EU Digital Markets Act, aimed at Google, Apple, Amazon, approved • Hacker News Board

Re: EU Digital Markets Act, aimed at Google, Apple, Amazon, approved

#481

Post by donmcronald » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 5:13 PM UTC

runako wrote: post #332

SheinhardtWigCo wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's entirely possible that to enable compliance with this will require explicit compromises to the security of iMessage, for example by requiring key exchange with startup messaging providers. Is that really much worse than the status quo, where all iMessage plaintexts are shared with Apple by default, unless every participant in the thread has disabled iCloud Backup? > So Apple just needs to explain security & en…

Yes, it is. All of the participants in an iMessage chat have consented to have their data stored by Apple. We can all do rough evaluations on how well we think Apple can protect our data. The wording in the Act appears to not place constraints on exactly what services must be able to interop with iMessage, and it says Apple can't preference iMessage. So presumably the blue bubbles have to go. This means that when cha…

> The issue is that when people use iMessage and see a blue bubble, they also know something about how the encryption keys are handled & who does the handling, etc.

Realistically, the average person doesn't even know what an encryption key is and the average tech enthusiast doesn't know anything beyond "Apple handles everything".

> So presumably the blue bubbles have to go. This means that when chatting in Messages now, one will not be able to know whether it's Apple alone protecting the privacy of the conversation

Why can't iMessage to iMessage be blue bubbles with iMessage to anything else being green bubbles? Do you think the average iPhone user understands that green bubbles mean insecure rather than thinking they're "Android bubbles"?

Why are so many people convinced that consumer choice and security are mutually exclusive?

Re: EU Digital Markets Act, aimed at Google, Apple, Amazon, approved

#482

Post by Aaargh20318 » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 5:16 PM UTC

thunkshift1 wrote: post #399

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Use existing hardware and software features without competitive prejudice. E.g. NFC What this will mean for me as an iPhone user: instead of using Apple Pay which is seamlessly integrated in my phone, watch and desktop OS, I will instead have to use my bank's terrible HTML-based 'app' to perform contactless payments, making it 100 times less convenient. This probably will make me switch back to using my bank card.…

No one is forcing you too do that. But they are forcing apple to give anyone using apple devices the option to use the banks shitty ui app. Maybe the ui app will stop being shitty as the usage goes up? That is the point

> No one is forcing you too do that.

The bank will by discontinuing Apple Pay support. They have every incentive to do so.

Re: EU Digital Markets Act, aimed at Google, Apple, Amazon, approved

#483

Post by pnw » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 5:18 PM UTC

Obviously this is aimed at phones but does it extend to any other computing devices? For example, does it require Microsoft to allow access to a third party app store and payment system on a game console like Xbox?

Re: EU Digital Markets Act, aimed at Google, Apple, Amazon, approved

#484

Post by elzbardico » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 5:18 PM UTC

bloppe wrote: post #81

It blows my mind how many people have bought into Apple's position on this. No, Apple restricting your freedom does not afford you greater security. You, as an adult, can choose not to install shady software. If you're not confident in your ability to tell shady from legit, just stick to the App Store. Don't demand that Apple treat the rest of us like children just because that's how you would like to be treated.

You can just keep using an android phone.

I, for one, don't want to waste my time being IT support for my entire family. That's the whole reason most of us prefer the walled garden of iOS. I don't care if it is as powerful a computer as a server from some 15 years ago, I WANT to treat it like an appliance, a friggin consumer device, I want to standardize it across my home and have some peace of mind.

If I want to hack, I have plenty of other devices at home or that I can buy that are far more adequate to this end.

Re: EU Digital Markets Act, aimed at Google, Apple, Amazon, approved

#485

Post by dane-pgp » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 5:21 PM UTC

gostsamo wrote: post #207

brtkdotse wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not a popular opinion around here, but the reason I like my iPhone is _because_ it’s a walled garden. It just works, reliably, without surprises, for years on end.

Nothing stops you of staying in the garden though. Just don't install anything Apple and you'd be golden.

At first I thought you had missed a word or two ("don't install anything unapproved by Apple"?), but then I decided this was deliberate as you're making a reference to Adam and Eve.

Re: EU Digital Markets Act, aimed at Google, Apple, Amazon, approved

#486

Post by runako » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 5:24 PM UTC

donmcronald wrote: post #481

runako wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it is. All of the participants in an iMessage chat have consented to have their data stored by Apple. We can all do rough evaluations on how well we think Apple can protect our data. The wording in the Act appears to not place constraints on exactly what services must be able to interop with iMessage, and it says Apple can't preference iMessage. So presumably the blue bubbles have to go. This means that when cha…

> The issue is that when people use iMessage and see a blue bubble, they also know something about how the encryption keys are handled & who does the handling, etc. Realistically, the average person doesn't even know what an encryption key is and the average tech enthusiast doesn't know anything beyond "Apple handles everything". > So presumably the blue bubbles have to go. This means that when chatting in Messages n…

> average tech enthusiast doesn't know anything beyond "Apple handles everything".

The new law removes that person's ability to even discern this much.

> Why can't iMessage to iMessage be blue bubbles with iMessage to anything else being green bubbles?

