4 ms·

Apple is basically saying: "Even if our rules are unethical, we still want you to take the blame for it. Don't even dare to explain to the consumer that you're

Apple is basically saying: "Even if our rules are unethical, we still want you to take the blame for it. Don't even dare to explain to the consumer that you're merely following Apple's guidelines."

zepto 6y ago
No, they aren’t saying that. They are saying ‘when we ask you to stop doing something unethical, don’t try to make us look bad for making the request’. However, I agree with Gruber on this - it’s wrong for them to try to stifle discussion about their rules, whatever the context.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  Actually, they’re saying “when we ask you to do something we consider unethical, you can’t say we told you to do it”.
  - zepto 6y ago
    Yes, that is another fair rewriting of what they are saying. Obviously they make their own ethical judgements when enforcing their own rules, as do we all. My guess is that they wouldn’t object to the discussion though, if it didn’t make them look bad.
    - jedimind 6y ago
      Can you elaborate on how that is substantially different from my statement?
      - zepto 6y ago
        It should be obvious, but here are things from your comment that are very different from my or saagarjha’s version: “we still want you to take the blame” Neither I, nor saargarjha nor Apple are saying anything about blame. You are putting words into Apple’s mouth here. “Don't even dare” There is nothing in my, or Apple’s or Sagaarjha’s comment that has this connotation. You are adding in the idea that Apple wants developers to be afraid. “merely following Apple’s guidelines” Again, not something that is true, and not something reflected in either my or Sagaargarjha’s comment. If someone actually complies with a request from Apple, there is a lot more going on than ‘merely following guidelines’, an obvious one being that there may be a real problem with the content behind taken down. By saying this, you exclude the possibility that Apple is acting in good faith. To summarize, your comment was in no way a fair rewriting of Apple’s comment. You introduced a set of additional content that weren’t in anyone else’s version, and which give the appearance of Apple’s actions being the meritless bullying of a bad faith actor. That is the entire substance of your comment. It’s certainly possible that Apple’s actions are disagreeable to many people, but HN shows that they are not universally considered meritless. It’s also possible for Apple to act like a bully uninitentionally, or to actually bully developers. They are not above that and we should discuss it. But those facts don’t make your ‘rewrite’ a fair reflection.
        jedimind 6y ago
        You are all over this thread trying to protect Apple by hook or by crook, jumping into any statement and twisting and forcing your interpretations. Sagaarjha’s statement is still essentially saying the same as mine, so it's absolute nonsense to claim that it's not what Apple is saying, but then agreeing with Sagaarjha’s statement, which fundamentally says the same thing. Your zealousness in this thread exposes your unbearable bias.
        zepto 6y ago
        It seems like I struck a nerve. There is nothing twisted about my interpretations, and I’m not defending Apple. Here are is a summary of my position: 1. I agree with Gruber - Apple shouldn’t be policing discussion of their rules. 2. Your comment is not the same as Sagaarjha’s. I have clearly explained why, and you have chosen to ignore the points I made, and attack me personally. 3. I can understand why Apple is motivated to police certain comments, and I believe the motivations are based on real problems they want to avoid in good faith. 4. Despite believing #3 I also believe #1. Just because they are acting in good faith on real problems, doesn’t mean I think they are doing the right thing. 5. I believe we should choose open OS’s and there should be a possibly mandated requirement to be able to install alternate OS’s on Apple decides (and anything else in a wide similar class). Not one thing I have said in this thread defends Apple’s actions at all. I don’t find that it helps us to understand what is going on if we simply portray them as a nasty bully without considering their motivations. If this is representative of ‘unbearable bias’, then so be it.
        jedimind 6y ago
        > There is nothing twisted about my interpretations, and I’m not defending Apple. I stopped reading there. It's as false as it is shameless to make such a claim after all the comments you spammed across the whole thread.
        zepto 6y ago
        Unfortunately, if you really stopped there, then you don’t understand what I mean when I say that. But, since you have such a black and white view: Can you quote a single comment from this thread in which I defend Apple?
  - 4926394057 6y ago
    Sounds like Telegram needs to implement a "message canary" where every message has a note attached saying something to the effect of; "Apple hasn't asked us to remove this message".
    - smnrchrds 6y ago
      Then they would probably get banned from Apple ecosystem. And Apple will defend itself saying they have a right to choose not to do business with anyone for any reason and they have deemed it best for user experience not to let Telegram in App Store. And Telegram developers would have no recourse.
- smnrchrds 6y ago
  What is unethical about letting the consumers know how much they are paying Apple for the privilege of using in-app purchase?
  - sunahe 6y ago
    Forbidding it
  - zepto 6y ago
    Nothing
- FireBeyond 6y ago
  They're also saying "Don't say that your app overcame a bug in iOS, that's irrelevant".

