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

Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

9to5mac.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 785 posts

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#421

Post by rlpb »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #180
glimshe wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In even more fairness, Meta has literally skipped the EU for Threads instead of increasing privacy. In their case, it's just a careful balance of virtue signaling, it had no qualms about pushing their spyware to hundreds of millions of people, violating basic human rights in the process. Check Article 12: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-huma...

Your comment would have been stronger if you left out the piece re: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, because it's an eye roller. Article 12 is: > No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. I'm no fan of Meta or the…

Arguably it's not the voluntary downloading of an app that's the problem; it's the mandatory government imposition of privacy interference across all apps.

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#422

Post by barbazoo »

thefurdrake wrote: post #253
barbazoo wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is taking away anyone's right to independent thought, at least for now. Patent was talking about privacy though, I'm not sure our species has a fundamental right to it, how did you arrive at that conclusion?

It's a bit difficult to grasp the reasoning behind humans not having the fundamental right to privacy. It seems like the right to privacy/private communication with other sentient creatures is corollary to the right to independent thought, since humans are fundamentally social creatures with an inbuilt need to communicate. I'm a bit curious how you arrived at the conclusion that you're "not sure our species has a fun…

> I'm a bit curious how you arrived at the conclusion that you're "not sure our species has a fundamental right to [privacy]". That seems like the absurd claim requiring actual support here, seeing as how privacy is the norm, not the other way around.

I didn't claim anything, I said I wasn't sure. Our species is much much older than the concept of privacy. Back when we were still sitting in trees there was no privacy. We decided that that was a thing quite a bit later. Now in the year 2023 I would say many of us see privacy as a fundamental human right though obviously and a privilege to defend.

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#423

Post by scarface_74 »

_cenw wrote: post #201
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment would have been stronger if you left out the piece re: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, because it's an eye roller. Article 12 is: > No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. I'm no fan of Meta or the…

> voluntarily downloading an app that's all true until an app becomes the only way to interact with certain groups of people. i certainly wouldn't call my usage of Discord voluntary. it doesn't actually matter how often i read their privacy policy and shake my head. either I break off contact with a large part of the internet that's important to me or I begrudgingly agree "voluntarily" to their terms and conditions.

Someone is forcing you to use Discord? An app that I personally have never used?

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#424

Post by throwmeback »

hiatus wrote: post #278
_cenw wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> voluntarily downloading an app that's all true until an app becomes the only way to interact with certain groups of people. i certainly wouldn't call my usage of Discord voluntary. it doesn't actually matter how often i read their privacy policy and shake my head. either I break off contact with a large part of the internet that's important to me or I begrudgingly agree "voluntarily" to their terms and conditions.

So what you're really complaining about is that other people will not follow your choices. If your relations have such a hard line that a single app is "the only way to interact with certain groups of people", they are the ones to blame, not the maker of the app.

I'm afraid life (at least mine) is way more complicated than that.

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#425

Post by olliej »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #320
mihaaly wrote: post #123

I wonder why the UK legislators not preparing a new regulation mandating every keys to every door and safe having a bypass mechanism for government officials. Behind every door and every locked place there could be child pornography and illicit materials hidden!! Every house, every hotel safe are suspects! Criminal oversight, criminal oversight! (and if they think their reasoning for backdoors into online chat and co…

I'll play Devil's Advocate (because I enjoy throwing myself into the fray — especially when arguing against a point I actually agree with). No one is mass-sharing their safe of child-porn worldwide with thousands of other child-porn voyeurs. The internet and its ubiquitous accessibility combined with digital image file formats has changed the landscape for those that would fight these heinous crimes. It is indeed a n…

> No one is mass-sharing their safe …

They literally are though? Numerous cases of child abusers abusing their children and publishing the footage of it from their homes, not to mention the mass storage and hosting (hosting _may_ be less common now).

People physically abuse their family and children at scale (domestic violence is not rare), a really good way to stop this would be to mandate cameras and microphones in everyone’s houses.

Don’t worry though: to see/hear recordings from inside someone’s house police will need a warrant.

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#426

Post by scarface_74 »

_cenw wrote: post #224
dmbche wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

May I ask, what compels you to use discord if it's not voluntary? It's absolutely impossible to use keybase or signal?

