It's REALLY weird the Apple's app store supports generic "targeted groups". Looks like Apple literally is chasing the lowest common denominator of risk management by not upsetting groups.
Apple CEO Tim Cook "secretly" signed an agreement worth more than $275 billion with Chinese officials, promising that Apple would help to develop China's economy and technological capabilities - https://www.macrumors.com/2021/12/07/apple-ceo-tim-cook-secr...
Last week, the Chinese government ordered Apple to remove several widely used messaging apps—WhatsApp, Threads, Signal, and Telegram—from its app store. [..] In a statement, Apple said that it was told to remove the apps because of “national security concerns,” adding that it is “obligated to follow the laws in the countries where we operate, even when we disagree.” [but they don't disagree so much that they'd stop locking their devices against their users] - https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/apple_appstore_china_cen...
Apple happily locks you out of your own devices, then cries "just complying with local governments" when those locks are used against their users. They're the person holding you down while others kick you. Every bit as guilty - especially when they see their users kicked again and again, yet continue holding them down.
I see ethically there being a difference between what the Chinese and Russian government told them to do where leaders make and enforce the laws with their capitulation to the Trump administration in what is suppose to be a democracy where only the legislative branch and/or court system can demand anything.
I’m also not trying to escuse their heavy handedness about “being nice to China”
Apple and Tim Apple are here for profits. <---period.
They could not care less if you, the customer lived or died, as long as your check clears.
Source: Tim Apple sucking up to Trump like he's the antidote. This is even more ironic considering Tim's sexual orientation and Mango Jabba's take on "the gays".
Yes - you have the right to observe public actions of federal agencies and agents and to report on them.
However a private entity, including Apple, is free to censor whatever they want on their platforms.
For example, I have the right to voraciously criticize or praise the current Administration or the prior Administration without government interference. However if you own a grocery store you are generally free to ban anyone wearing, or not wearing, a garment criticizing or praising either Administration (or any specific combination of praising or criticizing or referring to the current Administration or the prior Administration). Political views, unlike race or religion for example, are not a protected class under federal law even in a public accommodation such as a grocery store.
“Targeted group” is the language that the Apple guidelines use.
This annoys me because I agree that ICE shouldn’t be a protected class (e.g. have the same legal status as minorities)… but no one is saying that they are.
100%. There is even a very strong national security argument for the US Government allowing Apple this level of control over the hardware that ~200 million Americans carry.
The corruption is allowing illegal immigrants into the country in the first place. Its a mess that needs cleaned up. I dont condone excessive use of violence unless it's warranted, but open your eyes. Biden allowed the flood gates open. You have to recognize this reality.
Trumps deportation numbers are not out of trend with prior presidents. Its on par with Obama.
Make immigration easier for law abiding productive members of society. Dont reward those who cut in line.
I'm generally very anti-Apple when it comes to their draconian control over the code I'm allowed to execute on hardware I've purchased. However, I'm going to devil's advocate this situation for a minute (and I do mean the devil, because that is what Apple is):
Very broadly speaking, my position that I feel strongly on is: Apple should enjoy a right to distribute or restrict whatever apps they want through their app store. They might have a reasonable right to restrict what apps can be installed on their operating system and the means through which those apps are installed; I could be convinced either way depending on the day and I would not lose sleep if precedence is established in either direction. But they absolutely should not have any rights when it comes to restricting what operating systems I can run on their devices. I outline that only to state the context and framework within which the next paragraph is typed.
If Apple doesn't want to carry and distribute the anti-ICE app, I think that's their right. Apple's problem right now is that this unilaterally now means that the native application can no longer be executed on iOS, and that is a problem, but let's pretend like it isn't and that this app is now only available through the Epic Games App Store (or wherever). Why is this situation better for the anti-ICE app than just being a web app? This should be a web app, right? It shouldn't really rely on any native capabilities.
Phrase this another way, flip this on its head: the anti-ICE app wants in the App Store because of the marketing and ease of distribution it enables, which I feel are not natural rights developers should have when making applications. Its similar to freedom of speech; you have a right to speak, but you don't have a right to be heard. You should have a right for your app to be available (not all apps can be web apps; but this can). You should not have a right to ultra-streamlined distribution through Apple's servers.
I understand why this is a flashpoint, and I think its important that we push Apple on this issue because there should be more options when it comes to running code on mobile devices. However, functionally speaking: Y'all should just make this a web site.
baffling that in this day and age Apple can have some sort of a dictatorship in deciding what people can or cannot install in their own phones they purchased with their own money, and Google taking similar steps towards that direction as well. I guess people just got used to this.
