3 ms·

The UK and China are not comparable. China is the worlds most populous country (for now). The UK has a population of under 70m. China is a totalitarian regime w

The UK and China are not comparable. China is the worlds most populous country (for now). The UK has a population of under 70m. China is a totalitarian regime where even an imperfect freedom is preferable to no freedom at all. The UK is a democratic country which should be upholding the right to privacy. If Apple weakens crypto for the UK, it affects people in other countries as well. iMessage is not exactly popular in the UK, so it is disproportionately used for transatlantic communication compared to WhatsApp. If Apple complies with the law, they are violating the privacy of users in the US as well.

YetAnotherNick 3y ago
What are you trying to say with the message? Are you saying if UK government turns bad tomorrow, it is fine for Apple to remove encryption there? But now it is not fine as UK is not bad? Why does Apple even care about how bad the government is? Either they care about user privacy over money, or they value money over privacy. It is fine if they value any of those as I frankly believe it's not Apple's job to moral police governments. > If Apple complies with the law, they are violating the privacy of users in the US as well. As is the case now with US-China communication?
bpicolo 3y ago
Just an interesting note I learned recently - it’s estimated that India’s population overtook China’s this year (within the last couple of months)
ninth_ant 3y ago
> The UK and China are not comparable. China is the worlds most populous country (for now). The UK has a population of under 70m. You say they are not comparable, and then compare them in a way that backs up the point you're trying to argue against. It _is_ two-faced of Apple to give China a pass here, undoubtably in large part due to the massive loss of sales were they not to comply and be removed by the Chinese regime. > China is a totalitarian regime where even an imperfect freedom is preferable to no freedom at all. If the Chinese gov't has the keys to unlock "private" conversations, how is this "imperfect freedom" in any way different from WeChat or other state-sanctioned messaging systems? > The UK is a democratic country which should be upholding the right to privacy. I mean sure, but Chinese people should have the same rights of privacy as anyone else. It's not suddenly less-bad because their government is totalitarian. > If Apple weakens crypto for the UK, it affects people in other countries as well. iMessage is not exactly popular in the UK, so it is disproportionately used for transatlantic communication compared to WhatsApp. If Apple complies with the law, they are violating the privacy of users in the US as well. How is this any different than what Apple currently does when an iMessage user outside China messages someone inside China? My understanding is that it acts precisely as you describe, but I could be wrong. And likewise, from what I understand iMessage is likewise unpopular in China so cross-country communications would potentially be a major source of iMessage activity as well? ( I don't see any statistics on this)
- jdiez17 3y ago
  >> The UK is a democratic country which should be upholding the right to privacy. > >I mean sure, but Chinese people should have the same rights of privacy as anyone else. It's not suddenly less-bad because their government is totalitarian. The extent to which Chinese people oppose the government being able to read anyone's conversations is quite different vs. the UK. Unfortunately, it's not likely that this or the Chinese government's behaviour will change any time soon. But in the UK it is an active political question that is still undecided. And as you said, the size of the market -> how much money they get probably has an influence on Apple's decision to operate in China, even with all the caveats. But it's also not the only factor. If it was, Apple wouldn't consider blocking iMessage/etc for UK customers.
nonethewiser 3y ago
> China is the worlds most populous country (for now). nit: they arent. India is.
abigail95 3y ago
No, the UK is a democratic country that is voting to reduce privacy. A massive company in a foreign country affecting the laws of your own is anti-democratic. Democracy doesn't mean privacy.
- guy98238710 3y ago
  > UK is a democratic country Democracy is a bit more than just rule of the majority (or sub-majority due to the peculiarities of the UK voting system).
- zarzavat 3y ago
  Apple is clearly entitled to not provide iMessage in the UK if they feel that the extraterritoriality of a UK law will hurt their interests in other jurisdictions. That’s not anti-democratic, unless you think the UK rules the world.
- raxxorraxor 3y ago
  Democracy requires privacy if you take a few minutes (shouldn't take too long) to think about it. And not even just a bit of it, it is often required for voting to be anonymous for similar or the same reasons.
- webinvest 3y ago
  Are you sure the UK is a democratic country?
webinvest 3y ago
Furthermore, Apples phones are made in China. Apples phones are not made in the UK.