This would pretty clearly be Apple preferring its own service over other services, and is prohibited under the new law.

I should be clear here: I think this law is clumsy and will have to be fixed or loosely enforced. But even if one is in favor of these changes, it's fair to acknowledge the reality that the law basically mandates a major change in the security posture of a billion deployed devices. One may still be in favor, but it's important not to lose sight of the fact that there are in fact compromises being made.

> Why are so many people convinced that consumer choice and security are mutually exclusive?

I am 100% not convinced this is true; security and choice can coexist. But this EU law does not aim at the goal of preserving security while increasing consumer choice. Which is strange, given how a consequence of a prior EU Act was the pollution of the Web with cookie banners. (I am aware these banners are not specifically required for many use cases, which is why I said this is a consequence of their Act and not something ordered by their Act.)

Re: EU Digital Markets Act, aimed at Google, Apple, Amazon, approved

#487

Post by Apocryphon » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 5:24 PM UTC

giantrobot wrote: post #363

This should have been named the Law of Unintended Consequences. In the most abstract, opening up mobile and messaging platforms is a Good Thing. Unfortunately it is going to cause a mass of real world problems and will have significant negative consequences. Requiring alternate App Stores will mean Facebook, Epic (Tencent), TikTok, and Scams R Us will all set up their own app stores. Their apps will slowly move to th…

I really think that setting up an alternative app store is more difficult than one can imagine:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31991394

Out of the ones you've listed, I think Epic has the highest likelihood to do it, not just because they were the only one to take substantiative legal action to try to force it, but because theirs is a platform that might actually offer compelling content that would give users a good reason to switch. (Though then again, plenty of iOS games will remain with the Apple Arcade, and I'm not sure what killer apps Epic has beyond Fortnite.)

If Facebook or TikTok moves their apps to a new app store without offering an additional app library of new content, users are going to be irate and it could end up backfiring on them. I think TikTok would stand a greater chance of doing that given that ByteDance is a Chinese company subject to that nation's regulations and policies, but I don't see attempts at a Meta, Google/Alphabet, or Amazon app store succeeding for long. App stores are hard, and even harder when your competitor owns the platform- I'm sure Apple can still exercise leverage over iOS beyond the App Store.

Re: EU Digital Markets Act, aimed at Google, Apple, Amazon, approved

#488

Post by elzbardico » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 5:27 PM UTC

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #256

MichaelCollins wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The apparent desire for paternalism unnerves me. Any time people are free to choose who they associate with, they run the risk of coming across bad actors who would scam them or worse. In most domains of life, we have special protections for the senile elderly and children but everybody else is given freedom and subsequently expected to develop and exercise a sense of good judgement, because freedom is more important…

> The apparent desire for paternalism unnerves me. I find the EU imposing these conditions, under threat of force, on Apple that sells a product that people are free to buy or not buy, much more paternalistic than anything Apple does.

Exactly. As if consumers needed to be protected from their own choices. Nobody is forced to buy apple. There are plenty of other manufacturers. Let the fucking market sort this.

Re: EU Digital Markets Act, aimed at Google, Apple, Amazon, approved

#489

Post by mgraczyk » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 5:28 PM UTC

MichaelCollins wrote: post #422

buscoquadnary wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also starts to bother me quite a bit when we go from treating everyone equal before the law to creating certain requirements based on other factors. Further it seems more like a moat to keep anyone else from getting as big as these "digital gatekeepers" are as suddenly when you get to a certain size you have an enormous expense. If these companies really are that large that they have to get special laws for them i…

> It also starts to bother me quite a bit when we go from treating everyone equal before the law to creating certain requirements based on other factors. Like tax brackets? Treating big things exactly the same as small things seems ideological, not rational.

Very different structurally. Tax brackets almost always apply _marginally_. The higher tax bracket only applies to income made above the higher bracket level.

Behavior that applies marginally avoids most "discontinuity" and distortions in incentives that come along with them. For example, people whose income increases from $99,999 to $100,001 are only incentivized by a 100,000 bracket to hide the marginal $2, rather than suddenly needing to hide all of their income.

EU regulations that apply to companies above a certain size are not like this. Once you pass a certain level, it applies to all the business below the level. That already has a distorting incentive on growth and incentivizes companies to stay small. Maybe that's something you want in this case, but it's almost always an unintended consequence.

Re: EU Digital Markets Act, aimed at Google, Apple, Amazon, approved

#490

Post by Apocryphon » Wed, Jul 20, 2022, 5:28 PM UTC

izacus wrote: post #281

fbanon wrote: post #192

What HackerNews thinks will happen: "zomg, I will finally be able to run Arch on my iPhone!" What will actually happen: "honey, something is wrong with my phone, whenever I unlock it, a popup jumps up that says 'Please update the Adobe™ Updater™ to get up to date Adobe™ Software Updates', could you take a look at it?"

In reality none of that will happen. The magical rockstar engineers of Apple will listen for their best in the world UX and handcraft artisanal UI that will respectfully explain users what causes the popup.

Not to mention use plenty of dark patterns to steer them away from it.

Not to mention the vast majority of users will not bother to deal with alternative app stores when the vast overwhelming majority of existing apps will remain on the official App Store.