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

My small revenge on Apple

javierantonsblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 471 posts

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#441

Post by dang »

csmpltn wrote: post #329
addison-lee wrote: post #296

> look ugly and inconsistent Hate to break it to you, your app is already ugly, the thin black border around the Apple sign in doesn’t change the fact the rest of the app looks awful. Also you’re not getting “revenge” on Apple, you are just fucking over your users who use Apple.

> "Hate to break it to you, your app is already ugly, the thin black border around the Apple sign in doesn’t change the fact the rest of the app looks awful. Also you’re not getting “revenge” on Apple, you are just fucking over your users who use Apple." What's going on with this entire awful thread? A bunch of Apple fanboys crucifying the developer for refusing to play by Apple's rules? The developer has every right…

Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#442

Post by dang »

addison-lee wrote: post #335
csmpltn wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Hate to break it to you, your app is already ugly, the thin black border around the Apple sign in doesn’t change the fact the rest of the app looks awful. Also you’re not getting “revenge” on Apple, you are just fucking over your users who use Apple." What's going on with this entire awful thread? A bunch of Apple fanboys crucifying the developer for refusing to play by Apple's rules? The developer has every right…

The developer has every right to do what they did just as I have every right to call out their bullshit. Why don’t you fuck off?

Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#443

Post by InsomniacL »

pokot0 wrote: post #377
InsomniacL wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple users are happy that they forced you. As an Apple user I'm not happy they forced this. It's manipulative forcing even more platform lock-in for the average joe which empowers other anti-trust practices too. You're argument that an Apple user is happy at the point of use doesn't justify anti-trust behaviour which is to the overall detriment of people. Apple seem to get away with far too much just because they'…

I understand your anti-trust point and I agree to some extent. But this is not something you can blame on Apple. You need to go to your politicians. You can't expect a company to self-regulate its dominance position. In general I believe a much better way of dealing with this form of dominance is taxing the dominant companies agressively and use that money to fund open source competition.

Isn't this how it works though...? Company 'X' abuses the trust it's given to self regulate it's dominant position and forces 'Y' application on all it's 'Z' platform users.

X, Y, Z could be Apple, AppleID, and iPhone or Microsoft, Internet Explorer, and Windows.

Microsoft received a $611 fine in the EU for abusing it's Monopoly of control with Windows back in 2004 but it took many years to get there.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#444

Post by sbuk »

pier25 wrote: post #437
HWR_14 wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's explained in my previous comment. Not well enough for me to understand, because I asked what you meant.

If a dev uses a Facebook login on an app then it will never be able to remove it again as users won't be able to log in. Similarly, if it uses Facebook comments, these cannot be removed from a website as the content would be lost. Apple does the same thing. As a dev once you open the door to using Apple you're forever stuck with that. As a user, it entrenches you further into the Apple ecosystem which is ultimately t…

Again, the point that you as a developer are missing is that your behavior is atleast as, if not more abusive towards your end user than Apple are being. Why should your user have to use an anti-privacy 3rd party like Facebook to use your app or service? Where is the users choice other than to not use your product?

I have to be honest here and say that I amazed, but sadly not surprised by the level of entitlement on display from a very small but extremely vocal set of developers.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#445

Post by fennecfoxy »

elzbardico wrote: post #395
webmobdev wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bizarre thing is the ignorance here that this whole thing is a matter of choice! I am glad that there are developers who recognize that they do not have to accept unfair, and even unethical, practices from corporates. And are willing to speak about it and fight it. Like minded developers are not just fighting Apple, but the whole attempt by "big tech" to move to the business model of exploiting developers by cont…

Yes. you don't have to accept anything that is unfair. You can just refuse to develop for the platform.

Privilege.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#446

Post by fennecfoxy »

Interesting the comments here, rather than addressing the issue of "is it okay for Apple to force implementation of their own services in addition to others" the discussion is more "well, nobody's _forcing_ you to do this".

When does it stop then? If Spotify releases their app to the store, do they have to include Apple music functionality in their app? If I have an app with a "listen to this on spotify" button, do I also have to have a "listen to this on Apple music" button?

See no evil, I guess.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#447

Post by collaborative »

SP2njsPl2WmlAwM wrote: post #278
collaborative wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly, I couldn't care less about whether you trust the app or not The fact is, I send 0 emails and privacy and security are top priorities. I am passionate about E2E encryption so I have integrated loads of that in the app too The only purpose an email address serves is password recovery. Period TBH I am a bit tired of people trusting big tech so much. They are businesses, meant to make money. I make no money and…

To be clear: This is not meant as a direct attack, just to highlight some of the pitfalls of creating your own e2ee chat protocol. I had a quick look at your app's e2ee and summarized my findings here: https://telegra.ph/Reviewing-the-app-behind-My-small-revenge... Feel free to correct.

Hey, just seen this now.