Apple is basically saying: "Even if our rules are unethical, we still want you to take the blame for it. Don't even dare to explain to the consumer that you're merely following Apple's guidelines."

zepto 6y ago

No, they aren’t saying that. They are saying ‘when we ask you to stop doing something unethical, don’t try to make us look bad for making the request’. However, I agree with Gruber on this - it’s wrong for them to try to stifle discussion about their rules, whatever the context.

saagarjha 6y ago
Actually, they’re saying “when we ask you to do something we consider unethical, you can’t say we told you to do it”.
- zepto 6y ago
  Yes, that is another fair rewriting of what they are saying. Obviously they make their own ethical judgements when enforcing their own rules, as do we all. My guess is that they wouldn’t object to the discussion though, if it didn’t make them look bad.
  - jedimind 6y ago
    Can you elaborate on how that is substantially different from my statement?
    - zepto 6y ago
      It should be obvious, but here are things from your comment that are very different from my or saagarjha’s version: “we still want you to take the blame” Neither I, nor saargarjha nor Apple are saying anything about blame. You are putting words into Apple’s mouth here. “Don't even dare” There is nothing in my, or Apple’s or Sagaarjha’s comment that has this connotation. You are adding in the idea that Apple wants developers to be afraid. “merely following Apple’s guidelines” Again, not something that is true, and not something reflected in either my or Sagaargarjha’s comment. If someone actually complies with a request from Apple, there is a lot more going on than ‘merely following guidelines’, an obvious one being that there may be a real problem with the content behind taken down. By saying this, you exclude the possibility that Apple is acting in good faith. To summarize, your comment was in no way a fair rewriting of Apple’s comment. You introduced a set of additional content that weren’t in anyone else’s version, and which give the appearance of Apple’s actions being the meritless bullying of a bad faith actor. That is the entire substance of your comment. It’s certainly possible that Apple’s actions are disagreeable to many people, but HN shows that they are not universally considered meritless. It’s also possible for Apple to act like a bully uninitentionally, or to actually bully developers. They are not above that and we should discuss it. But those facts don’t make your ‘rewrite’ a fair reflection.
      - jedimind 6y ago
        You are all over this thread trying to protect Apple by hook or by crook, jumping into any statement and twisting and forcing your interpretations. Sagaarjha’s statement is still essentially saying the same as mine, so it's absolute nonsense to claim that it's not what Apple is saying, but then agreeing with Sagaarjha’s statement, which fundamentally says the same thing. Your zealousness in this thread exposes your unbearable bias.
        zepto 6y ago
        It seems like I struck a nerve. There is nothing twisted about my interpretations, and I’m not defending Apple. Here are is a summary of my position: 1. I agree with Gruber - Apple shouldn’t be policing discussion of their rules. 2. Your comment is not the same as Sagaarjha’s. I have clearly explained why, and you have chosen to ignore the points I made, and attack me personally. 3. I can understand why Apple is motivated to police certain comments, and I believe the motivations are based on real problems they want to avoid in good faith. 4. Despite believing #3 I also believe #1. Just because they are acting in good faith on real problems, doesn’t mean I think they are doing the right thing. 5. I believe we should choose open OS’s and there should be a possibly mandated requirement to be able to install alternate OS’s on Apple decides (and anything else in a wide similar class). Not one thing I have said in this thread defends Apple’s actions at all. I don’t find that it helps us to understand what is going on if we simply portray them as a nasty bully without considering their motivations. If this is representative of ‘unbearable bias’, then so be it.
        jedimind 6y ago
        > There is nothing twisted about my interpretations, and I’m not defending Apple. I stopped reading there. It's as false as it is shameless to make such a claim after all the comments you spammed across the whole thread.
        zepto 6y ago
        Unfortunately, if you really stopped there, then you don’t understand what I mean when I say that. But, since you have such a black and white view: Can you quote a single comment from this thread in which I defend Apple?
- 4926394057 6y ago
  Sounds like Telegram needs to implement a "message canary" where every message has a note attached saying something to the effect of; "Apple hasn't asked us to remove this message".
  - smnrchrds 6y ago
    Then they would probably get banned from Apple ecosystem. And Apple will defend itself saying they have a right to choose not to do business with anyone for any reason and they have deemed it best for user experience not to let Telegram in App Store. And Telegram developers would have no recourse.
smnrchrds 6y ago
What is unethical about letting the consumers know how much they are paying Apple for the privilege of using in-app purchase?
- sunahe 6y ago
  Forbidding it
- zepto 6y ago
  Nothing
FireBeyond 6y ago
They're also saying "Don't say that your app overcame a bug in iOS, that's irrelevant".