11 ms·

Apple pulls iPhone torrent app from AltStore PAL in Europe

268 points by pabs3 1y ago

charcircuit 1y ago
This headline is misleading as it seems the issue is with the way countries are sanctioning Russian developers (assuming based off the Russian name) as opposed to being related to torrents.
- ronsor 1y ago
  Ideally you would be able to install what you want on devices you pay for, without being overseen by an external body, thus rendering sanctions irrelevant.
  - charcircuit 1y ago
    While an option in the design space, and favorable for countries who may have sanctions placed on them, it may not actually be ideal since that means malware authors have free reign.
    - ronsor 1y ago
      Yes, users will install malware sometimes. I'm OK with that as long as the rest of us don't have to suffer everything being locked down for their sake.
      - charcircuit 1y ago
        "The rest of us" is a small group of people. Willing to sacrifice the needs of majority for your own benefit is a biased take.
        ronsor 1y ago
        People need to learn how to use computers without installing malware. In almost every other field, it's normal and expected that people learn how to operate the tools properly; if they don't, then it is their fault. For some reason, technology has ended up different, and we dumb things down endlessly. I am tired of it.
        charcircuit 1y ago
        >In almost every other field Phones are not designed to be a specialized tool of a field. They are gadgets designed for a general audience of billions of people. >For some reason, technology has ended up different Because with computers there is a lot of freedom in how things can be made to work without adding extra cost to the product. They can be designed to be user friendly.
        debazel 1y ago
        Cars, knifes, power tools, and a million other things are also designed for a general audience of billions of people. And if you do not learn or use these responsibly you'll end up with a lot worse outcomes than getting some malware on your phone.
        charcircuit 1y ago
        Take for example power tools. If a sawstop could be implemented to a power tool for free then all of them would offer the feature. Cars also have had a ton of safety features that have become required in order for them to be sold. Dangerous knifes also have been banned from being sold. It turns out that for other tools society didn't just accept that they were unsafe. They improved safety or legislated safety.
        ronsor 1y ago
        A sawstop doesn't spy on you and doesn't stop you from using your saw (why would you want to cut your own hand off?). Meanwhile there is a legitimate reason to want to install applications without the eye of Sauron always watching...
        fsflover 1y ago
        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45081344 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45081344
    - MangoToupe 1y ago
      Apple already openly ships gambling apps. As far as I'm concerned the malware won
      - charcircuit 1y ago
        Ultimately, humans love gambling and it's one of the best ways to make money. It will require creating rules via the government to eliminate such apps.
    - beeflet 1y ago
      ideal for who?
- koolala 1y ago
  That is kinda worse in a lot of ways.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
can16358p 1y ago
Not to play devil's advocate here and also IANAL but: If (as as it is) Apple is still controlling apps via notarizarion/digitally signing apps of and recognizing developers, and if the app is developed for something that would land Apple in legal trouble (e.g. it makes it easy to freely and illegally download music and Apple also has legal contracts with record labels as they have Apple Music, and not only legal but it also affects Apple's own music revenue too) as the app has passed explicit notarization of Apple (in other words: Apple "knowlingly" allowed them and greenlighted them by notarizing the app), wouldn't it cause legal trouble for Apple? For that, it's the logical behavior for a company like Apple to stop allowing the app. Again, I'm not supporting it, but I can imagine where it's coming from and that makes sense from a business perspective as torrenting on mobile has almost no legal use cases. We all know you have not installed it to download your favorite Linux distro to your iPhone.
- dmix 1y ago
  I don’t think people are blaming Apple here
  - cnst 1y ago
    You're wrong. We are blaming Apple, because they prohibit us from installing the apps we want on devices we own.
    - Rohansi 1y ago
      Do you really own your device if Apple has control over what you can use it for?
      - AnthonyMouse 1y ago
        Isn't that the point? People would like to own an Apple product instead of paying for it and then never getting the keys.
        1y ago
WatchDog 1y ago
Some more context from the linked github issue[0], the app was removed because of European sanctions against Russia, it seems that the app developer who now lives in Malta, has a Russian background. What is interesting is that it's Apple enforcing these sanctions, rather than AltStore. The amount of control that Apple exercises over these alternative app stores, really does seem to be against the spirit of the DMA. [0]: https://github.com/XITRIX/iTorrent/issues/401#issuecomment-3235081476 https://github.com/XITRIX/iTorrent/issues/401#issuecomment-3...
- jkaplowitz 1y ago
