5 ms·

I get that this lawsuit is about discerning whether Apple built enough safeguards into the AirTag system… But taking a step back and acknowledging the amount o

I get that this lawsuit is about discerning whether Apple built enough safeguards into the AirTag system… But taking a step back and acknowledging the amount of heat Apple has gotten for releasing a legitimately useful product while we drown in an ocean of guns always makes me chuckle uncomfortably.

asah 3y ago
The utility of a thing does not excuse its danger to individuals and society. Shoplifting should be not ignored until first catch all the murderers. see "whataboutism"
- olliej 3y ago
  There are plenty of non-AirTag trackers, and they by and large have no anti-stalking measures. In fact there is an entire market of explicitly non-traceable stalker ware, and that market existed long before AirTags. Meanwhile there are explicit legal protections for gun manufacturers despite the vast majority of murders in the US being with guns that people have no real reason to have (see: the rest of the civilized world, and its lack of active shooter drills and training)
  - codetrotter 3y ago
    My electric scooter was taken from the house of a friend of mine one night. We eventually got it back, because we posted notes around town with a picture of the electric scooter urging anyone who’d seen it to contact us by phone. Anyways, as a result of that I went on AliExpress and bought a small device which is supposed to be able to be mounted on things and track their location. You put a SIM card and an SD-card in it and it will report its location. I didn’t get around to mounting it on the electric scooter yet. But something that stood out to me when it came in the mail is that it was declared as being something else and I was like, is this because people buy this thing and they don’t want their spouse to know what they bought or something. That’s a bit creepy, considering it’s a GPS tracking device.
    - sargun 3y ago
      Probably more likely to get around customs / export restrictions.
      - Scoundreller 3y ago
        Been a while since I actually looked at one of my aliexpress customs labels, but they tend to arrive as “electronic gadget - $5” or something very generic and undervalued like that. Definitely a “they can’t inspect them all” aspect to it.
        codetrotter 3y ago
        The thing that was weird and creepy in this case was that the label was very specific. But claimed that the contents of the package was another kind of product entirely. Seemed suspiciously like they want to make people able to order it without others in their family knowing what had been bought.
    - Gibbon1 3y ago
      That and It's not FCC licensed so illegal to sell. Not carrier approved either so they'll get pissy if they figure that out. And likely the hardware design itself is stolen.
      - foota 3y ago
        Pro: you'll be able to find your things. Con: The FCC will also be able to find your things!
  - chx 3y ago
    That's like saying the LG Prada was the first mobile phone with a capacitive touchscreen...
- mjburgess 3y ago
  I think the charge of 'whataboutism' is often a bit of a strawman. The argument is rarely, 'ignore Y because of X' or similar. Rather its 'if were were to apply this standard correctly, we would have other priorities'. So here that if we were to apply the 'regulate/remove objects which change the social environment to make it less safe' standard to prioritise our concern, I'd imagine find-my-device systems wouldnt rank highly: indeed, we might find these systems make it more safe. So, in a complex series of tradeoffs where all actions have a cost (time, effort, etc.) the claim is about where one ought pay that cost. I think its fine to show that the standards people have lead to contradictions.
