9 ms·

The bigger news to me was that Apple blocked AirDrop in China - specifically to limit dissent and for preventing people from organizing [1]. A company that miss

• dymk 4y ago
  Apple did not block AirDrop in China. Apple made it harder to fingerprint protestors who forgot to turn off "Everyone" sharing.
• password4321 4y ago
  Discussed 2 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33778302 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33778302
• BaseballPhysics 4y ago
  > The bigger news to me was that Apple blocked AirDrop in China Why is this bigger news? Seems equivalent to me. Is it because Huawei is already seen as an adversary while folks persist in seeing Apple as somehow more benign?
  • Joe_Boogz 4y ago
    To me I read this as Huawei is already a “state controlled” entity. So this is egregious but expected by them. Apple however is two faced. Saying that they stand for bigger ideals but quietly supporting the communist party by disabling airdrop. Edit: I know it’s more complicated than my comment indicates. But it’s still a weird response by Apple none the less.
    • BaseballPhysics 4y ago
      Eh, it's only weird if you ever thought Apple wasn't two-faced, and nothing about their behaviour has ever suggested that to me. I've not once seen them make a business decision that was in line with some expressed set of ethics while damaging them financially, which to me is a key litmus test of whether a company actually lives by their stated values. Anything else is just lip service.
• rhaway84773 4y ago
  As far as I’m aware Apple didn’t block access. They limited it to 10 minutes at a time. You can re-enable it manually every 10 mins. This is obviously really bad but it doesn’t come close to what Huawei is doing.
• jb1991 4y ago
  This is a form of whataboutism and distracts from this particular article. The Apple AirDrop change has its own thread with meaningful discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33778302 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33778302
  • ok123456 4y ago
    It's not 'whataboutism'. Two tech companies are adding comparable restrictions on their technologies to humor the political interests of a government.
    • ok1234567 4y ago
      [dead]
    • threeseed 4y ago
      a) Not comparable restrictions in the slightest. b) Timeline doesn't match up that Apple did this in response to protests.
  • vharuck 4y ago
    "Whataboutism" is when somebody or something else is brought up as a defense. It's common in HN threads about the Chinese Communist Party, but the grandparent doesn't seem like it. It reads more like, "Here's another company helping the CCP!" It extends the shame and conversation instead of excusing it.
    • jb1991 4y ago
      The definition of this term is a bit broader, from the British dictionary: > the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counter-accusation or raising a different issue. Article criticizes company A, and then a different issue about a different company is raised as a way to somehow minimize the original company A offense. It’s basically saying, “if you think Huawei is bad, what about Apple?”
• matai_kolila 4y ago
  I dunno if, “use Apple AirDrop” is a “most basic freedom”. Is it shitty and contrary to what they claim to support? Yeah. Does it merit this melodramatic response? Probably not.
  • Archipelagia 4y ago
    The issue here is not "using Apple AirDrop", it's "hindering attempts to organize political resistance". I don't think there's anything melodramatic about calling Apple out on it.
    • matai_kolila 4y ago
      I think pretending AirDrop is the only way people can coordinate is weird.
      • bewaretheirs 4y ago
        I don't think anyone's claimed that was the case. Apple isn't removing the only way to coordinate, but they are removing a mechanism which has reportedly been used by Chinese dissidents.
        • nickthegreek 4y ago
          they aren't removing, they are limiting to 10mins.
          • bewaretheirs 4y ago
            Always-on is qualitatively different from "only on for 10 minutes".
      • pannSun 4y ago
        Yes, until every spark of freedom has been irreversibly extinguished, we are blameless for helping in that process.
      • 4y ago
• danpalmer 4y ago
  This sucks, but as a decision maker who cares about privacy, and who believes your product on the whole improves users’ privacy: would you rather keep a hard line and lose market share, or give in on select things so that you can maintain and grow market share. I don’t think there’s an obviously correct choice, but it’s very easy to criticise not taking the hard line. It’s possible that’s the wrong thing for overall privacy.
• gnicholas 4y ago
  > Apple blocked AirDrop in China Just to be clear, it's still possible to use AirDrop in China — the change was that you can't set your device to receive from 'Everyone' indefinitely. It's now limited to 10 minutes. I don't support this change, but we shouldn't conflate it with blocking AirDrop entirely, which would be much worse.
  • neodypsis 4y ago
    Nevertheless, - was this change in response to the protests? - was this change only for Chinese users?
    • jaywalk 4y ago
      I'm sure it was in response to the protests. Apple said it's rolling out worldwide, but starting in China.
      • flappyeagle 4y ago
        I've received random dick picks often enough on airdrop that I have turned it to contacts only, and so has every female friend of mine that I know of. The primary usecase of allowing everyone to send at all times seems like mass organization
      • threeseed 4y ago
        The timeline doesn't match up with it being in response to the protests. Apple needs time to design, implement and test changes even small ones.
        • brookst 4y ago
          Yes, but they’re sure ;)
          • jaywalk 4y ago
            Despite your snark and the downvotes, I am still sure. It's a tiny change in the grand scheme, and it's pretty conveniently being rolled out in China first.
