5 ms·

Legal experts condemn Apple bowing to White House's request to remove ICEBlock

66 points by pera 1y ago

Simulacra 1y ago
A theoretical contrapositive: would Apple allow an app that allowed people to track anti-ice police? Antifa? Clearly, they would not, and cannot have an app that tracks a protected class, but what about an app that told people that antifa was nearby? I see the logic in tracking government officials, but I think it cuts both ways and maybe neither should be allowed. Of course the same argument could be made for Waze, but I don't know where you draw the line without blowback to others. I think there is a line, I just don't know where it is. Motives? Perceived danger?
- glimshe 1y ago
  Without getting in the merits of Apple's block, the problem in your argument is that the government is not equivalent to a group of citizens. It's in a position of power and it carries weapons ordinary citizens can't.
  - drweevil 1y ago
    And in a Democratic society it is subject to citizen oversight (in principle). We have a right to know, iow.
    - samus 1y ago
      Most democratic societies dilute and aggregate voting power in ways that misrepresent voter intention and thus make it unable to reject authoritarian tendencies. In most countries, people don't vote for issues or policies, but for parties. Specifically, what democratic measures exist to act against ICE targeting people of color who are legal residents otherwise?
- mcphage 1y ago
  > the wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "theres actually zero difference between good & bad things. you imbecile. you fucking moron" —dril
  - haskellshill 1y ago
    > my side is good and your side is evil, just because it is, okay?
- hackable_sand 1y ago
  You made a really inept "argument". But you did show your hand so I guess we all benefited in some way.
  - haskellshill 1y ago
    I know nobody benefited from your comment either way, you're literally just stating somebody is dumb
- potato3732842 1y ago
  Until the peasant's ability to know the whereabouts both real time and historical of government agents they are interested in equals or exceeds the government's ability to know the whereabouts both real time and historical of peasants they are interested in I don't see the problem.
laserdancepony 1y ago
Why should a country tolerate an information system designed to circumvent the enforcement of the law, no matter how you individually feel about that laws. We boot fraudulent or illegal apps all the time. What about an app that reports every LEO (not just ICE) around you? What would that accomplish except benefit criminals? "Rules for thee, not for me."
- samus 1y ago
  Such apps can be forbidden by law, and then this would be quite unambiguous. This is criticizing a company bending over backwards to what the government wants. Not really surprising, since none of these companies supports free speech for the sake of it, but to further its business, but still.
  - MichaelZuo 1y ago
    “ bending over backwards” seems to be just an opinion, or collection of opinions…? I don’t have a dog in this fight, but clearly there has to be some credible argument why opinion X is better than opinion Y (held by company decision makers). Assuming it’s just automatically better isn’t productive.
    - samus 1y ago
      Indeed, an opinion held by legal experts, as the title of the submission quite clearly expresses.
    - samus 1y ago
      Indeed, an opinion held by legal experts, as the title of the submission quite clearly expresses. And on the other hand there is a history of Apple refusing other government requests. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple%E2%80%93FBI_encryption_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple%E2%80%93FBI_encryption_d...
      - MichaelZuo 1y ago
        It doesn’t matter if every expert concurred, arguments from authority can not lead to opinion X becoming superior to opinion Y. At least not in a logically valid way.
jmclnx 1y ago
I hope no one is surprised by what Google and Apple did on their Locked Down devices, all the care about is their bottom line. Trump and his people have no qualms about destroying a companies' revenue. These locked down devices seems to be future tech is being pushed to. I suspect the TPM 2.0 requirement for Windows is a first step in Locking Down Laptops and Desktops. Luckily Linux is not heading in this direction, yet. But I fear it will and baby steps may have already been taken. From what I have heard about OpenBSD and NetBSD, they will probably never lock down anything. FreeBSD, I am not sure about, but so far they are not going in that direction. There was a story by FSF or maybe GNU detailing a possible future with using these devices. The story was you needed to get a license to use certain software. Debugging and Development tools required a specific license and permission. I lost the link, but I think that is the future we are heading directly too :(
- gruez 1y ago
  >These locked down devices seems to be future tech is being pushed to. I suspect the TPM 2.0 requirement for Windows is a first step in Locking Down Laptops and Desktops. You mean the boogeyman that's been around for over a decade and precisely nothing has come of it? Moreover given the declining use of desktops/laptops, and the widespread prevalence of locked-down devices like smartphones, tablets, and streaming boxes, the battle over "locking down" has already been lost. If a company wants their app to run in a trusted environment, they can simply not offer a web version and enforce attestation (so you can't run it in an emulator or whatever).
ChrisArchitect 1y ago
Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45457333 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45457333
iamleppert 1y ago
The app itself (I still have it on my phone) wasn't very good, buggy and not user friendly. The author is a clout chaser and wanted to profit off the app.