  That’s also weird to me. I don’t have current 2025 info on the sanctions, but back in early 2022 I had a colleague with Russian citizenship who was living in Ireland (with proper permission to live and work - I think even permanent residence). He was exempted from the nationality-based sanctions because of his EU residence, although he did have to prove it to e.g. his banks. Do the sanctions applicable in 2025 apply even to EU residents of Russian nationality or origin without such an exemption, or is this person covered by more narrow sanctions like one which name him individually, or is Apple going beyond the sanctions rules here for a store they don’t even operate? Edit: reading the linked GitHub discussion more closely, it seems that he expects to benefit from the same exemption as I was describing, with the problem being twofold: one, the developer had neglected to update his personal info in Apple’s dev portal - not Apple’s fault, at least assuming that sanctions enforcement is their job at all in this scenario. But two, Apple has taken a long time to react to this guy providing proof of his Maltese residence, so that’s on them for being an unresponsive bottleneck.
  - isodev 1y ago
    And 3, Apple asking for a photo of the ID instead of using eID so the entire process can be tap > Face ID (in your country’s eID app) > done. Also for some reason on App Store Connect, Apple is asking for a country of birth, not citizenship so with that alone, it’s unclear to me how can they make a determination at all. Once again, our random spawn point (of which we have no control) is interfering with what we can and can’t do in life. Oh and Apple totally not getting how people live and move in the EU.
andai 1y ago
If Apple can decide what you can publish on alternative stores, doesn't that defeat the purpose of having alternative stores?
- Fade_Dance 1y ago
  I believe it was the Apple fee monopoly that was the central thrust of the anti-trust case, not open distribution of apps themselves. The goal was to allow storefronts to compete on fees. If Apple was banning apps from alt stores but keeping them listed in their own store, then it would be a legal issue. I personally I think it defeats the purpose as well, but I'm more concerned with the right for people to do what they wish with their own device. These antitrust court cases can get pretty specific with what they are addressing.
  - AnthonyMouse 1y ago
    Aren't they both anti-trust problems? Suppose Apple bans apps that compete with some service they offer themselves. Allowing them to be banned in alternate stores as long as Apple also bans them in their own store is clearly not going to make that better, right?
    - dathinab 1y ago
      > compete with some service they offer themselves if you move from ban to, systematically hinder updates, despotic interpretation of store TOS/Guidelines/Rules, APIs their apps can use and others can't which affect competitiveness of the apps, not having to pay their own fees, randomly removing top apps from the app store front/ranking/promotion, TOS which make competing impossible etc. then they have been doing exactly that for years i.e. "not ban but market wise not that different"
  - rickdeckard 1y ago
    > I believe it was the Apple fee monopoly that was the central thrust of the anti-trust case, not open distribution of apps themselves. This was not just subject of the anti-trust case, it's Apple being expected to comply with the EU Digital Markets Act. (The DMA defined objective criteria to identify a scaled market of digital goods with an uneven playing field for all players. Apple was found to have created such a market and was ordered to rectify this)
juancn 1y ago
Apple did not remove it, it revoked notarization. The title is misleading. Google can and will do exactly the same thing for Android.
- cnst 1y ago
  Google does not notarise apps outside of the Play Store on Android, so, no, they will not do exactly that. My fav App Store on a fresh Android is Chrome, because you can use Chrome to install any other app store, or any app directly from any website. On iOS, there's no such alternative. In fact, on iOS, you cannot install ANY app at all until you login into an Apple Account. In fact, even some pre-installed premium apps (Pages, Numbers, Keynote) on iOS cannot be used before you login into an Apple Account. By comparison, Chrome lets you install any app from any website without providing any identifying information, preserving you privacy. It's very easy to dismiss the login screens when setting up a new Android device, too; something that Apple also makes far more difficult on iOS.
  - koolala 1y ago
    You missed the bad news about Android :( Though I'm not sure why they made the "remove" vs. "revoke" distinction.
    - cnst 1y ago
      That trial they'll be running isn't even live yet, and isn't even set in stone, either, and is limited to just a few countries in APAC. So, even with the news, it's still 2y away at a minimum for the US/EU. Part of the big success of sideloading is that few people are doing it in the US/EU, so the attack surface is smaller as a result.
      - Nevermark 1y ago
        If few people are doing it, then unfortunately the attack surface for Google extinguishing it is smaller too.
- 1y ago
everyone 1y ago
Is there no way to torrent on iOS? If so that is utterly pathetic.
yieldcrv 1y ago
Violate sanctions or violate DMA? What do
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
ChrisArchitect 1y ago
[dupe] Earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45040064 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45040064
827a 1y ago
