dude.
- computerex 7y ago
  I totally agree. I have noticed that HackerNews isn't immune to the cult following that Apple has. In every Apple related thread there are people irrationally and fanatically advocating for the company. It's shocking because otherwise HackerNews tends to have relatively level headed users.
  - toasterlovin 7y ago
    FWIW, Apple threads also has a strong contingent of people who seem pretty obviously in ideological (and irrational) opposition to Apple.
  - 205guy 7y ago
    HN readers obviously have a mix of opinions, from software pirate to corporate shill. But certainly many work for FAANGs and the thousands of other companies in tech and have some ideas how companies work. Their pay and employment and products they work on all depend on both 1) them not revealing inside information and 2) their co-workers not revealing inside information. So the GP's "rip away his work and livelihood because he’s clever enough to find clues in their betas" is totally off base. The reason he had access to those betas was because of his developer agreement. Clearly, the public is served when inside information about illegal or immoral behavior is revealed, but the OP seems to all about commercial information, so no whistleblower status.
jmull 7y ago
> monolithic software pipelines controlled by a corporation sure are bad I would guess a lot of people wouldn't agree with that as a general statement. I suppose we can argue about what "bad" means. They certainly aren't perfect and have various drawbacks. On the other hand, where are the better software pipelines not controlled by corporations, all things considered? Keep in mind that people generally opt-in to the Apple ecosystem, despite the high dollar cost of entry. Meanwhile, let's consider an unpoliced app store. It will be full of malware, scams and frauds that only highly sophisticated users will be able to navigate with some safely. One one hand, no one's going to get banned. On the other hand, no one is going to be banned! It doesn't sound good to me.
- Reelin 7y ago
  > where are the better software pipelines not controlled by corporations You're joking, right? Any tool that allows you to configure your own trust roots qualifies: `apt install`, `flatpak install`, etc. Even most laptop SecureBoot implementations qualify at this point! This isn't a dichotomy - of course Apple should police the apps they serve as a root for. The issue is having a monolithic pipeline that doesn't distinguish the vendor root from the tool itself. The F-Droid app store is a good example of one approach to addressing this problem on a mobile device.

by hnarn 7y ago

SmellyGeekBoy 7y ago

To be fair, having a contract terminated by violating it isn't really the result of "monolithic software pipelines controlled by a corporation".

hnarn 7y ago
I feel like you're missing the point. A "contract" with a company shouldn't be at the center of the question of whether you can develop software for a specific platform or not to begin with. It feels like this was understood and controversial only ten years ago, while nowadays people all over the Internet will argue with you to defend Mordors god-given right to rule over every single behavior in the world's most popular smart phone. It's quite worrying to be honest, of this continues people won't know there even was a debate about net neutrality and software freedom a few decades from now.
- slavik81 7y ago
  It reminds me of something out of The Right to Read. > Programmers still needed debugging tools, of course, but debugger vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only, and only to officially licensed and bonded programmers. The debugger Dan used in software class was kept behind a special firewall so that it could be used only for class exercises.
sanxiyn 7y ago
On the other hand, after terminating the contract, saying "you would be getting an e-mail with instructions to get your access restored", without doing so, is pretty weird. I mean, lying is not illegal, but still.

s_dev 7y ago

If he broke Apples ToS then fair enough terminate the account however it isn't clear this is what happened. If Apple terminates an account they should be obliged to provide a reason as to why the account is being terminated, otherwise it's a clear cut refund of the $100 for the dev account at the very least.

izacus 7y ago
Except that terminated account now also means that he and other people aren't allowed to run his code on their own hardware at home.

jdgoesmarching 7y ago

It’s weird to see this whole thread jumping to Apple’s defense because “he broke the rules.” Feels hilariously similar to the human centipede episode of South Park. The fact that this company can rip away his work and livelihood because he’s clever enough to find clues in their betas is crazy. Everyone here acting like it’s ok because the world’s richest company has a team of lawyers building the justification are even crazier. Especially when this community eats up his leaks and reporting, it’s sad to see everyone turn their backs on this dude.

computerex 7y ago
I totally agree. I have noticed that HackerNews isn't immune to the cult following that Apple has. In every Apple related thread there are people irrationally and fanatically advocating for the company. It's shocking because otherwise HackerNews tends to have relatively level headed users.
- toasterlovin 7y ago
  FWIW, Apple threads also has a strong contingent of people who seem pretty obviously in ideological (and irrational) opposition to Apple.
- 205guy 7y ago
  HN readers obviously have a mix of opinions, from software pirate to corporate shill. But certainly many work for FAANGs and the thousands of other companies in tech and have some ideas how companies work. Their pay and employment and products they work on all depend on both 1) them not revealing inside information and 2) their co-workers not revealing inside information. So the GP's "rip away his work and livelihood because he’s clever enough to find clues in their betas" is totally off base. The reason he had access to those betas was because of his developer agreement. Clearly, the public is served when inside information about illegal or immoral behavior is revealed, but the OP seems to all about commercial information, so no whistleblower status.

jmull 7y ago

> monolithic software pipelines controlled by a corporation sure are bad I would guess a lot of people wouldn't agree with that as a general statement. I suppose we can argue about what "bad" means. They certainly aren't perfect and have various drawbacks. On the other hand, where are the better software pipelines not controlled by corporations, all things considered? Keep in mind that people generally opt-in to the Apple ecosystem, despite the high dollar cost of entry. Meanwhile, let's consider an unpoliced app store. It will be full of malware, scams and frauds that only highly sophisticated users will be able to navigate with some safely. One one hand, no one's going to get banned. On the other hand, no one is going to be banned! It doesn't sound good to me.

Reelin 7y ago
> where are the better software pipelines not controlled by corporations You're joking, right? Any tool that allows you to configure your own trust roots qualifies: `apt install`, `flatpak install`, etc. Even most laptop SecureBoot implementations qualify at this point! This isn't a dichotomy - of course Apple should police the apps they serve as a root for. The issue is having a monolithic pipeline that doesn't distinguish the vendor root from the tool itself. The F-Droid app store is a good example of one approach to addressing this problem on a mobile device.