Have you ever actually tried to convince a non-technical friend or family member to use a different platform for communicating? Now try that with 10 people at the same time. The only reason Discord ever became successful is the huge vacuum of good UX that existed before it. A fragmentation of Skype, Steam, XFire, Teamspeak, Vent and Mumble. Jabber if you were playing certain MMOs. Signal and Keybase aren't even close…

> Have you ever actually tried to convince a non-technical friend or family member to use a different platform for communicating

How many non technical people have heard of Discord?

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#427

Post by indymike »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #180
glimshe wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In even more fairness, Meta has literally skipped the EU for Threads instead of increasing privacy. In their case, it's just a careful balance of virtue signaling, it had no qualms about pushing their spyware to hundreds of millions of people, violating basic human rights in the process. Check Article 12: https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-huma...

Your comment would have been stronger if you left out the piece re: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, because it's an eye roller. Article 12 is: > No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. I'm no fan of Meta or the…

>> No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation

If I cannot attack the honor and reputation of a person, and by extension, artificial person like a corporation, what good is freedom of speech? How can I call someone out for being a scammer, or for doing horrible things? How does one seek public redress of a grievance against a company, or an agent of the government? Does arbitrary apply to timing, or the circumstance? Who is the arbiter of arbitrary? This is not a human right. It is a nice tool for a tyrannical government to strip away rights from people. Oh, you've violated Mr. Arresting Officer by accusing him of falsely arresting you. Now you get to deal with the false arrest and a human rights crime. Likewise, Ms. Bought a Mansion with Public Money can no longer be accused because she has a human right to not have to trifle with public accountability.

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#428

Post by FormerBandmate »

mihaaly wrote: post #123

I wonder why the UK legislators not preparing a new regulation mandating every keys to every door and safe having a bypass mechanism for government officials. Behind every door and every locked place there could be child pornography and illicit materials hidden!! Every house, every hotel safe are suspects! Criminal oversight, criminal oversight! (and if they think their reasoning for backdoors into online chat and co…

That’s called bolt cutters

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#429

Post by nashashmi »

JPws_Prntr_Fngr wrote: post #328
nashashmi wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actions like this is why I used to trust Google. Fighting government overreach should have been a critical part of technology and data. But it seems Google was more political in its relationships than idealistic. And now the entire sector is compromised. Apple will be one day compromised too. In some crevice of some unknown government office is a person working on a ten-year initiative to get access to inaccessible i…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM Apple is a participant in the NSA's PRISM mass surveillance program. They've been compromised for a long time. I doubt any decent sized corporation isn't.

I am going to give them the benefit of doubt in the case of PRISM. It is not clear whether PRISM is the result of forced/voluntary participation, or the result of vulnerabilities found in their systems. Because of the diagrams in the PRISM powerpoint mentioning some of the integration is "coming soon", I feel it is definitely not legally coerced, otherwise everyone would participate at once. Also due to the integration having varying limits from service to service tells me this not given to NSA on a silver platter. Lastly, the outright denial of these companies further tells me that they are unaware.

PRISM is the result of vulnerabilities found and purchased from hackers. And integrated together in a project codenamed PRISM. Each source has different levels of information sharing. And with Dropbox being a less integrated and more primitive resource for search, I know the entire PRISM program was a gum and shoestring project.

Re: Apple says it'll remove iMessage and FaceTime in UK rather than break encryption

#430

Post by graypegg »

detourdog wrote: post #50
graypegg wrote: post #8

I do like how Apple has backed themselves into a consumer-protecting hole here. I’m sure they would love to have access to that much conversational data themselves, of which no other company has access to. If Siri ever improves too significantly I’ll get nervous.

I don't think so. There are people in the world that don't want to pry into other's lives. Collecting un-needed data on people is Nixonian. I think Apple managed to understand and attract those types of customers. I find a generational disconnect between the 70's computer users and the user in the 00's.

I don’t think it’s possible for a company as big as Apple to act solely on principle. We’re just lucky the profit motive aligned with consumer privacy for once.

Untainted (without ML-generated content) human communication is becoming more and more scarce. It’s only a matter of time before they take advantage of that.

They'll forbid any app using ML generated content from providing iMessage extensions, or possibly it’ll receive a warning mark in iMessage when sent. Could also work with content pasted from those apps. Some sort of “provenance check”. They’ll pitch it as a consumer privacy thing, I promise.

That’ll also be the same update where E2E encryption falls off the the marketing.

There is very much a motivation to access massive amounts of user data, especially when you control the OS that would be the gate keeper to that data, as well as how the “choice” is presented to the end user.

Post reply on HN