181–190 of 634 posts
This is part of the 2020 Belarusian Protests [4]. Three Telegram accounts, dedicated to doxing police officers associated with the authoritarian regime of Alexander Lukashenko, have been requested to be taken down by Apple.
Durov is politically libertarian and is in self-imposed exile after his own struggle with the regime in his Russian homeland.
Apple’s defence is IANAG (I am not a government). That’s fine, but it works both ways: we must remember when observing their marketing campaigns that buying nice things will not and cannot create a democratic and liberal world order.
https://t.me/durov/136 > Previously, when removing posts at Apple’s request, Telegram replaced those posts with a notice that cited the exact rule limiting such content for iOS users. However, Apple reached out to us a while ago and said our app is not allowed to show users such notices because they were “irrelevant”. Fucking hell, Apple. ---- cough https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four#Ministry_...
Please stop worshipping this company. It's not a force for good. They've kicked us out of open computing by locking down the only computer a lot of folks own (iPhone). And now look what kind of shit they can pull because they own the entire stack! This shouldn't be possible! We really have to push against this and hope the DOJ forces all phone providers to allow "side-loading" (what a bizarre term!) The iPhone is a c…
Still, free-as-in-freedom iPhones? Hell no! I give them money because they are not free-as-in-freedom, but provide a walled garden and defend it for me. I don't think I could do this myself; I know lots and lots of people absolutely certainly couldn't in the same way that I couldn't perform open-heart surgery. On iOS right now it's really, really hard to inadvertently give one's data, money or identity to any random app, and even for people who are not in the cohort that somehow always accumulates browser toolbars, the security measures by device/OS and browser vendors are the only thing that keeps them safe. This is an absolutely huge thing. If they break that, it'll wipe out their mobile products.
I do wholeheartedly agree that they lock down too much and too hard. I get that it shouldn't be easy to side-load software, but making it utterly impossible is a bit too advanced-user-hostile. And this particular action of theirs is wayyy over any line one could draw, and I absolutely think their brand should suffer big time for this.
But taking things to the other extreme – free as in freedom – I really don't see how that could end well. Give the big app vendors easy, convenient ways to bypass all restrictions and they'll make use of it, if only to make development cheaper, and then the small vendors and eventually the shady vendors will follow suit, and we're essentially back at the Windows 95 security model with some permission nag screens that no one really cares about anyway, and then everyone gets scammed and flocks to whatever vendor still has a properly secured walled garden. If there is a way to open things up completely while keeping the platform safe and usable for absolute laypeople, I haven't read or heard of it. Right now, I vastly prefer a locked-down but completely usable platform to some abstract notion of freedom.
Does Apple have a strong user base in Belarus? I don't think many protestors can afford their devices.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please stop worshipping this company. It's not a force for good. They've kicked us out of open computing by locking down the only computer a lot of folks own (iPhone). And now look what kind of shit they can pull because they own the entire stack! This shouldn't be possible! We really have to push against this and hope the DOJ forces all phone providers to allow "side-loading" (what a bizarre term!) The iPhone is a c…
It's a shame that anti-trust enforcement has been so effectively neutered in the US. This is exactly the type of thing it's designed to protect us from. But I think with the current high bar for anti-trust, it can be argued that Apple is "hurting consumers" through the lock-down of their platform. It's fine that Apple should offer a safe, curated experience of using their devices through the App Store. I'm even fine…
In general, prices don't need a legal justification. That's a big part of free enterprise.
> This is exactly the type of thing it's designed to protect us from.
What makes you so optimistic? In practice, complicated laws with lots of reach usually work in favour of the party that can afford more and better lawyers. (Or, sometimes, the party that is winning the PR battle for the hearts and minds of public opinion.)
I'm from Belarus. Honestly, I'm surprised Apple gives a shit. Now I'm worried that Apple can cooperate with local police in case they make inquiry. Am I safe? Here is the link to one group that uses ML to de-anonymize people: https://youtu.be/FAJIrnphTFg
On the other hand... that AI/ML looks like it has immense potential for wrongful identification.
"AI hallucinating" the wrong person's face into the scene using totally convincing feature interpolation.
In a high stakes scene where people feel the need to fight back, it's not hard to imagine such false positives ruining an innocent person's life.
Edit: If the other comment about people being killed as a result of identification videos is true, "ruining" only scratches the surface. Getting people killed due to an algorithm false positive would be a terrible thing to facilitate. We are talking about an algorithm where the "recognise face" part is known to make errors as well as subject to many kinds of bias (and that's even without a mask); and the "project the face into the video part" is optimised for making the most convincing deep fakes. Especially in the most high stakes scenes, somebody will inevitably convince themselves or others that the interpolated face is really the person who was there behind that mask. Heck, even experts misjudge pattern-matching evidence: https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/news/views/the-prosecutors-fallacy "The Prosecutor’s Fallacy is most often associated with miscarriages of justice."
There's the petition "Asking Apple to not block Telegram channels of Belarusian peaceful protest" https://www.change.org/p/apple-asking-apple-to-not-block-tel... Yesterday's discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24722130
Would Signal be a good replacement in this case?
>The size limit is 150 members.
The affected channels on Telegram have tens of thousands of members and it's not possible to directly post to the timeline.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's been a technique that apple have been using quite a bit. Forbid apps to be transparent with their customers around apple rules. This way app users are pissed at the app makers not apple.
Can you give any examples of this happening? Not doubting at all.
Through what right or means can Apple demand this, though? Telegram is a platform for user-generated content and it seems odd for Apple to single-out those 3 channels/groups specifically - what about the hundreds of thousands of other objectionable groups on Telegram? And why Telegram in particular? Why doesn't Apple give the same ultimatum to Facebook to pressure them to block access to militant ethnonationalist gro…
Exactly! If they want to start policing all content generated through apps that can be installed on iOS... they'll start getting millions of takedown requests from governments around the world.
Very weird decision strategically, and ofc very questionable morally.