66 points by pera 1y ago

A theoretical contrapositive: would Apple allow an app that allowed people to track anti-ice police? Antifa? Clearly, they would not, and cannot have an app that tracks a protected class, but what about an app that told people that antifa was nearby? I see the logic in tracking government officials, but I think it cuts both ways and maybe neither should be allowed. Of course the same argument could be made for Waze, but I don't know where you draw the line without blowback to others. I think there is a line, I just don't know where it is. Motives? Perceived danger?

glimshe 1y ago
Without getting in the merits of Apple's block, the problem in your argument is that the government is not equivalent to a group of citizens. It's in a position of power and it carries weapons ordinary citizens can't.
- drweevil 1y ago
  And in a Democratic society it is subject to citizen oversight (in principle). We have a right to know, iow.
  - samus 1y ago
    Most democratic societies dilute and aggregate voting power in ways that misrepresent voter intention and thus make it unable to reject authoritarian tendencies. In most countries, people don't vote for issues or policies, but for parties. Specifically, what democratic measures exist to act against ICE targeting people of color who are legal residents otherwise?
mcphage 1y ago
> the wise man bowed his head solemnly and spoke: "theres actually zero difference between good & bad things. you imbecile. you fucking moron" —dril
- haskellshill 1y ago
  > my side is good and your side is evil, just because it is, okay?
hackable_sand 1y ago
You made a really inept "argument". But you did show your hand so I guess we all benefited in some way.
- haskellshill 1y ago
  I know nobody benefited from your comment either way, you're literally just stating somebody is dumb
potato3732842 1y ago
Until the peasant's ability to know the whereabouts both real time and historical of government agents they are interested in equals or exceeds the government's ability to know the whereabouts both real time and historical of peasants they are interested in I don't see the problem.

laserdancepony 1y ago

Why should a country tolerate an information system designed to circumvent the enforcement of the law, no matter how you individually feel about that laws. We boot fraudulent or illegal apps all the time. What about an app that reports every LEO (not just ICE) around you? What would that accomplish except benefit criminals? "Rules for thee, not for me."

samus 1y ago
Such apps can be forbidden by law, and then this would be quite unambiguous. This is criticizing a company bending over backwards to what the government wants. Not really surprising, since none of these companies supports free speech for the sake of it, but to further its business, but still.
- MichaelZuo 1y ago
  “ bending over backwards” seems to be just an opinion, or collection of opinions…? I don’t have a dog in this fight, but clearly there has to be some credible argument why opinion X is better than opinion Y (held by company decision makers). Assuming it’s just automatically better isn’t productive.
  - samus 1y ago
    Indeed, an opinion held by legal experts, as the title of the submission quite clearly expresses.
  - samus 1y ago
    Indeed, an opinion held by legal experts, as the title of the submission quite clearly expresses. And on the other hand there is a history of Apple refusing other government requests. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple%E2%80%93FBI_encryption_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple%E2%80%93FBI_encryption_d...
    - MichaelZuo 1y ago
      It doesn’t matter if every expert concurred, arguments from authority can not lead to opinion X becoming superior to opinion Y. At least not in a logically valid way.

jmclnx 1y ago

I hope no one is surprised by what Google and Apple did on their Locked Down devices, all the care about is their bottom line. Trump and his people have no qualms about destroying a companies' revenue. These locked down devices seems to be future tech is being pushed to. I suspect the TPM 2.0 requirement for Windows is a first step in Locking Down Laptops and Desktops. Luckily Linux is not heading in this direction, yet. But I fear it will and baby steps may have already been taken. From what I have heard about OpenBSD and NetBSD, they will probably never lock down anything. FreeBSD, I am not sure about, but so far they are not going in that direction. There was a story by FSF or maybe GNU detailing a possible future with using these devices. The story was you needed to get a license to use certain software. Debugging and Development tools required a specific license and permission. I lost the link, but I think that is the future we are heading directly too :(

gruez 1y ago
>These locked down devices seems to be future tech is being pushed to. I suspect the TPM 2.0 requirement for Windows is a first step in Locking Down Laptops and Desktops. You mean the boogeyman that's been around for over a decade and precisely nothing has come of it? Moreover given the declining use of desktops/laptops, and the widespread prevalence of locked-down devices like smartphones, tablets, and streaming boxes, the battle over "locking down" has already been lost. If a company wants their app to run in a trusted environment, they can simply not offer a web version and enforce attestation (so you can't run it in an emulator or whatever).

ChrisArchitect 1y ago

Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45457333 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45457333

iamleppert 1y ago

The app itself (I still have it on my phone) wasn't very good, buggy and not user friendly. The author is a clout chaser and wanted to profit off the app.