Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple tells Telegram to take down protestor channels in Belarus

iphoneincanada.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 634 posts

Re: Apple tells Telegram to take down protestor channels in Belarus

#271

Post by shoulderfake »

boudin wrote: post #113
_RPL5_ wrote: post #102

Here is a source in Russian [0] saying that Apple is asking Telegram to remove messages that de-anonymize Belorussian police members, rather than blocking channels outright. I don't know whether their source is reliable, but here is the relevant snippet (google translate): > Apple says it didn’t require any channels to be removed. But they demanded to immediately remove any information that discloses someone's data o…

This seems to match this post, where apple is asking to remove telegram groups used to de-anonymize law enforcement members. Apple could do something really simple if they wanted to not interfeer with how people organize their fight: allow to install apps outside of the app store. This would force law enforcement to deal with Telegram directly rather than being able to take advantage of apple's own authoritarian way…

We all know the answer to that

Re: Apple tells Telegram to take down protestor channels in Belarus

#272

Post by dan-robertson »

m3kw9 wrote: post #267
latexr wrote: post #259

Tim Cook’s twitter bio[1] has the following: > “Life's most persistent and urgent question is, 'What are you doing for others?'” - MLK Considering this and the HKmap.live[2] situations, I’d say that in his case the answer to that question is “not much”. [1]: https://twitter.com/tim_cook [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HKmap.live

Sure that country can force Apple to comply with local laws. That’s how it works now.

In this case it is telegram which the government ought to need to compel. Or they could make Apple remove the telegram app. But that hasn’t happened

Re: Apple tells Telegram to take down protestor channels in Belarus

#274

Post by foepys »

m3kw9 wrote: post #267
latexr wrote: post #259

Tim Cook’s twitter bio[1] has the following: > “Life's most persistent and urgent question is, 'What are you doing for others?'” - MLK Considering this and the HKmap.live[2] situations, I’d say that in his case the answer to that question is “not much”. [1]: https://twitter.com/tim_cook [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HKmap.live

Sure that country can force Apple to comply with local laws. That’s how it works now.

So if an app shows an image of two men kissing, Apple should order the app makers to take it down worldwide because it's illegal in Uganda?

Re: Apple tells Telegram to take down protestor channels in Belarus

#276

Post by DoingIsLearning »

nickpp wrote: post #209

So it was fine when Apple banned Infowars but now it’s different? This is exactly what those free speech advocates meant when talking about slippery slopes: you either support free speech or censure. There is no middle ground. Disclaimer: I think Infowars is pure, evil sh*t.

> There is no middle ground.

Pause this slippery slope argument for a second.

The current situation in Belarus:

- Protestors are being imprisoned by unidentified agents in unidentified vehicles

- Protestors are being _tortured_ throughout nightly interrogations

- Protest _organizers_ have been kidnapped overnight and hanged from trees to get the OMON's point across.

This isn't a US politics disinformation twitter ping-ball discussion of who gets to sound the smartest in logical argumentation.

This is an actual dictatorship, with real people and real blood.

Re: Apple tells Telegram to take down protestor channels in Belarus

#277

Post by simonh »

iddqd wrote: post #145
robertlagrant wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe we need a chat protocol that does the same decoupling, then.

Do you think Apple would approve a client app to such a chat network?

They already do in the form of email clients, IRC clients, mastodon clients, etc, etc.

Re: Apple tells Telegram to take down protestor channels in Belarus

#278

Post by summerlight »

_RPL5_ wrote: post #102

Here is a source in Russian [0] saying that Apple is asking Telegram to remove messages that de-anonymize Belorussian police members, rather than blocking channels outright. I don't know whether their source is reliable, but here is the relevant snippet (google translate): > Apple says it didn’t require any channels to be removed. But they demanded to immediately remove any information that discloses someone's data o…

https://t.me/durov/136

At least being transparent and willing to take a part of responsibility of this action?

Re: Apple tells Telegram to take down protestor channels in Belarus

#279

Post by yunruse »

iddqd wrote: post #145
robertlagrant wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe we need a chat protocol that does the same decoupling, then.

Do you think Apple would approve a client app to such a chat network?

Just off the top of my head, Apple allows for apps supporting IRC, RSS and Mastodon protocols. The latter came about in 2016, when these topics were just as relevant as they are now. Adding another protocol doesn’t seem difficult.

Re: Apple tells Telegram to take down protestor channels in Belarus

#280

Post by class4behavior »

rzwitserloot wrote: post #229

This keeps being posted and keeps disappearing, so I'm going to not link to it, but when you search around, a post on telegram by Pavel Durov explains that apple has in fact made 2 demands: Take down the private information __and__ in addition to that, do so silently: Do not replace it with a notice explaining which part of apple's guidelines were breached, because that would be 'irrelevant' info. Apparently, whilst…

Here's Durov's response:

```

Apple released a statement saying they didn't want us to take down the 3 channels run by the Belarusian protestors, but just specific posts "disclosing personal information."

This sly wording ignores the fact that channels like @karatelibelarusi and @belarusassholes consist entirely of personal information of violent oppressors and those who helped rig the elections – because that is why those channels exist.

By hiding their demands with vague language, Apple is trying to avoid the responsibility of enforcing their own rules. It is understandable: according to this poll, over 94% of Belarusian users think the channels that made Apple worry should be left alone.

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”.

Similarly, when Facebook wanted to inform its users that 30% of the fees users were paying for online events went to Apple, Apple didn’t let Facebook do it saying this information was (once more) “irrelevant”.

I strongly disagree with Apple’s definition of “irrelevant”. I think the reason certain content was censored or why the price is 30% higher is the opposite of irrelevant.

Apple has the right to be greedy and formalistic (or maybe not – that’s something for the courts and regulators to decide). But it’s time Apple learned to assume responsibility for their policy instead of trying to hide it from users – they deserve to know.

```

https://t.me/s/durov/136

Post reply on HN