Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS • Hacker News Board

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#211

Post by anfilt » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 2:34 AM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #82

pojntfx wrote: post #5

It is still absolutely fascinating to me how we have arrived at a point where in order to use one's own device properly, one has to ask a US company nicely or be unable to do so - and people pay money for it. On macOS, it is now impossible to distribute a VPN or a virtualization software without permission from Apple. 30% of the world's population would, if their government cut a deal with Apple, be unable to install…

in order to use one's own device properly It boils down to someone's personal definition of "properly." You are on HN. Your definition of using a device "properly" is very different from the vast majority of the other human beings on the planet. You're not Apple's target audience, and that's OK. The more of you there are, the more force there is for creating other options. But don't pretend that there is only one "pr…

Let’s not fall into the argumentum ad populum fallacy. Just because a majority of people don't understand how a phone/computer works does not mean their property rights are not being infringed.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#212

Post by bogwog » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 2:34 AM UTC

ogre_codes wrote: post #191

bogwog wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arguing these fine points is a waste of time because I feel like people defending this are missing the complete insanity of this situation. Try a different perspective: Let's say Apple wants to sell their devices at "Billy's Electronics", which is a tiny kiosk at a mall with minimal foot traffic. Billy tells Apple that he'll only sell Apple devices at his kiosk if Apple agrees to give him 30% of all revenues Apple ma…

> Arguing these fine points is a waste of time because I feel like people defending this are missing the complete insanity of this situation All I’m suggesting is we just discuss what Apple actually does rather than exaggerating it to poorly make a point. > That's a deflection tactic, and doesn't justify anything. 15% is still too much as long as there are no alternatives. I wouldn’t have even mentioned this if you h…

> There is an absolutely massive difference between “All their revenue” and “All revenue from in app purchases”.

The OP is about Librem Tunnel, an app which is one part of a subscription service called "Librem One".

By forcing this company to add in-app purchases, Apple is taking 30% of all the revenue of the entire Librem One subscription, since Librem doesn't sell VPN access by itself.

I don't see how I'm blowing that out of proportion? The kiosk taking 30% of iCloud subscriptions is pretty much a perfect analogy to what's going on. I haven't exaggerated anything as far as I can tell.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#213

Post by Google234 » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 2:38 AM UTC

knubie wrote: post #195

This is timely considering I just got hit with a rejection from Apple for my app. It's insane to me that a $1 trillion company is willing to put someone out of business for a measly $300/mo.

I’m glad there’s a company that is willing to protect its customers from abusive devs. If there are a few false positives then too bad, nothing is perfect.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#214

Post by google234123 » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 2:49 AM UTC

jasonjayr wrote: post #167

vbezhenar wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about customers who have found an app in AppStore, wanted to try it out only to find that they need to go through external websites and stuff. Not kind of UX you expect from iPhone.

I expect any device with general purpose computing capabilities to allow me to use those capabilities anyway I want. Especially I'm spending $1000 USD on the thing.

If you want completely general purpose computing capabilities then don't buy an Iphone. I don't expect my fridge to allow me to execute arbitrary code on it's ARM cpu.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#215

Post by google234123 » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 2:52 AM UTC

anfilt wrote: post #211

reaperducer wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

in order to use one's own device properly It boils down to someone's personal definition of "properly." You are on HN. Your definition of using a device "properly" is very different from the vast majority of the other human beings on the planet. You're not Apple's target audience, and that's OK. The more of you there are, the more force there is for creating other options. But don't pretend that there is only one "pr…

Let’s not fall into the argumentum ad populum fallacy. Just because a majority of people don't understand how a phone/computer works does not mean their property rights are not being infringed.

You want to restrict Apple's right to sell a limited computing device. I would argue that you are infringing on their freedom.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#216

Post by google234123 » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 2:52 AM UTC

pojntfx wrote: post #5

It is still absolutely fascinating to me how we have arrived at a point where in order to use one's own device properly, one has to ask a US company nicely or be unable to do so - and people pay money for it. On macOS, it is now impossible to distribute a VPN or a virtualization software without permission from Apple. 30% of the world's population would, if their government cut a deal with Apple, be unable to install…

So Apple is suppose to break the law of China? Why don't you go there and start openly distributing illegal material and see what happens.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#217

Post by anfilt » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 2:54 AM UTC

Google234 wrote: post #210

anfilt wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then dont do business with that developer/company. You cant force a seller/company to accept every form of payment or payment processor. Especially one that takes 30% cut, and says they cant sell their goods themself to people (aka sideload). Not only does such system seem insane for a normal payment processor. It also effects you the purchaser in multiple ways. Since to use this payment system you cant make the choi…

Yes you can. Try and sell a product at any store and demand they take a 0% cut

Sigh I don't think you understand. The comment I was responding to said they dont want to use other payment processors. Walk into a store and demand that they use a payment processor you like especially ones with such onerous requirements.

As for your comment normal producers of goods can sell directly or choose what stores to stock their product. However, here a developer has no choice but apple and the same goes for a payment processor. Its all because the hardware is locked down infringing on the property rights of device owners. Apple does not even own the hardware after they sell it. Apple can run their store like they want however the only reason is its a problem is because they infringe on the device owners rights, and they cant run software unless apple allows that software to run on the device.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#218

Post by google234123 » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 2:54 AM UTC

kmeisthax wrote: post #103

ctdonath wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m paying for a walled garden. I own the hardware, and with it bought software which I want to aggressively maintain it. If you don’t like the product, don’t buy it. Don’t compel them to satisfy your whim via police power of the state.

Walled gardens are also legally enforced by police power of the state. Otherwise, Epic would just distribute their own jailbreaks and tell Fortnite users to jailbreak their phones. Furthermore, I find it really frustrating how my desire for the ability to go a little bit outside of certain walled gardens is construed as me demanding you go outside the walled garden at all times. 95% of the walled garden is perfectly…

Epic is free to distribute a jailbreak. Apple is also free to update their phone to cover that security vulnerability.

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#219

Post by google234123 » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 2:57 AM UTC

forgotmypw17 wrote: post #53

moistbar wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an interesting take on "this non-password-protected, non-LTE iPad that I do own abruptly stopped letting me look at data I was able to see recently."

It was on the cell network, but it was purchased outright, not under contract. It does sound like the other commenter's theory that the SIM has "gone bad" may be true, but I had no idea this could happen, and I don't see how that makes it any more valid.

Have you removed the sim?

Re: Librem Tunnel Is Leaving iOS

#220

Post by anfilt » Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 2:59 AM UTC

google234123 wrote: post #215

anfilt wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s not fall into the argumentum ad populum fallacy. Just because a majority of people don't understand how a phone/computer works does not mean their property rights are not being infringed.

You want to restrict Apple's right to sell a limited computing device. I would argue that you are infringing on their freedom.

You don't normally sell things with limited ownership rights. Selling something generally involves the transfer of all rights in real/tangible property. Here apple is reserving some rights even after sale. Last I checked apple was not leasing devices or something similar.