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

We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

ifixit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 367 posts

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#301

Post by dang »

paulmd wrote: post #291
dang wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please not post in the flamewar style to HN? We're trying for something different here, and we've had ask you this many times before—that's not cool. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

It’s a shame you don’t have rules against advocating for violent criminal conduct! One would really hope that would be addressed before tone-policing the criticisms of that.

If a post is unambiguously "advocating for violent criminal conduct" that's one thing, but I don't think your interpretation is something most people would call obvious. In fact, one could argue that it's another way in which you broke the site guidelines, which include: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

It's not actually in your interest to argue aggressively or abusively, because it undermines the point you're trying to make. I know it's frustrating when people don't get the truth of your points and/or repeat false claims, but the proper way to deal with that is to make better arguments and/or communicate more clearly, not to fulminate against the community or throw your weight around.

For example, it sounds like you have a great point in your GP comment: the parts are known to be stolen because the lockout was sent. But this information gets eclipsed by the putdowns, snark, etc., which made up the majority of your post.

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#302

Post by austhrow743 »

pzo wrote: post #206
wyldberry wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are more robberies than a mugging. Pick pockets are a real scourge. If you have a reliable way to turn stolen goods into currency, you are incentivized to take that item. Jewelry -> pawn shops for example. The anti-theft measure here makes it not profitable, or much harder to profit, from taking a phone because you can't resell it or strip the valuable parts. I had a friend get pick pocketed in spain, and the n…

Do you think pickpocketer take your phone out of your pocket, check it then say "oh shit this is iphone 15 with DRM" and put it back to your pocket ? Pickpocketers will fish anything that is in your pocket and in crowded public transport immediately pass to other partner in crime. Same with thefts on scooter that rob woman with bags - they don't check if it's prada bag or if has any valuables inside. Same with thefts…

Any impact isn't going to happen on the individual pickpocket level. It would be by making the industry unprofitable.

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#303

Post by autoexec »

ChadNauseam wrote: post #272
shortcake27 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m highly dubious of anyone claiming this reduces crime. Things being easy to steal and sell aren’t the _cause_ of crime, they’re a symptom. If someone has felt the need to resort to a life of crime for whatever reason, how is lowering their “salary” (so to speak) going to reduce crime? Surely they now need to steal more phones to make up the difference? I guess you could argue they might commit a different crime in…

Maybe people resort to a life of crime because it makes them money and they like money, not because they have no other option. People readily accept that rich people do morally wrong things (like exploit their employees etc) for more money. So why assume that the only reason people in general would do morally wrong things is because they need to to feed their family?

> So why assume that the only reason people in general would do morally wrong things is because they need to to feed their family?

I don't think anyone has ever made that claim, but people do tend to do what's easy/convenient and it's a lot easier and more convenient to put in 8 hours in a safe climate-controlled office where you get medical benefits and a salary you can depend on than it is to go out every night mugging people or trying to pick pockets, then trying to figure out how to sell your stolen goods, all without getting killed, robbed yourself, or caught by police.

Most people need to make money somehow and nobody is picking the most dangerous, risky, effort intensive means to make that money when they have other options readily available.

The harder it is for someone to make money doing anything other than commit crimes the more likely they will be to commit crime and for some people (those with few resources, and addictions and/or past criminal records for example) it can be very very hard to get and maintain legitimate employment.

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#304

Post by skeaker »

dang wrote: post #301
paulmd wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a shame you don’t have rules against advocating for violent criminal conduct! One would really hope that would be addressed before tone-policing the criticisms of that.

If a post is unambiguously "advocating for violent criminal conduct" that's one thing, but I don't think your interpretation is something most people would call obvious. In fact, one could argue that it's another way in which you broke the site guidelines, which include: " Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith. " -…

I appreciate the way you put this, dang. You're right that I was misinterpreted: I am advocating for a way to unlock the (perfectly good and fully functional) parts that doesn't involve throwing them away and buying new ones. I'm upset that Apple has gone the route of remote bricking with no recourse but to throw them away, not complaining that Apple is making theft harder. Painting me as a "violent criminal" for that is certainly the least generous interpretation of my post.

As for why this misinterpretation happened, I think the other poster here assumes that parts that throw this error were stolen. TFA states that this is not the case, but that any part swap at all will trigger it, such as moving parts from your old phone with a broken screen to your new phone.