YetAnotherNick 3y ago

What are you trying to say with the message? Are you saying if UK government turns bad tomorrow, it is fine for Apple to remove encryption there? But now it is not fine as UK is not bad? Why does Apple even care about how bad the government is? Either they care about user privacy over money, or they value money over privacy. It is fine if they value any of those as I frankly believe it's not Apple's job to moral police governments. > If Apple complies with the law, they are violating the privacy of users in the US as well. As is the case now with US-China communication?

bpicolo 3y ago

Just an interesting note I learned recently - it’s estimated that India’s population overtook China’s this year (within the last couple of months)

ninth_ant 3y ago

> The UK and China are not comparable. China is the worlds most populous country (for now). The UK has a population of under 70m. You say they are not comparable, and then compare them in a way that backs up the point you're trying to argue against. It _is_ two-faced of Apple to give China a pass here, undoubtably in large part due to the massive loss of sales were they not to comply and be removed by the Chinese regime. > China is a totalitarian regime where even an imperfect freedom is preferable to no freedom at all. If the Chinese gov't has the keys to unlock "private" conversations, how is this "imperfect freedom" in any way different from WeChat or other state-sanctioned messaging systems? > The UK is a democratic country which should be upholding the right to privacy. I mean sure, but Chinese people should have the same rights of privacy as anyone else. It's not suddenly less-bad because their government is totalitarian. > If Apple weakens crypto for the UK, it affects people in other countries as well. iMessage is not exactly popular in the UK, so it is disproportionately used for transatlantic communication compared to WhatsApp. If Apple complies with the law, they are violating the privacy of users in the US as well. How is this any different than what Apple currently does when an iMessage user outside China messages someone inside China? My understanding is that it acts precisely as you describe, but I could be wrong. And likewise, from what I understand iMessage is likewise unpopular in China so cross-country communications would potentially be a major source of iMessage activity as well? ( I don't see any statistics on this)

jdiez17 3y ago
>> The UK is a democratic country which should be upholding the right to privacy. > >I mean sure, but Chinese people should have the same rights of privacy as anyone else. It's not suddenly less-bad because their government is totalitarian. The extent to which Chinese people oppose the government being able to read anyone's conversations is quite different vs. the UK. Unfortunately, it's not likely that this or the Chinese government's behaviour will change any time soon. But in the UK it is an active political question that is still undecided. And as you said, the size of the market -> how much money they get probably has an influence on Apple's decision to operate in China, even with all the caveats. But it's also not the only factor. If it was, Apple wouldn't consider blocking iMessage/etc for UK customers.

nonethewiser 3y ago

> China is the worlds most populous country (for now). nit: they arent. India is.

abigail95 3y ago

No, the UK is a democratic country that is voting to reduce privacy. A massive company in a foreign country affecting the laws of your own is anti-democratic. Democracy doesn't mean privacy.

guy98238710 3y ago
> UK is a democratic country Democracy is a bit more than just rule of the majority (or sub-majority due to the peculiarities of the UK voting system).
zarzavat 3y ago
Apple is clearly entitled to not provide iMessage in the UK if they feel that the extraterritoriality of a UK law will hurt their interests in other jurisdictions. That’s not anti-democratic, unless you think the UK rules the world.
raxxorraxor 3y ago
Democracy requires privacy if you take a few minutes (shouldn't take too long) to think about it. And not even just a bit of it, it is often required for voting to be anonymous for similar or the same reasons.
webinvest 3y ago
Are you sure the UK is a democratic country?

webinvest 3y ago

Furthermore, Apples phones are made in China. Apples phones are not made in the UK.