  - gretch 3y ago
    I think this happens all the time as a form of societal procrastination. Like in a city where homelessness is rampant, and the city government meets up and the first thing they talk about is littering ordinances or if there's enough sun/shade in the park, and then oops, all out of time to talk about homelessness - let's just put that on the agenda for next time right after we talk about changing trash pickup day.
    - mjburgess 3y ago
      That's true -- but sometimes people are being accused of that when they arent doing it. To say, eg., "my country did X too!" when "Country B did X" could be whataboutism, or it could be pointing to an international game with its own rules that all players are complicit in -- such an observation is a kind of rebuke to moralism. Here we can read this sort of reply to those who worry about airtags in a similar sort of way: what, exactly does the principle, "limit objects which make a social environment less safe" do if applied mechanically -- rather than as a sort of circumstantial moralism about some recent headline. Perhaps often, then, whataboutism is really a kind of distaste for hastey moralism about circumstantial matters
  - Krasnol 3y ago
    I don't understand. How would regulating guns make tracking less problematic? It's still a problem in societies which have gun regulations. You can murder someone without a gun, too. Stalking is there without guns too. Let's just face the obvious: bringing up a huge and dramatic topic like gun regulation makes the issue which is the topic here look less dramatic. This is it. There isn't more to it. The argument makes no other senese here.
- mainpassathome 3y ago
  ok but we should ignore the shoplifters though
  - ZoomerCretin 3y ago
    Are you serious? Shoplifting has huge negative externalities that affect more people than the megacorporations you think you're sticking it to.
  - callalex 3y ago
    This kind of thinking is how food deserts happen. I know because I live in one.
- itake 3y ago
  What is the solution? Ban all radio transmitters with Bluetooth or GPS? Make owning a cell phone illegal?
  - Am4TIfIsER0ppos 3y ago
    YES PLEASE! Unironically! But the government won't ban its surveillance device.
- yathaid 3y ago
  Not sure why you are being downvoted. Parent's argument is literally "but what about guns", the textbook definition of whataboutism.
- camhart 3y ago
  > The utility of a thing does not excuse its danger to individuals and society. Cars kill more people in the US than just about everything. Yet we still drive. I don't think the world agrees with you.
  - Fnoord 3y ago
    Agreed. the world doesn't agree. Cars provide a meaningful utility which is deemed important. Interestingly, more and more on the way out inside major cities in Europe, btw. But the utility of guns in Europe doesn't outweigh ownership; this is regulated (!= illegal).
selfhoster11 3y ago
AirTags can be weaponised far outside the borders of the USA.
- sneed_chucker 3y ago
  Guns too, believe it or not
  - goku12 3y ago
    Gun ownership is heavily restricted and regulated in most countries.
seanmcdirmid 3y ago
The American gun industry has explicit immunities from lawsuits if people use their products for bad things, Apple does not. So the lawyers are going to spend their time going after the company that they can win a huge payout from, not the company that is simply immune to legal action.