• malshe 4y ago
  > The bigger news to me was that Apple blocked AirDrop in China The article you linked doesn't say anything about blocking. It just says that they changed the "Everyone" option to "Everyone up to 10 minutes." How is that blocking? Do you have any other source to support your assertion that they blocked it in China?
  • post_break 4y ago
    Because you can no longer keep it on everyone 24x7 to anonymously airdrop protest information without fear of being caught or tracked. You also can't use it to adhoc communicate when the internet is shut off. It's effectively blocked and rendered useless for those reasons.
  • quenix 4y ago
    You are underestimating how severely it cripples it for sharing of protest material, especially between people who may not formally know each other. It is a fatal blow, make no mistake.
• huggingmouth 4y ago
  It's situations like this that show the truthfulness of these statements and the organizations that make them. Un this instance, it shows that Apple is only using privacy as an excuse to achieve whatever ends they're aiming for.
• mola 4y ago
  Like any other commercial entity in the west, and especially in the US, it's a machine for making money. All other values are subjugated to that purpose. As long as some other value isn't hurting the bottom line, it'll be tolerated. Once it does, all those other values go out the window. This is what makes these machines so effective. This is what makes liberal western values vulnerable.
  • Beaver117 4y ago
    Then why did they pull Twitter ads? Surely they're losing sales from that?
    • kredd 4y ago
      They could also be losing sales for having ads on Twitter.
      • v0idzer0 4y ago
        Are there people who actually won’t buy an iPhone if they advertise on Twitter? That sounds so absurd, but I guess we’re talking about Twitter users
        • philistine 4y ago
          That’s a very limited point of view. Think of brand management. What if suddenly people start seeing tweets from very problematic people, and Apple ads next to that? And imagine if that makes the news cycle after that?
        • yakkityyak 4y ago
          Conversely, how effective are Apple advertisements on twitter anyway? At least half of the install base is probably already tweeting from an iPhone.
          • threeseed 4y ago
• rocket_surgeron 4y ago
  >A company that misses no chance to showcase its liberal credentials, bending over backwards for perhaps the most dictatorial government in the world to suppress the most basic of freedoms. Anyone who claims they would act differently is either a fool or a liar. Doubly so if the screen they're using to read this contains but a single IC made in China, while they let the self-righteously indignant stank of their own morality waft up into their nose.
• ypeterholmes 4y ago
  I built an iOS app for location-based sharing that that nobody uses lol. But it works in China too. So if anyone knows anyone over there, send them this: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/radius-report-news/id1524742033 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/radius-report-news/id152474203...
  • martimarkov 4y ago
    Is it only available in the US? Can’t open it in the uk store.
  • 0x0 4y ago
    Looks like this app is only available in the US and Canada app stores. This link is leading to nowhere: https://apps.apple.com/cn/app/radius-report-news/id1524742033 https://apps.apple.com/cn/app/radius-report-news/id152474203...
• fnordpiglet 4y ago
  Are they not bound by the local law and regulation as any corporation or individual is regardless of their moral point of view? You could argue they could be principled and withdraw from China because of policies they disagree with but are compelled to comply with. But given the economic structure of electronics manufacturing in todays world that seems like a suicidal task. I’d argue a more effective route is to comply as minimally as possible while advocating for improvement in policy, law, and regulation. Practically speaking if apple were to self immolate on principle a more compliant competitor will fill their vacuum. How is that advancing any agenda? I feel you can both comply with laws and regulations and take the stance they are wrong and publicly advocate to the extent you’re legally allowed for their reformation without moral hazard.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  • totalZero 4y ago
    I agree with your stance. Lawlessness is rarely a convincing argument. There is also a moral basis for respecting the local laws and regulations; the debate over whether to follow so-called immoral laws is a complicated one, but the biblical stance is credible in the hearts of many people: Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. [Romans 13:1] This doesn't mean one should necessarily treat the law of the land as perfectly moral (eg MLK Jr), but lawfulness and a respect for order will serve to elevate arguments against the established practices. I believe that Apple has more influence in China when the Chinese authorities view their company as respectful and cooperative.
    • fnordpiglet 4y ago
      I think more than that they can’t operate in China against the law. The Chinese police have way more guns than the Genius Bar employees and have built more effective prisons - whether god sanctioned them or not. No company can operate outside the law of the land without being a criminal enterprise, and that’s not a great way to sell iPhones.
• gumby 4y ago
  > I guess according to Apple, Chinese people don't deserve any of what's written in their post. Sometimes I find Apple's response to some of these issues cleverly passive-agressive. For example you can still use mass airdrop, you just have to keep enabling it. While, I assume, Google would simply have disabled the feature (does Android have a similar feature?). A related example is how they support you disabling face/finger authentication when you are afraid of the authorities. N.B. This is not to defend or condemn Apple. They are simply a huge, largely incomprehensible steamship not deserving my adulation or scorn.
