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

EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

protocol.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 645 posts

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#291

Post by afiori »

fnordpiglet wrote: post #278
idiotsecant wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it is actually going to make things worse, that's what regulation does in most cases. Yes all those regulations that actually make things worse. Which ones are those again? specifically? I find that generally people who make hand-wavey boogeyman 'regulation is bad' arguments typically struggle to identify which regulations are bad and why, and conveniently forget about the thousands of regulations that make their li…

Please accept all cookies to receive your response.

I think that I will decline those, I hope that the response wasn't too important

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#293

Post by mort96 »

baby wrote: post #289
mort96 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your criticism of the companies who time and time again decide to utterly destroy their user experience just so that they can spy on people. They should avoid that. But you didn't respond to the regulations thing.

It made browsing the web an inferior experience for all users. Come on. Let’s not continue this charade and just accept a valid argument when you see one

I agree. These companies are making the web a worse experience for all users. I wish they would stop.

At the very least I get the option to not be tracked on those shitty websites, but I would really, really have preferred if they didn't make me go through all those intentionally confusing and probably illegal steps to opt out of tracking.

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#295

Post by dghlsakjg »

theloco wrote: post #176
mattrighetti wrote: post #165

This sounds nice, but when you really think about the consequences it really is not. Isn't this going to kill features that only some apps have or offer? What if one day Signal, Telegram or WhatsApp want to implement something "different" that could make messaging better but this policy is making things harder to implement because it would be impossible to make it interoperate with other messaging apps? I don't get w…

>I don't get why you would regulate such a thing The job of most government officials is to find plausible solutions to real problems, get a mob engaged and mobilized to solve it, then get the money voted into play so they can extract it via kickbacks and other indirect payments from the contractors. They're gonna be trying to regulate anything they think is capable of justifying the racket. Example: Youtube.com 17mi…

Healthcare.gov was famously a boondoggle, and did have to be rebuilt. But comparing a notorious failure to a generational success is a bit disingenuous. To say that no one uses healthcare.gov is also a bit disingenuous. It set a record for signups in 2022 at 16 million plans sold.

For a different comparison, why don't we look at Uber: it has market dominance to the point of being a verb, yet it loses more money per year than Healthcare.gov has cost in its entire existence.

Also, worth noting is that dozens of states managed the Obamacare site rollouts just fine as an example of government managing tech projects just fine.

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#296

Post by afiori »

baby wrote: post #289
mort96 wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your criticism of the companies who time and time again decide to utterly destroy their user experience just so that they can spy on people. They should avoid that. But you didn't respond to the regulations thing.

It made browsing the web an inferior experience for all users. Come on. Let’s not continue this charade and just accept a valid argument when you see one

The cookie warnings are mostly useless, but the cookie consent popups are mostly good, now it is possible to block a lot more tracking.

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#297

Post by mxuribe »

tekknik wrote: post #205
rkangel wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution I use to minimise this is Element One ( https://element.io/element-one ). This is a paid for service that operates bridges from Matrix to Signal, WhatsApp and Telegram. I then get to communicate with all those contacts in one place (I'm on Android so iMessage not a problem). I signed up the moment it came out and they had some teething reliability problems for a while, but it's been great for months now.…

Matrix comes up quite often here. Tell me why, even as a nerd, I want to run a server and get my friends and family to join to chat, instead of them opening the built in app and just having at. This is a non-starter.

> ...Tell me why, even as a nerd, I want to run a server...

Actually, you have the *choice* to run a server or not. (Conceptually similar to old school email, you can live on your own server, or live on someone else's servers.) For matrix (or heck even for email) if you do not wish to manage your own server, there are free and paid services that you can leverage.

> ...instead of them opening the built in app and just having at...

This is not clear to me if you were referring to Apple to open up their app or if you meant matrix. Because i agree that Apple should open up their app....Even though i am a matrix fan. More open apps helps everyone involved to communications plaforms (including and especially users). But, if you meant for matrix to have their app open...well, matrix is the open protocol, and there are already many opened apps, such as Element, Cinny, Fluffychat, Schilid, etc.

> ...and get my friends and family to join to chat...

Yeah, no matter if Apple opens up or not, the network effect of asking/hoping friends/family join something else is real and non-trivial. Matrix won't solve that alone, because its not necessarily a tech-only problem. My personal hope is that - whether it is matrix protocol and associated clients, servers or something else entirely - i do wish we had some universal, open protocol that allowed for everyone, everywhere to chat...and which was not controlled by a few, powerful entities.

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#298

Post by dijit »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #272
wildpeaks wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On that note, I think the GDPR banner problem won't be solved until the UI is shown at the browser level, just like tracking permission dialogs on mobile: having the same UI for all sites would prevent tricking users into over-complicated form because at least it would be the same form everytime. Right now, too many end users get fatigue fooled into blaming the EU rather than the companies tracking them, whereas on m…

My understanding of GDPR, et. al. is that you don't need consent to use cookies. You need consent to use tracking cookies, third party cookies, and any cookie that isn't essential to the use of the app. So for me, that reads as anytime I am asked about consent, it is an admission that the site is using my data/adding cookies in a way that is unnecessary and invasive. Automatically decline!

According to my Lawyers in Switzerland, this is the correct interpretation.

I'm working at removing google analytics from my product site specifically because it means I don't need a cookie consent popup any longer, despite supporting log in (which will set an actually essential, non-third-party cookie).

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#299

Post by afiori »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #218
mh- wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't there only, say, two or three companies that fit that criteria? The legislators may as well have called them out by name.

well this is the way legislation works, it's considered bad form to call them out by name so you choose some few characteristics that apply to them which has the side benefit that if in the future some other company comes along with those characteristics the same laws apply to them.

Also I am quite sure that such a law would be unconstitutional in a lot of places.

Re: EU will require Apple to open up iMessage (2022)

#300

Post by rTX5CMRXIfFG »

I can't quite wrap my head around why people think that it is a good thing for Apple to be regulated into "opening up" (i.e. as opposed to being a "walled garden" platform).

If I were an entrepreneur, and say that I wanted to fork a Unix-like OS so that I could make a cross-device OS for consumer hardware that I, too, make---shouldn't I have the right to program my OS to seamlessly integrate only with the apps and the hardware that I want it to seamlessly integrate with (i.e., mine), because my suite of apps and hardware is exactly the kind of platform that I want to offer? Isn't it regulatory overreach when lawmakers are dictating how an OS should be designed and how a company should differentiate its product from the rest of the market?

Post reply on HN