asah 3y ago

The utility of a thing does not excuse its danger to individuals and society. Shoplifting should be not ignored until first catch all the murderers. see "whataboutism"

olliej 3y ago
There are plenty of non-AirTag trackers, and they by and large have no anti-stalking measures. In fact there is an entire market of explicitly non-traceable stalker ware, and that market existed long before AirTags. Meanwhile there are explicit legal protections for gun manufacturers despite the vast majority of murders in the US being with guns that people have no real reason to have (see: the rest of the civilized world, and its lack of active shooter drills and training)
- codetrotter 3y ago
  My electric scooter was taken from the house of a friend of mine one night. We eventually got it back, because we posted notes around town with a picture of the electric scooter urging anyone who’d seen it to contact us by phone. Anyways, as a result of that I went on AliExpress and bought a small device which is supposed to be able to be mounted on things and track their location. You put a SIM card and an SD-card in it and it will report its location. I didn’t get around to mounting it on the electric scooter yet. But something that stood out to me when it came in the mail is that it was declared as being something else and I was like, is this because people buy this thing and they don’t want their spouse to know what they bought or something. That’s a bit creepy, considering it’s a GPS tracking device.
  - sargun 3y ago
    Probably more likely to get around customs / export restrictions.
    - Scoundreller 3y ago
      Been a while since I actually looked at one of my aliexpress customs labels, but they tend to arrive as “electronic gadget - $5” or something very generic and undervalued like that. Definitely a “they can’t inspect them all” aspect to it.
      - codetrotter 3y ago
        The thing that was weird and creepy in this case was that the label was very specific. But claimed that the contents of the package was another kind of product entirely. Seemed suspiciously like they want to make people able to order it without others in their family knowing what had been bought.
  - Gibbon1 3y ago
    That and It's not FCC licensed so illegal to sell. Not carrier approved either so they'll get pissy if they figure that out. And likely the hardware design itself is stolen.
    - foota 3y ago
      Pro: you'll be able to find your things. Con: The FCC will also be able to find your things!
- chx 3y ago
  That's like saying the LG Prada was the first mobile phone with a capacitive touchscreen...
mjburgess 3y ago
I think the charge of 'whataboutism' is often a bit of a strawman. The argument is rarely, 'ignore Y because of X' or similar. Rather its 'if were were to apply this standard correctly, we would have other priorities'. So here that if we were to apply the 'regulate/remove objects which change the social environment to make it less safe' standard to prioritise our concern, I'd imagine find-my-device systems wouldnt rank highly: indeed, we might find these systems make it more safe. So, in a complex series of tradeoffs where all actions have a cost (time, effort, etc.) the claim is about where one ought pay that cost. I think its fine to show that the standards people have lead to contradictions.
- gretch 3y ago
  I think this happens all the time as a form of societal procrastination. Like in a city where homelessness is rampant, and the city government meets up and the first thing they talk about is littering ordinances or if there's enough sun/shade in the park, and then oops, all out of time to talk about homelessness - let's just put that on the agenda for next time right after we talk about changing trash pickup day.
  - mjburgess 3y ago
    That's true -- but sometimes people are being accused of that when they arent doing it. To say, eg., "my country did X too!" when "Country B did X" could be whataboutism, or it could be pointing to an international game with its own rules that all players are complicit in -- such an observation is a kind of rebuke to moralism. Here we can read this sort of reply to those who worry about airtags in a similar sort of way: what, exactly does the principle, "limit objects which make a social environment less safe" do if applied mechanically -- rather than as a sort of circumstantial moralism about some recent headline. Perhaps often, then, whataboutism is really a kind of distaste for hastey moralism about circumstantial matters
- Krasnol 3y ago
  I don't understand. How would regulating guns make tracking less problematic? It's still a problem in societies which have gun regulations. You can murder someone without a gun, too. Stalking is there without guns too. Let's just face the obvious: bringing up a huge and dramatic topic like gun regulation makes the issue which is the topic here look less dramatic. This is it. There isn't more to it. The argument makes no other senese here.
mainpassathome 3y ago
ok but we should ignore the shoplifters though
- ZoomerCretin 3y ago
  Are you serious? Shoplifting has huge negative externalities that affect more people than the megacorporations you think you're sticking it to.
- callalex 3y ago
  This kind of thinking is how food deserts happen. I know because I live in one.
itake 3y ago
What is the solution? Ban all radio transmitters with Bluetooth or GPS? Make owning a cell phone illegal?
- Am4TIfIsER0ppos 3y ago
  YES PLEASE! Unironically! But the government won't ban its surveillance device.
yathaid 3y ago
Not sure why you are being downvoted. Parent's argument is literally "but what about guns", the textbook definition of whataboutism.
camhart 3y ago
> The utility of a thing does not excuse its danger to individuals and society. Cars kill more people in the US than just about everything. Yet we still drive. I don't think the world agrees with you.
- Fnoord 3y ago
  Agreed. the world doesn't agree. Cars provide a meaningful utility which is deemed important. Interestingly, more and more on the way out inside major cities in Europe, btw. But the utility of guns in Europe doesn't outweigh ownership; this is regulated (!= illegal).

selfhoster11 3y ago

AirTags can be weaponised far outside the borders of the USA.

sneed_chucker 3y ago
Guns too, believe it or not
- goku12 3y ago
  Gun ownership is heavily restricted and regulated in most countries.

seanmcdirmid 3y ago

The American gun industry has explicit immunities from lawsuits if people use their products for bad things, Apple does not. So the lawyers are going to spend their time going after the company that they can win a huge payout from, not the company that is simply immune to legal action.