When it comes to your personal data, Apple loves (correctly) to say "all of our user's data is encrypted, we can't access it even if we wanted to, so we cannot respond to this government request for data" When it comes to application distribution, all of Apple's courage immediately disappears. They could say "We don't sign or control apps distributed through third party app stores, that's out of our hands, so we cannot respond to this government request". But, they chose not to. It was a choice, and Tim Cook chose an ugly, dishonorable, cowardly path.
- anonym29 1y ago
  It would be trivial for Apple to push out silent targeted OS updates to specific individuals that would log decryption keys and send them to Apple, enabling Apple to decrypt that specific user's data. Remember, Apple is the same company that cooperated with the NSA to secretly log and feed user data to the NSA starting back in 2012, as revealed by Snowden's heroic disclosure of the PRISM program (which was ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge). Apple's privacy-protecting image is nothing more than marketing.
  - cnst 1y ago
    Apple is actually far worse at protecting your privacy than Google. On iOS, you cannot install any apps without an Apple Account, and even some preinstalled apps (like Pages, Numbers, Keynote, GarageBand, iMovie) cannot be used before you assign them to an Apple Account. On Android, you can install any app from any third-party store without having any accounts. There's a store called Aurora Store that even lets you install apps from Google's Play Store without an account as well, so, you can even install all the mainstream apps, all without any accounts.
    - vlovich123 1y ago
      > On Android, you can install any app from any third-party store without having any accounts. There's a store called Aurora Store that even lets you install apps from golgle's Pay Store without an account as well. I thought Google recently announced changes to this requiring a developer account to side load.
teekert 1y ago
I’ve never managed to get this torrent client working myself. I paid money for Altstore, but I’ve only ever found some emulator. I think I just don’t understand how it works. Just now: I open Altstore, see an ad for the Epic Games Store, I tap it, the install button at the top sends you in a loop back to the same page, nothing happens. Oh, there’s another button (lower on the "page"): Install on iPhone or iPad, I tap that, then another button, Install. I tap it. New screen: Open the Epic Games Store on your home screen. Except that there is no Epic Games Store anywhere on my device. And that’s basically all my experiences with Altstore. The idea is really nice, indeed, which is why I paid for it immediately (just 1-2 euros or so I believe) but I never got anything out of it, ah well.
prxtl 1y ago
This is a fine example of "chit bhi meri, pat bhi meri" which in Hindi translates to "heads I win, tails I win".
- fluoridation 1y ago
  That saying exists in English, with a (in my opinion) more pleasing phrasing: heads, I win; tails, you lose.
- tene80i 1y ago
  Not sure why you're being downvoted – this is a perfectly interesting fact. Presumably the words "chit" and "pat" don't literally mean "heads" and "tails", though, even if they correspond to those sides? If not, what do they mean?
  - rahilsheikh 1y ago
    "chit" is derived from "chitra" which means "picture". It translates to face side. "pat" has the same origins as "sapaat" which means "flat"/"plane". So it IS the heads/tails analogue for Hindi and Urdu.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
littlecranky67 1y ago
Looks like it was pulled due to government sanctions (not because it is a torrenting app) - the name of the developer sounds russian.
- freeAgent 1y ago
  I guess we can look forward to similar moves by Google after they require dev registration in order to distribute apps to Android devices.
irusensei 1y ago
So in the end we got the worst of both worlds in Europe. Apple does malicious compliance while still holding control of app stores while EU users are being kept out of things like iPhones remote screen. I'm gonna get bashed here because the average HN user is a EU-weeb but if you can't properly write regulations don't do it at all. I'm tired of good intentioned candy colored EU regulation that ends in worst experience for everyone.
- gyomu 1y ago
  As a EU citizen, it is kind of exhausting to read all the pro-EU legislation rhetoric on US-centric websites like HN while witnessing our governments destroying all our institutions and values at home. EU legislators might not get checks from lobbyists as big as their US counterparts, but they are just as rotten of a bunch.
wasabinator 1y ago
Sadly a future that Android is bound to once el Google controls all signing.
- freeAgent 1y ago
  My thoughts exactly. This is what Google have promised to implement starting next year.
type0 1y ago
from torrentfreak > "No further context was provided, but the developer purportedly had a Russian developer account, despite living in Malta." "seems the issue is related to government sanctions" - so he is still connected to the Russian government then?! btw, Malta is a good place for Russian agents, Sergey Gorokhovsky is one such and he oversees White House Personnel while telling everyone he's not Russian
throwaway48476 1y ago
iPhone? More like theirPhone!
- frankzander 1y ago
  if you don't have root it's always theirs. I wonder why ppl just accept this.
mpalmer 1y ago
While of course not quite apples to apples, it's still interesting to consider what the reaction would be if Apple complied with a government order to block a domain entirely on all its devices. Where, ultimately, is the difference?
getpvait 1y ago
[dead]
getpvait 1y ago
[dead]