First of all, thank you for taking your time to do this. I still wish you'd told me before so that I could help you understand a few points before publishing, but I totally get it, good effort. A bit unfortunate that your post got flagged and taken down

A few comments:

> chat keys are ever changed or when (forward secrecy)

Yes, this can be done anytime by any user. Chats -> Settings -> Renew RSA Keys

The Windows client doesn't include any chat capability, it's not just that it isn't E2EE, you simply can't send/receive messages on it. I plan on replacing the Windows client entirely with a web version, it's only there for some few users who really need it

>it's legal to have a directory of all registered users and email addresses accessible to all users

This is not the case. Users can only see other people's contact details when they are in the same "Group". Otherwise, both email address and name is hidden

>On Android, the standard `Random` is not entirely[5] based on current system time, but it does not seem like Codename One uses that. The documentation says it's purely time-based.

I think you may have missed that every message is encrypted with the ChatKey but also with a different IV each time. This ensures each message originates from a different seed

Don't know if you can update your post with this info? Anyway, thanks again and happy to discuss! I might have missed some points. Tbh the E2EE chat isn't really used by loads of people and in retrospective I should have made it non-E2E since most users use the app for its organigrams and not for secure comms. I just did it this way for fun

Edit: One last note

>If you're going to use a closed-source E2EE chat application, you might as well use WhatsApp

The problem with Whatsapp is backups. They kind of make E2E pointless

Edit 2: feel free to reply directly to javierantonf@hotmail.com I can't guarantee I will see your msg here

Edit 3: Isn't 2048 valid until 2023 and possibly beyond?

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#448

Post by AshamedCaptain »

Semaphor wrote: post #122
AshamedCaptain wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Competition is no longer possible these days, as banks, towns, etc. start to require an _unrooted_ Android/iOS device for basic operations (e.g. authorization of credit card operations, paying taxes and fines, COVID stuff, etc.).

At least here in Germany, there are many banks that work fine on rooted devices. And outside of banking and Google Pay, I haven’t seen anything that won’t work on rooted devices. The rest of your comment, I sadly agree with.

Up until a couple weeks ago, my French bank's program worked on rooted devices. No longer. Same thing happened with my previous bank a year or so ago. They removed SMS 2FA as an alternative at the same time.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#449

Post by collaborative »

CubsFan1060 wrote: post #276
collaborative wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly, I couldn't care less about whether you trust the app or not The fact is, I send 0 emails and privacy and security are top priorities. I am passionate about E2E encryption so I have integrated loads of that in the app too The only purpose an email address serves is password recovery. Period TBH I am a bit tired of people trusting big tech so much. They are businesses, meant to make money. I make no money and…

I feel like you’re getting personally offended here. And I get it, you’re likely a responsible person who will be respectful with my information. However… when looking at apps and signing up for them, can you tell me how I would differentiate someone like you (who I can probably trust) with someone who will sell my information, or send me a ton of emails? Even with good developers, some will make mistakes and lose da…

If you want to make sure, check who is behind the app before you sign up and make an informed decision from there

Of course it is easier when you can relate the app to a physical person (as in my case). How can you make sure the physical person has good morals? That is a lot harder

I did dislike implementing AppleID purely because I was told to do it and even how to make it look which went against the design I'd already nailed for the app. It just put me off. I just wish Apple treated developers with more respect but it seems even Apple users are happy that they mistreat us. It seems Apple users enjoy the "power" Apple has over us. I think that this is just evil. It's like enjoying the "power" Uber has over the taxi market, or the "power" Deliveroo has over the miserable sods that do the deliveries. I don't know what the solution is, but Apple needs to change this behavior and the only way might be to "convince" their users somehow. Strikes are never a pretty sight

Again, I guess you could draw an analogy with Uber. We used to depend on our luck to find a clean/respectful/honest taxi driver and now we rely on Uber to manage this for us (with reviews etc). But Uber never really had their drivers in mind, and it took collective action for Uber to start respecting them a bit. I think that something similar needs to happen in the app space. We need rights

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#450

Post by wayneftw »

qeternity wrote: post #427
wayneftw wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's adorable that anyone actually believes Apple is concerned with user privacy. Sorry to burst your bubble but you can read all about how hypocritical Apple is about your privacy right here on HN - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24109695

It’s really adorable to watch people embarrass themselves by not reading/comprehending the entire comment. As I said: lesser of evils. I don’t care if Apple truly cares about privacy. I just care whether they will trample on it less than the others will, which I do believe, not because they care but because it might be profitable for them. But good attempt, kiddo. You’ll get em next time.

Imagine thinking that a whole 3 lines of comment are anything to ponder over very deeply.

We get it. Love Apple, trust Apple! There's not much else there.

Clearly the greater evil though is to enshrine one corporation to rule them all in the digital landscape. If we don't know that, then we haven't thought about the problem at all because we're trading short term security for long term insecurity. Read some Orwell or Huxley. Or just look at human history and how this plays out... what do we know about that? Anything?

Enjoy that! (Got 'em!)

Oh but we can go to Android! Gee, but we're talking about developers… You don't build a successful app business in the United States without going through Apple because they have over half the customers here.

To be clear: I'm fine with Apple signin existing. I am not fine with Apple being able to force every developer to dance to their tune just to be able to get at over half the smart phone users. There's a reason we have antitrust laws for this and not laws against two bit developers gaining your email and that's because one of them is the greater evil, but it's not the one you think it is...

Post reply on HN