• tablespoon 4y ago
  > The bigger news to me was that Apple blocked AirDrop in China - specifically to limit dissent and for preventing people from organizing [1]. A company that misses no chance to showcase its liberal credentials, bending over backwards for perhaps the most dictatorial government in the world to suppress the most basic of freedoms. It's a private corporation, which are known for manufacturing sweet-smelling lies. I mean, a "new an improved" label on a package often literally means they're just giving you less product. If they'll be that blatant, there's no limit to how low they'll go. Short-sighted Western economic policy has allowed China to grab companies like Apple by the balls, which means the Chinese government is the one Apple ultimately is accountable to (with varying amounts of smoke-and-mirrors to obscure it). Tim Cook knows who his boss is.
  • brookst 4y ago
    Now that you know that Airdrop is not in fact blocked in China, has your opinion changed?
    • tablespoon 4y ago
      > Now that you know that Airdrop is not in fact blocked in China, has your opinion changed? No, because it's a general statement that you can't trust marketing. Also, looking around at sibling comments because you provided no source, it looks like you're splitting hairs. It may not be blocked, just crippled specifically in China in a way that thwarts how the protesters used it: https://twitter.com/tibor/status/1597296268275240960 https://twitter.com/tibor/status/1597296268275240960, https://www.macworld.com/article/1377200/apple-to-limit-airdrop-everyone-setting-to-10-minutes.html https://www.macworld.com/article/1377200/apple-to-limit-aird...: > By default, AirDrop is set to allow incoming connection requests from Contacts Only, but that setting can be changed to Everyone–popular among protesters and teens alike. Starting with iOS 16.1.1, users in China will find that the “Everyone” option has changed to “Everyone for 10 minutes.” Apple won’t admit why this change is being made in China, but the peer-to-peer nature of AirDrop has made it popular for spreading anti-government protest material, and hopping into your settings every 10 minutes to re-enable the ability to receive AirDrop from strangers makes it a lot less useful for that. Framing an action that thwarts censorship circumvention as preventing "spam and abuse" is exactly the kind of sweet-smelling lie I was talking about.
• testbjjl 4y ago
  $2+T market cap or karma? Why not both.
• dev_tty01 4y ago
  False. It can't be left open to Everyone for more than 10 minutes at a time. Frankly, from a security perspective cutting this off after a few minutes is preferable. You can turn it back on for another 10 minutes. Pure conjecture on my part, but I wouldn't be surprised if China wanted them to block it entirely and Apple negotiated this compromise to try and appease officials while still allowing information sharing. Your hyperbole is a massive exaggeration. They didn't "bend over backwards" to help China suppress freedom. They maintained as much usability as they could under almost certain direct legal pressure from the host country. If China says turn it off completely, that is what they would have to do if they want to operate in China. Apple must obey local laws. Would the interests of freedom be served if Apple refused to obey local laws and there were no iPhones sold in China? Everyone running a Huawei phone. Would that advance the cause of freedom? Samsung, Google, everyone has to make these choices if they want to operate in China.
  • euroderf 4y ago
    > I wouldn't be surprised if China wanted them to block it entirely and Apple negotiated this compromise to try and appease officials while still allowing information sharing. My reading too, fwiw. If so, rather well done on Apple's part.
  • tooltalk 4y ago
    Samsung mostly pulled out of China back in 2019 -- except their NAND factory in Xi`an -- and Google opted out years ago. Apple went the other way -- Tim Apple went all-in in China with $270+B investment to train their young, unskilled, slave-wage laborers from rural China and, as recent as last month, made huge efforts to prop up China's domestic tech/chip industry (eg, YMTC). - "Inside Tim Cook’s Secret $275 Billion Deal with Chinese Authorities," Wayne Ma, Dec. 7, 2021, the Information. - "Apple Reportedly Helped China Chipmaker YMTC Hire US Engineers, Apple Reportedly Helped China Chipmaker YMTC Hire US Engineers," Tom's Hardware
• dang 4y ago
  Edit: argh - this story already had a major HN thread: AirDrop is now limited to 10 minutes - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33778302 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33778302 - Nov 2022 (692 comments) , so https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33806401 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33806401 is actually a dupe. I'm going to undo the change I just made and put everything back the way it originally was. It will take a few minutes. Sorry all! --- original, now invalid comment: --- This comment was originally posted in response to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33803692 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33803692 — hence the reference to "the bigger news". Since this topic deserves its own discussion, I've moved the comments about it to the thread that's actually about this. The other topic deserves its own discussion too.
  • zaroth 4y ago
    Since Apple did not in fact “block AirDrop in China” this whole thing just feels like flame bait.
    • dang 4y ago
      I haven't dived into the details but I assume there's a legitimate debate about why they did whatever they did. From a moderation point of view, the issues are simply that (1) the Airdrop story is off topic in this thread, and (2) it already had a massive thread on HN.
• adrr 4y ago
  It is kind of expected they would follow the rules and regulations of a country they are selling in. I would expect Tim Cook to be fired by the board if Apple was banned from the largest consumer market in the world.