268 points by pabs3 1y ago

This headline is misleading as it seems the issue is with the way countries are sanctioning Russian developers (assuming based off the Russian name) as opposed to being related to torrents.

ronsor 1y ago
Ideally you would be able to install what you want on devices you pay for, without being overseen by an external body, thus rendering sanctions irrelevant.
- charcircuit 1y ago
  While an option in the design space, and favorable for countries who may have sanctions placed on them, it may not actually be ideal since that means malware authors have free reign.
  - ronsor 1y ago
    Yes, users will install malware sometimes. I'm OK with that as long as the rest of us don't have to suffer everything being locked down for their sake.
    - charcircuit 1y ago
      "The rest of us" is a small group of people. Willing to sacrifice the needs of majority for your own benefit is a biased take.
      - ronsor 1y ago
        People need to learn how to use computers without installing malware. In almost every other field, it's normal and expected that people learn how to operate the tools properly; if they don't, then it is their fault. For some reason, technology has ended up different, and we dumb things down endlessly. I am tired of it.
        charcircuit 1y ago
        >In almost every other field Phones are not designed to be a specialized tool of a field. They are gadgets designed for a general audience of billions of people. >For some reason, technology has ended up different Because with computers there is a lot of freedom in how things can be made to work without adding extra cost to the product. They can be designed to be user friendly.
        debazel 1y ago
        Cars, knifes, power tools, and a million other things are also designed for a general audience of billions of people. And if you do not learn or use these responsibly you'll end up with a lot worse outcomes than getting some malware on your phone.
        charcircuit 1y ago
        Take for example power tools. If a sawstop could be implemented to a power tool for free then all of them would offer the feature. Cars also have had a ton of safety features that have become required in order for them to be sold. Dangerous knifes also have been banned from being sold. It turns out that for other tools society didn't just accept that they were unsafe. They improved safety or legislated safety.
        ronsor 1y ago
        A sawstop doesn't spy on you and doesn't stop you from using your saw (why would you want to cut your own hand off?). Meanwhile there is a legitimate reason to want to install applications without the eye of Sauron always watching...
      - fsflover 1y ago
        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45081344 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45081344
  - MangoToupe 1y ago
    Apple already openly ships gambling apps. As far as I'm concerned the malware won
    - charcircuit 1y ago
      Ultimately, humans love gambling and it's one of the best ways to make money. It will require creating rules via the government to eliminate such apps.
  - beeflet 1y ago
    ideal for who?
koolala 1y ago
That is kinda worse in a lot of ways.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

