3 ms·

These anti-theft systems are one of the big reasons that so few users have their phones & laptops stolen from them. I don't know how old you were in the 2000's

These anti-theft systems are one of the big reasons that so few users have their phones & laptops stolen from them. I don't know how old you were in the 2000's, but even in restricted access college libraries, laptops were stolen constantly. In the first few years after iPhones came around, phone theft started becoming super common, and was eventually a constant source of news. Back then the thieves weren't limited to professionals who had access to a fence who has contacts with shady factories overseas. Every single hard up person could benefit from grabbing a device, and doing a DFU reset or wiping the hard drive. The market and opportunity for thievery was soooo much bigger.

saghm 3y ago
I'm not sure I buy this logic. The timeline you give could be just as easily explained as people taking time to learn to account for carrying around something valuable in a form factor they're not used to (e.g. accidentally leaving it on a table and using the bathroom only to find it gone when they returned). It's also not like Apple devices make up the majority of the phone or laptop market, and at least for laptops I'm pretty sure there's no standard equivalent for whatever remote lockout thing happened to the macbook in the article. I think you'd need a lot more evidence to argue convincingly that this policy made a huge difference.
- Shadowmist 3y ago
  My local shopping mall had visible from the food court these ATM looking machines that spit out cash if you put cell phones in, and I would watch kids standing there with bags of phones exchanging one phone after another.
- jonatanheyman 3y ago
  In many western countries, e.g. the US, iPhones do make up the majority of the phone market.
- ffgjgf1 3y ago
  > I'm pretty sure there's no standard equivalent Don’t most other phones have an equivalent feature? Samsung certainly does and they together with Apple control the overwhelming majority of the market almost everywhere > I think you'd need a lot more evidence to argue convincingly that this policy made a huge difference. I disagree. It’s perfectly obvious that it made a very big difference. The market price of stolen phones is now much, much lower that it used be which significantly alter the cost/benefit ratio from the perspective of would be thieves.
- michael1999 3y ago
  No. It was a policy problem large enough that legislators required it as a condition of selling phones. It was a real problem that kids walking around high-school, or people walking in the street, were carrying something easily stolen and fenced for several hundred dollars. Ride-by theft by bike was a notorious mode. The equivalent would be people walking around with a stack of $50s flapping in their hands. A target like that is called an "attractive nuisance", and the law has a long tradition of discouraging them. https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2015/07/02/smartphone-anti-theft-kill-switch-law-goes-into-effect-in-california https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2015/07/02/smartphone-anti-the...

saghm 3y ago

I'm not sure I buy this logic. The timeline you give could be just as easily explained as people taking time to learn to account for carrying around something valuable in a form factor they're not used to (e.g. accidentally leaving it on a table and using the bathroom only to find it gone when they returned). It's also not like Apple devices make up the majority of the phone or laptop market, and at least for laptops I'm pretty sure there's no standard equivalent for whatever remote lockout thing happened to the macbook in the article. I think you'd need a lot more evidence to argue convincingly that this policy made a huge difference.

Shadowmist 3y ago
My local shopping mall had visible from the food court these ATM looking machines that spit out cash if you put cell phones in, and I would watch kids standing there with bags of phones exchanging one phone after another.
jonatanheyman 3y ago
In many western countries, e.g. the US, iPhones do make up the majority of the phone market.
ffgjgf1 3y ago
> I'm pretty sure there's no standard equivalent Don’t most other phones have an equivalent feature? Samsung certainly does and they together with Apple control the overwhelming majority of the market almost everywhere > I think you'd need a lot more evidence to argue convincingly that this policy made a huge difference. I disagree. It’s perfectly obvious that it made a very big difference. The market price of stolen phones is now much, much lower that it used be which significantly alter the cost/benefit ratio from the perspective of would be thieves.
michael1999 3y ago
No. It was a policy problem large enough that legislators required it as a condition of selling phones. It was a real problem that kids walking around high-school, or people walking in the street, were carrying something easily stolen and fenced for several hundred dollars. Ride-by theft by bike was a notorious mode. The equivalent would be people walking around with a stack of $50s flapping in their hands. A target like that is called an "attractive nuisance", and the law has a long tradition of discouraging them. https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2015/07/02/smartphone-anti-theft-kill-switch-law-goes-into-effect-in-california https://news.sophos.com/en-us/2015/07/02/smartphone-anti-the...