3 ms·

This is so negative sum thought. It's not even zero sum. "If I cant have it NOBODY CAN! <stomps foot>" As much as theft hurts, destroying a device that costs

This is so negative sum thought. It's not even zero sum. "If I cant have it NOBODY CAN! <stomps foot>" As much as theft hurts, destroying a device that costs so much environmental resources just to be vindictive to a thief over is abhorrent. They could do this without the destroying hardware by linking serial numbers to people, making it trivial to look up who owns a serial number, and then enforcing receive stolen property a crime.

tonyedgecombe 6y ago
It's not to be vindictive to a thief, it's to deter a thief. There is no point in steeling something that has no value. They could do this without the destroying hardware by linking serial numbers to people, making it trivial to look up who owns a serial number, and then enforcing receive stolen property a crime. Who is they? Apple? The state? The number of ways that could go wrong is endless.
- crankylinuxuser 6y ago
  >> They could do this without the destroying hardware by linking serial numbers to people, making it trivial to look up who owns a serial number, and then enforcing receive stolen property a crime. > Who is they? Apple? The state? The number of ways that could go wrong is endless. Well, Apple, insurance and the state all have their part. The government can enforce the crime of receiving stolen property. However on the other side, is whenever higher dollar merchandise is sold, to also record the owner. We already do this with vehicles and the VIN. Manufacturers already do this for warranty and recalls. And Apple usually also knows who you are from the AppleID, which almost always has payment and addresses on file. And, everything has endless ways it can go wrong. But there's a pretty well known finite ways of it going, with weird legal edge cases. Apple, Insurance, and the state can handle at least the more common cases.

tonyedgecombe 6y ago

It's not to be vindictive to a thief, it's to deter a thief. There is no point in steeling something that has no value. They could do this without the destroying hardware by linking serial numbers to people, making it trivial to look up who owns a serial number, and then enforcing receive stolen property a crime. Who is they? Apple? The state? The number of ways that could go wrong is endless.

crankylinuxuser 6y ago
>> They could do this without the destroying hardware by linking serial numbers to people, making it trivial to look up who owns a serial number, and then enforcing receive stolen property a crime. > Who is they? Apple? The state? The number of ways that could go wrong is endless. Well, Apple, insurance and the state all have their part. The government can enforce the crime of receiving stolen property. However on the other side, is whenever higher dollar merchandise is sold, to also record the owner. We already do this with vehicles and the VIN. Manufacturers already do this for warranty and recalls. And Apple usually also knows who you are from the AppleID, which almost always has payment and addresses on file. And, everything has endless ways it can go wrong. But there's a pretty well known finite ways of it going, with weird legal edge cases. Apple, Insurance, and the state can handle at least the more common cases.