can16358p 1y ago

Not to play devil's advocate here and also IANAL but: If (as as it is) Apple is still controlling apps via notarizarion/digitally signing apps of and recognizing developers, and if the app is developed for something that would land Apple in legal trouble (e.g. it makes it easy to freely and illegally download music and Apple also has legal contracts with record labels as they have Apple Music, and not only legal but it also affects Apple's own music revenue too) as the app has passed explicit notarization of Apple (in other words: Apple "knowlingly" allowed them and greenlighted them by notarizing the app), wouldn't it cause legal trouble for Apple? For that, it's the logical behavior for a company like Apple to stop allowing the app. Again, I'm not supporting it, but I can imagine where it's coming from and that makes sense from a business perspective as torrenting on mobile has almost no legal use cases. We all know you have not installed it to download your favorite Linux distro to your iPhone.

dmix 1y ago
I don’t think people are blaming Apple here
- cnst 1y ago
  You're wrong. We are blaming Apple, because they prohibit us from installing the apps we want on devices we own.
  - Rohansi 1y ago
    Do you really own your device if Apple has control over what you can use it for?
    - AnthonyMouse 1y ago
      Isn't that the point? People would like to own an Apple product instead of paying for it and then never getting the keys.
      - 1y ago

WatchDog 1y ago

Some more context from the linked github issue[0], the app was removed because of European sanctions against Russia, it seems that the app developer who now lives in Malta, has a Russian background. What is interesting is that it's Apple enforcing these sanctions, rather than AltStore. The amount of control that Apple exercises over these alternative app stores, really does seem to be against the spirit of the DMA. [0]: https://github.com/XITRIX/iTorrent/issues/401#issuecomment-3235081476 https://github.com/XITRIX/iTorrent/issues/401#issuecomment-3...

jkaplowitz 1y ago
That’s also weird to me. I don’t have current 2025 info on the sanctions, but back in early 2022 I had a colleague with Russian citizenship who was living in Ireland (with proper permission to live and work - I think even permanent residence). He was exempted from the nationality-based sanctions because of his EU residence, although he did have to prove it to e.g. his banks. Do the sanctions applicable in 2025 apply even to EU residents of Russian nationality or origin without such an exemption, or is this person covered by more narrow sanctions like one which name him individually, or is Apple going beyond the sanctions rules here for a store they don’t even operate? Edit: reading the linked GitHub discussion more closely, it seems that he expects to benefit from the same exemption as I was describing, with the problem being twofold: one, the developer had neglected to update his personal info in Apple’s dev portal - not Apple’s fault, at least assuming that sanctions enforcement is their job at all in this scenario. But two, Apple has taken a long time to react to this guy providing proof of his Maltese residence, so that’s on them for being an unresponsive bottleneck.
- isodev 1y ago
  And 3, Apple asking for a photo of the ID instead of using eID so the entire process can be tap > Face ID (in your country’s eID app) > done. Also for some reason on App Store Connect, Apple is asking for a country of birth, not citizenship so with that alone, it’s unclear to me how can they make a determination at all. Once again, our random spawn point (of which we have no control) is interfering with what we can and can’t do in life. Oh and Apple totally not getting how people live and move in the EU.

andai 1y ago

If Apple can decide what you can publish on alternative stores, doesn't that defeat the purpose of having alternative stores?

