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

751–760 of 785 posts

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

#751

Post by _cenw »

scarface_74 wrote: post #734
_cenw wrote: post #728

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Essentially everyone my age and down? I'm a late millennial. If the number in your name is your birth year I'm not too surprised, but don't assume you can project from your own experience onto others 1:1.

How many millennials on down are “non technical” at least to the point that they can’t download an app?

You are a very ignorant if you think there is no barrier to getting someone to try an app with a substantially less good UX than what someone's currently using, and that that barrier doesn't border impossible in a group of 10.

I can't even get my wife to install Element - and she works in tech as a senior python / automation engineer. People want neatness on their phone and low total complexity, and installing a messenger for a single person is over the line for most.

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

#752

Post by _cenw »

scarface_74 wrote: post #737
_cenw wrote: post #729

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are rude enough that I'm tempted to say "OK Boomer" because you clearly are a different generation with no insight into mine.

So is there now a law saying that you must use Discord?

I'm flagging this, this must be trolling.

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

#753

Post by jon_adler »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #655
ashton314 wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like this vein of argument: assume that it is good that the government be able to snoop on your text messages. Why not in-person conversations as well? OK, let's make it so everything you say gets recorded. Eesh.

> Assume that it is good that the government be able to snoop on your text messages. Why not in-person conversations as well? Playing devil's advocate: in most US states, the FBI can in fact plant someone with a wire to record a private conversation. They don't have the resources to record all in-person conversations, but maybe they would if they could.

Isn’t a warrant required in advance to place the recording device? Many unencrypted messages will be recorded automatically and be retrievable indefinitely.

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

#754

Post by blitz_skull »

f6v wrote: post #269
blitz_skull wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong. Society is just a social construct, but your right to independent thought and agency, which is powered by privacy, are fundamental to the human experience.

Having rights is a social construct. Unless you believe in divine order of things. But I suspect there’s nothing in physical reality that requires any rights to be granted to anyone.

If having rights is a social construct as opposed to a universal truth, then you don't have any rights at all. You have temporary granted permissions, but not fundamental rights.

As such, it's much more likely that they are universally true rather than a result of human consensus.

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

#755

Post by blitz_skull »

danShumway wrote: post #406
blitz_skull wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are not human rights. Privacy, on the other hand, is.

I'll push back on this. I think that Right to Modify[0] is a human right. I think that software freedom and user agency (especially where it relates to vendor lock-in) is closely related to human rights, in the sense that it can directly impact people's ability to express those rights. To say that right to repair in specific isn't a human right because the actual human right is agency/ownership/modification/whatever,…

Sure, I'll agree they're closely aligned but software freedom and "user" agency (I'm guessing as opposed to general human agency?) require software to be relevant and therefore I wouldn't say they're universal human rights.

Important? To be sure. Just not "rights".

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

#756

Post by jjav »

xp84 wrote: post #694
jjav wrote: post #627

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Where to draw the line? It's definitely murky. It shouldn't be murky at all. For all of the history of humanity, privacy has been the default state. I could talk to people face to face (what used to be the only way) and it was by default private. I could keep written notes and records and they were by default private. There were special-case mechanisms to violate that privacy (e.g. search warrants, targeted spying)…

> special-case mechanisms to violate that privacy (e.g. search warrants, targeted spying)… go through a process with some checks and balances. I don't have any objection to this type of spying I think this is why it’s such a hot issue though. E2E Encryption is a “get out of all surveillance free card.” Even a mildly trained criminal or terrorist can easily guarantee that his communications will never be intercepted.…

> E2E Encryption is a “get out of all surveillance free card.”

That's the misdirection the pro-surveillance agencies use but it's not true at all.

People still ultimately exist in meatspace (as it used to be called). If you get a warrant based on legitimate suspicion to follow someone, you can assign detectives to follow them, plant bugs in their home, wire up collaborators and all the endless techniques that were used before the internet was around. People are still people and they walk around in the real world, they can be spied upon.

Sure, it's not as easy as sitting back in the DA office and spying on everyone all day long with zero effort, but it should not be. When the power is given to remove fundamental rights to privacy from someone, it needs to be based on a legitimate process and it must take effort. If it is zero-effort it will be relentlessly abused.

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

#757

Post by pms »

hiatus wrote: post #506
vbo wrote: post #419

I feel we've been collectively losing the battle to keep our conversations private. The anti-encryption laws are likely vocally opposed only by a minority, while the majority believes they had no privacy to begin with and governments can read your messages at a whim. And perhaps that's true to some extent. But since most people believe the battle is lost, moreso that this has always been the status quo, then any batt…

It's crazy that we allow this at all. The government can't observe clandestine conversations that occur in person, does that mean they can mandate us to carry a government recording device? That people don't equally balk at requests to encumber encryption is baffling.

I don't think it's that crazy if you trust the government to use these capabilities in the intended ways, that is to catch serious crimes. The US is a very specific country, because here people have very low trust in government and public institutions, which is why public good endeavors are less developed here, while corporations do whatever they want, as long as it seems legal. Many people would argue that's a bad thing for public good...

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

#758

Post by qweurisjskgi »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #668
kergonath wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the end the choice is simple: follow local laws or drop features or devices. The calculation is going to be different in each country, but there is no hypocrisy here. The Chinese government messing with Chinese servers affect the Chinese market, which makes a lot of money so there is a strong incentive to remain in it. The UK backdooring FaceTime compromises it for the rest of the world and would actually put Appl…

Companies are made up of people, who absolutely have stances.

But they’re not the same stances. And it’s not one person making every decision.

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

#759

Post by scarface_74 »

_cenw wrote: post #751
scarface_74 wrote: post #734

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many millennials on down are “non technical” at least to the point that they can’t download an app?

You are a very ignorant if you think there is no barrier to getting someone to try an app with a substantially less good UX than what someone's currently using, and that that barrier doesn't border impossible in a group of 10. I can't even get my wife to install Element - and she works in tech as a senior python / automation engineer. People want neatness on their phone and low total complexity, and installing a mess…

You have insults I have numbers. We are not the same…

> You are a very ignorant if you think there is no barrier to getting someone to try an app with a substantially less good UX than what someone's currently using, and that that barrier doesn't border impossible in a group of 10.

Yet many people do have multiple messaging apps.

And Discord the one you think is so popular is not even in the top 10…

https://www.statista.com/statistics/258749/most-popular-glob...

They aren’t counting iMessage as a separate app. But do you really think it wouldn’t rank above Discord?

> I can't even get my wife to install Element - and she works in tech as a senior python / automation engineer.

Maybe your enlightened millennial friends and family aren’t as willing to change as you think they are?

> People want neatness on their phone and low total complexity,

Yet the average person has 35 apps on their phone

https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/marketing-strategies/app-and...

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

#760

Post by scarface_74 »

_cenw wrote: post #752
scarface_74 wrote: post #737

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So is there now a law saying that you must use Discord?

I'm flagging this, this must be trolling.

So his use of Discord is “not voluntary” even though it doesn’t rank as one of the top 7 messenger apps?
Post reply on HN