3 ms·
The point I was attempting to make is I don't care what the thief does. I want the option to disable it if I've determined (on my own, with no help from anyone
by twodave 3y ago
The point I was attempting to make is I don't care what the thief does. I want the option to disable it if I've determined (on my own, with no help from anyone else!) that I'm not at a high risk of theft in the first place.
- hnfong 3y agoFair point. I must point out that in the original article, the author lost their MacBook and then complained it was locked after it was returned. (It would be analogous to getting it stolen then having the thief reactivate the lock.)
- cwillu 3y ago“must”? The lockout is only the reason that an event consisting of a misplaced device that was returned, instead turned into the constructive loss of the device in question.
- ffgjgf1 3y agoWell yes? As I understand it the owner chose to not enable the security feature. The thief however did. How else would you suggest this choice be implemented? Apple selling different models with or without the feature? Because then nobody would just buy the less “secure” option and Apple would rightfully soon discontinue it
- cwillu 3y agoA security feature that causes a security vulnerability that wouldn't exist without the feature, is not a good security feature. The existence of the security feature makes it less secure, for some people. Why wouldn't they buy the version without it?
- hnfong 3y agoThe "security vulnerability" you refer to is that somebody who steals your device can brick it. https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/
- stouset 3y agoOkay, and you can. But then the person who steals your laptop (as in this story) can turn it back on and you’re shit out of luck.
- alistairSH 3y agoIsn’t that what happened here? Owner didn’t enable security feature (Find my…). Then some series of events led the thief to reset device, enable Find My, and lock themselves out.