Fade_Dance 1y ago
I believe it was the Apple fee monopoly that was the central thrust of the anti-trust case, not open distribution of apps themselves. The goal was to allow storefronts to compete on fees. If Apple was banning apps from alt stores but keeping them listed in their own store, then it would be a legal issue. I personally I think it defeats the purpose as well, but I'm more concerned with the right for people to do what they wish with their own device. These antitrust court cases can get pretty specific with what they are addressing.
- AnthonyMouse 1y ago
  Aren't they both anti-trust problems? Suppose Apple bans apps that compete with some service they offer themselves. Allowing them to be banned in alternate stores as long as Apple also bans them in their own store is clearly not going to make that better, right?
  - dathinab 1y ago
    > compete with some service they offer themselves if you move from ban to, systematically hinder updates, despotic interpretation of store TOS/Guidelines/Rules, APIs their apps can use and others can't which affect competitiveness of the apps, not having to pay their own fees, randomly removing top apps from the app store front/ranking/promotion, TOS which make competing impossible etc. then they have been doing exactly that for years i.e. "not ban but market wise not that different"
- rickdeckard 1y ago
  > I believe it was the Apple fee monopoly that was the central thrust of the anti-trust case, not open distribution of apps themselves. This was not just subject of the anti-trust case, it's Apple being expected to comply with the EU Digital Markets Act. (The DMA defined objective criteria to identify a scaled market of digital goods with an uneven playing field for all players. Apple was found to have created such a market and was ordered to rectify this)

juancn 1y ago

Apple did not remove it, it revoked notarization. The title is misleading. Google can and will do exactly the same thing for Android.

cnst 1y ago
Google does not notarise apps outside of the Play Store on Android, so, no, they will not do exactly that. My fav App Store on a fresh Android is Chrome, because you can use Chrome to install any other app store, or any app directly from any website. On iOS, there's no such alternative. In fact, on iOS, you cannot install ANY app at all until you login into an Apple Account. In fact, even some pre-installed premium apps (Pages, Numbers, Keynote) on iOS cannot be used before you login into an Apple Account. By comparison, Chrome lets you install any app from any website without providing any identifying information, preserving you privacy. It's very easy to dismiss the login screens when setting up a new Android device, too; something that Apple also makes far more difficult on iOS.
- koolala 1y ago
  You missed the bad news about Android :( Though I'm not sure why they made the "remove" vs. "revoke" distinction.
  - cnst 1y ago
    That trial they'll be running isn't even live yet, and isn't even set in stone, either, and is limited to just a few countries in APAC. So, even with the news, it's still 2y away at a minimum for the US/EU. Part of the big success of sideloading is that few people are doing it in the US/EU, so the attack surface is smaller as a result.
    - Nevermark 1y ago
      If few people are doing it, then unfortunately the attack surface for Google extinguishing it is smaller too.
1y ago

everyone 1y ago

Is there no way to torrent on iOS? If so that is utterly pathetic.

yieldcrv 1y ago

Violate sanctions or violate DMA? What do

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

ChrisArchitect 1y ago

[dupe] Earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45040064 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45040064

827a 1y ago

When it comes to your personal data, Apple loves (correctly) to say "all of our user's data is encrypted, we can't access it even if we wanted to, so we cannot respond to this government request for data" When it comes to application distribution, all of Apple's courage immediately disappears. They could say "We don't sign or control apps distributed through third party app stores, that's out of our hands, so we cannot respond to this government request". But, they chose not to. It was a choice, and Tim Cook chose an ugly, dishonorable, cowardly path.