App Stores need to be taken away from the control of a single corporation and given to a larger non profit made up of multiple stakeholders to manage. Apple should have it's monopoly of the app store taken away.
23 comments
[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 48.1 ms ] threadApple Banned an App That Simply Archived Videos of ICE Abuses
https://www.404media.co/apple-banned-an-app-that-simply-arch...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45520110
https://eyesupapp.com/
Welcome to the right-wing funhouse mirror version of civil rights...
Have you been following Apple's China policies and decisions?
Apple Told Some Apple TV+ Show Developers Not To Anger China - https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/alexkantrowitz/apple-ch...
Apple quietly deletes nearly a hundred VPNs that allowed Russians to get around censorship - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41712728
Apple CEO Tim Cook "secretly" signed an agreement worth more than $275 billion with Chinese officials, promising that Apple would help to develop China's economy and technological capabilities - https://www.macrumors.com/2021/12/07/apple-ceo-tim-cook-secr...
Apple telemetry on every app opened - https://sneak.berlin/20201112/your-computer-isnt-yours/
Apple is lobbying against a bill aimed at stopping forced labor in China - https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/11/20/apple-u...
Apple is notoriously strict with App Store rules, but gives China’s WeChat a free pass - https://reclaimthenet.org/apple-app-store-wechat-china
Apple drops Hong Kong police-tracking app used by protesters - https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49995688
Last week, the Chinese government ordered Apple to remove several widely used messaging apps—WhatsApp, Threads, Signal, and Telegram—from its app store. [..] In a statement, Apple said that it was told to remove the apps because of “national security concerns,” adding that it is “obligated to follow the laws in the countries where we operate, even when we disagree.” [but they don't disagree so much that they'd stop locking their devices against their users] - https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/apple_appstore_china_cen...
Apple happily locks you out of your own devices, then cries "just complying with local governments" when those locks are used against their users. They're the person holding you down while others kick you. Every bit as guilty - especially when they see their users kicked again and again, yet continue holding them down.
I’m also not trying to escuse their heavy handedness about “being nice to China”
They could not care less if you, the customer lived or died, as long as your check clears.
Source: Tim Apple sucking up to Trump like he's the antidote. This is even more ironic considering Tim's sexual orientation and Mango Jabba's take on "the gays".
However a private entity, including Apple, is free to censor whatever they want on their platforms.
For example, I have the right to voraciously criticize or praise the current Administration or the prior Administration without government interference. However if you own a grocery store you are generally free to ban anyone wearing, or not wearing, a garment criticizing or praising either Administration (or any specific combination of praising or criticizing or referring to the current Administration or the prior Administration). Political views, unlike race or religion for example, are not a protected class under federal law even in a public accommodation such as a grocery store.
“Protected class” has a legal definition.
“Targeted group” is the language that the Apple guidelines use.
This annoys me because I agree that ICE shouldn’t be a protected class (e.g. have the same legal status as minorities)… but no one is saying that they are.
Trumps deportation numbers are not out of trend with prior presidents. Its on par with Obama.
Make immigration easier for law abiding productive members of society. Dont reward those who cut in line.
Very broadly speaking, my position that I feel strongly on is: Apple should enjoy a right to distribute or restrict whatever apps they want through their app store. They might have a reasonable right to restrict what apps can be installed on their operating system and the means through which those apps are installed; I could be convinced either way depending on the day and I would not lose sleep if precedence is established in either direction. But they absolutely should not have any rights when it comes to restricting what operating systems I can run on their devices. I outline that only to state the context and framework within which the next paragraph is typed.
If Apple doesn't want to carry and distribute the anti-ICE app, I think that's their right. Apple's problem right now is that this unilaterally now means that the native application can no longer be executed on iOS, and that is a problem, but let's pretend like it isn't and that this app is now only available through the Epic Games App Store (or wherever). Why is this situation better for the anti-ICE app than just being a web app? This should be a web app, right? It shouldn't really rely on any native capabilities.
Phrase this another way, flip this on its head: the anti-ICE app wants in the App Store because of the marketing and ease of distribution it enables, which I feel are not natural rights developers should have when making applications. Its similar to freedom of speech; you have a right to speak, but you don't have a right to be heard. You should have a right for your app to be available (not all apps can be web apps; but this can). You should not have a right to ultra-streamlined distribution through Apple's servers.
I understand why this is a flashpoint, and I think its important that we push Apple on this issue because there should be more options when it comes to running code on mobile devices. However, functionally speaking: Y'all should just make this a web site.