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#305

Post by mholm »

pzo wrote: post #206
wyldberry wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are more robberies than a mugging. Pick pockets are a real scourge. If you have a reliable way to turn stolen goods into currency, you are incentivized to take that item. Jewelry -> pawn shops for example. The anti-theft measure here makes it not profitable, or much harder to profit, from taking a phone because you can't resell it or strip the valuable parts. I had a friend get pick pocketed in spain, and the n…

Do you think pickpocketer take your phone out of your pocket, check it then say "oh shit this is iphone 15 with DRM" and put it back to your pocket ? Pickpocketers will fish anything that is in your pocket and in crowded public transport immediately pass to other partner in crime. Same with thefts on scooter that rob woman with bags - they don't check if it's prada bag or if has any valuables inside. Same with thefts…

It's about EV per phone. The more security, the lower the EV. Eventually, it isn't even worth it for informed, career pickpockets to take it. There'll always be pickpockets, but phones are much less of a target because of measures like these.

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#306

Post by lm28469 »

adesanmi wrote: post #57

When people stop robbing phones for them to end up in Shenzen and stripped for parts, this will stop. This is a deterrent to make stealing iPhones less convenient and I’m all for it. People already have to try to phish people’s iCloud details after stealing their devices to resell, costing them time and money and making it more annoying to try and steal. I do think people who want to repair their phone should have ac…

none of my phones have been stolwn

all of them had parts replaced, some of them multiple times

I'd much rather pay for theft insurance than have to pay 10x for parts replacement

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#307

Post by Chatting »

I don't find the "theft prevention" argument raised by many of the comments here particularly convincing.

If the concern is to prevent the resale of stolen devices or parts, Apple could simply provide users with a way to report the device as stolen (e.g. via iCloud.com), which would put the serial numbers of both the device and its parts into a blacklist. Problem solved.

Instead, the current system effectively assumes that ALL parts coming from a different device must've been "illegally obtained", which is nonsense.

You can do theft prevention without actively making independent repair shops' lives miserable. But Apple's goal is to make independent repair shops' lives miserable; theft is just a pretext. Just look at their track record, from the humble pentalobe screw all the way to the repair program NDAs.

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#308

Post by Terretta »

Everyone is debating whether "theft prevention" is the valid argument.

That's like banks blaming you for "identity theft". No, the bank failed to safeguard your identity or validate your transactions.

Similarly here, the valid argument, and target of such changes, is unscrupulous “repair” shops, aka the market makers for these stolen parts.

Whether cars, or phones, after-market repairs are riddled with hazards, and it's not those shops that end up in the news when someone's brakes fail, tire treads separate at speed, or a Samsung or iPhone explodes their face off.

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#309

Post by vineyardmike »

jchw wrote: post #73
vineyardmike wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“No one has stolen my phone so I don’t believe that actions to stop phone theft is necessary” I’ve heard plenty of stories of people getting their phones stolen in public. Especially when I was in school, we’d hear of plots like kids coming up to students and asking to call their parents because they’re scared and alone only to run over to a car waiting around the corner and drive away. You can argue it’s unnecessary…

I didn't make that argument at all, so it's pretty annoying that you've cornered me into arguing it. I really don't respect when people do this. I never, ever argued against "actions to stop it". I argued against this action. I never argued that my anecdata that my phone has never been stolen means that all action against theft are unnecessary, but I believe it is good cause for me to want a phone that doesn't have e…

No one is forcing you to argue that position. You said “my phone has never been stolen… Apple shouldn’t solve this… sell me a steal-able phone”.

My counter is that a primary reason you never had a stolen phone is the anti-theft solutions implemented by private companies.

Personally, I think removing the incentives to theft is a great way to reduce it, and this is particularly effective. Sure repair-ability would be nice, but I repair it so infrequently and it’s sufficiently cheap that I don’t mind. As an example, expecting the police to successfully hunt and remedy every petty theft of all the phones that would be stolen instead would be a lot less resource efficient for society. We have enough crime as is that the police have better things to do than fail to find a lost phone.

Re: We are retroactively dropping the iPhone’s repairability score

#310

Post by vineyardmike »

danaris wrote: post #76
webworker wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have been recent stories about how thieves were looking at people entering their passcodes into their phones, snatching the phone when it was unlocked and using the pin to disable iCloud/Find My.

...You can't use the device PIN to disable iCloud. You have to put in the iCloud password. And you really do have to put it in; even if the iPhone is unlocked, security features like that always require the password.

So it’s possible, and there’s countless articles explaining how.

But at face level… your phone is so personal that it’s pretty easy to mess with basically all of your life.

When you have someone’s unlocked phone, you can usually get access to their emails, and use that to reset most accounts. Finances, social, emails, often work etc.

Here’s the WSJ explanation if you want:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/apple-iphone-security-theft-pas...

Post reply on HN