anonym29 1y ago
It would be trivial for Apple to push out silent targeted OS updates to specific individuals that would log decryption keys and send them to Apple, enabling Apple to decrypt that specific user's data. Remember, Apple is the same company that cooperated with the NSA to secretly log and feed user data to the NSA starting back in 2012, as revealed by Snowden's heroic disclosure of the PRISM program (which was ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge). Apple's privacy-protecting image is nothing more than marketing.
- cnst 1y ago
  Apple is actually far worse at protecting your privacy than Google. On iOS, you cannot install any apps without an Apple Account, and even some preinstalled apps (like Pages, Numbers, Keynote, GarageBand, iMovie) cannot be used before you assign them to an Apple Account. On Android, you can install any app from any third-party store without having any accounts. There's a store called Aurora Store that even lets you install apps from Google's Play Store without an account as well, so, you can even install all the mainstream apps, all without any accounts.
  - vlovich123 1y ago
    > On Android, you can install any app from any third-party store without having any accounts. There's a store called Aurora Store that even lets you install apps from golgle's Pay Store without an account as well. I thought Google recently announced changes to this requiring a developer account to side load.

teekert 1y ago

I’ve never managed to get this torrent client working myself. I paid money for Altstore, but I’ve only ever found some emulator. I think I just don’t understand how it works. Just now: I open Altstore, see an ad for the Epic Games Store, I tap it, the install button at the top sends you in a loop back to the same page, nothing happens. Oh, there’s another button (lower on the "page"): Install on iPhone or iPad, I tap that, then another button, Install. I tap it. New screen: Open the Epic Games Store on your home screen. Except that there is no Epic Games Store anywhere on my device. And that’s basically all my experiences with Altstore. The idea is really nice, indeed, which is why I paid for it immediately (just 1-2 euros or so I believe) but I never got anything out of it, ah well.

prxtl 1y ago

This is a fine example of "chit bhi meri, pat bhi meri" which in Hindi translates to "heads I win, tails I win".

fluoridation 1y ago
That saying exists in English, with a (in my opinion) more pleasing phrasing: heads, I win; tails, you lose.
tene80i 1y ago
Not sure why you're being downvoted – this is a perfectly interesting fact. Presumably the words "chit" and "pat" don't literally mean "heads" and "tails", though, even if they correspond to those sides? If not, what do they mean?
- rahilsheikh 1y ago
  "chit" is derived from "chitra" which means "picture". It translates to face side. "pat" has the same origins as "sapaat" which means "flat"/"plane". So it IS the heads/tails analogue for Hindi and Urdu.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

littlecranky67 1y ago

Looks like it was pulled due to government sanctions (not because it is a torrenting app) - the name of the developer sounds russian.

freeAgent 1y ago
I guess we can look forward to similar moves by Google after they require dev registration in order to distribute apps to Android devices.

irusensei 1y ago

So in the end we got the worst of both worlds in Europe. Apple does malicious compliance while still holding control of app stores while EU users are being kept out of things like iPhones remote screen. I'm gonna get bashed here because the average HN user is a EU-weeb but if you can't properly write regulations don't do it at all. I'm tired of good intentioned candy colored EU regulation that ends in worst experience for everyone.

gyomu 1y ago
As a EU citizen, it is kind of exhausting to read all the pro-EU legislation rhetoric on US-centric websites like HN while witnessing our governments destroying all our institutions and values at home. EU legislators might not get checks from lobbyists as big as their US counterparts, but they are just as rotten of a bunch.

wasabinator 1y ago

Sadly a future that Android is bound to once el Google controls all signing.

freeAgent 1y ago
My thoughts exactly. This is what Google have promised to implement starting next year.

type0 1y ago

from torrentfreak > "No further context was provided, but the developer purportedly had a Russian developer account, despite living in Malta." "seems the issue is related to government sanctions" - so he is still connected to the Russian government then?! btw, Malta is a good place for Russian agents, Sergey Gorokhovsky is one such and he oversees White House Personnel while telling everyone he's not Russian

throwaway48476 1y ago

iPhone? More like theirPhone!

frankzander 1y ago
if you don't have root it's always theirs. I wonder why ppl just accept this.

mpalmer 1y ago

While of course not quite apples to apples, it's still interesting to consider what the reaction would be if Apple complied with a government order to block a domain entirely on all its devices. Where, ultimately, is the difference?

getpvait 1y ago

[dead]

getpvait 1y ago

[dead]