Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#211

Post by graphe » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:44 PM UTC

LordDragonfang wrote: post #189

graphe wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good? RCS isn't universal. Am I gonna be sending and receiving Google, Verizon, TMobile, or Samsung messages? It's not universally encrypted either. No way am I turning it on.

So instead of being possibly unencrypted RCS when sending outside iMessage, you'd rather guarantee it be unencrypted?

The only texts I get are unwanted spam or some confirmation codes and no it is not worth it to use RCS with the amount of unsent messages it keeps having problems with, maybe for some "possible encryption". It is trash all the way around.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#212

Post by iAMkenough » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:44 PM UTC

georgespencer wrote: post #190

maxlin wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since apple has no control over your fire extinguisher, they sent a man to securely take it from your house and dispose of it. It could have been a bomb for all you know.

Do you really consider Apple's control over a proprietary protocol which they invented and maintain to be comparable to a scenario in which Apple "sends a man" to take "your fire extinguisher […] from your house"? I've re-written this comment five or six times in an attempt to find the most charitable interpretation, but I just cannot comprehend how it made it through your filter and out onto the internet.

There's an open standard they're refusing to adopt that would be more secure than forcing users back to SMS.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#213

Post by StressedDev » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:44 PM UTC

focusedone wrote: post #20

Why can't we have nice things?

I suspect you are asking why Apple will not allow Beeper Mini to send and receive iMessages. The answer is probably Apple does not want non-customers to use iMessage or iMessage’s infrastructure. iMessage costs money to run and Apple is not interested in letting people who do not use its products use iMessage.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#214

Post by greyface- » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:44 PM UTC

sbuk wrote: post #177

z7 wrote: post #114

This is a wake-up call. It's high time we demand open-source messaging standards across all platforms. Imagine a world where communication isn't dictated by corporate interests but by user needs and innovation.

> It's high time we demand open-source messaging standards across all platforms. What, like this https://github.com/signalapp ? The only thing holding this back are end users. Not corporations or governments. A safe, vetable 'standard' exists, it just needs ratifying by a standards body. It is available cross platform and is free of charge and free-as-in-beer (mostly AGPL I believe). Messages app exists to send SMS,…

Signal isn't a protocol; it's a centralized service that wants you to use their official client only. The Signal Foundation gets weird and starts making trademark threats whenever someone makes moves towards interoperability (see e.g. https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issueco...).

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#215

Post by Grustaf » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:44 PM UTC

CivBase wrote: post #113

Grustaf wrote: post #81

> "if Apple truly cares about the privacy and security of their own iPhone users, why would they stop a service that enables their own users to now send encrypted messages to Android users, rather than using unsecure SMS?" - Eric Migicovsky 1. If Apple sees this as a gap, it is very obvious that they would address that themselves, rather than by allowing a hack to exploit loopholes in their architecture 2. Since Appl…

> 2. Since Apple has no control over the Beeper mini client, they would not consider it safe, it could easily be spying on users without their knowledge. Since I have no control over iMessage, I would not consider it safe. It could easily be spying on me without my knowledge.

As pointed out below, "they" is Apple, but I would also assume that at least 99.9% (really) of users would trust Apple more than Beeper, i they had to choose.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#216

Post by echelon » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:44 PM UTC

maxlin wrote: post #153

Grustaf wrote: post #81

> "if Apple truly cares about the privacy and security of their own iPhone users, why would they stop a service that enables their own users to now send encrypted messages to Android users, rather than using unsecure SMS?" - Eric Migicovsky 1. If Apple sees this as a gap, it is very obvious that they would address that themselves, rather than by allowing a hack to exploit loopholes in their architecture 2. Since Appl…

Since apple has no control over your fire extinguisher, they sent a man to securely take it from your house and dispose of it. It could have been a bomb for all you know.

It's time that we as an industry push back against Apple and Google.

The smartphone is the single most important device for modern life and society. It's news, photos, communications with loved ones, work, entertainment, food, paying for practically everything...

And it's just two companies. Two companies with an iron grip over such a wide and diverse set of functionalities that, taken together, should be as inalienable as free speech.

- They control what you can put on the devices (or in the cases where they're open, they scare you or make it exceedingly difficult).

- They tax all innovation happening on the platform. Because web is second class. If you build an app, you have to pay for ads against your own brand. You can't have a customer relationship (yet Google and Apple get that). You have to keep up with their release cycles on their timeline. They can deny you or ban you at any point. They take 30% of your margin. You're forced to use their billing. In many cases, they actively develop software that competes with you.

- They're extremely user hostile. The devices aren't easily repairable, the batteries force upgrade cycles, and they do stupid things that make your kids want to buy the most expensive model for clout. Green and blue bubbles, etc.

- On top of this, they're gradually eating away at every related industry. The music industry. The credit cards and payments and finance industry. The film industry. It's all getting absorbed into the blob that is the locked down smartphone.

- They turn their devices into "CSAM detection dragnets" (read: five eyes, US, China, and every other entity that wants to surveil).

This is fucking absurd and it needs to stop.

We need more than two device and platform manufactures.

Apps should be at least one of: (1) portable, (2) freely installable from the web without scare tactics, (3) web should be first class / native

The device provider shouldn't be able to use their platform play to maintain dominance. The cost of switching should be zero until there are enough new peer-level competitors.

I could keep going... the status quo is a tax on the public, a tax on innovation, and a really overall unfortunate situation.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#217

Post by cirrus3 » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:44 PM UTC

Building a startup around this neat trick was always as doomed. It is incredible the amount of delusion they would have needed to assume this was sustainable.

Edit: not a whole company, just a side project within a company I guess. Still, seems like a waste of time/effort to have even attempted.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#218

Post by rglullis » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:44 PM UTC

judge2020 wrote: post #93

rglullis wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's think higher than that. Let's just get rid of megacorporations: let's mandate that any company with more than amount of X employees should be broken down into smaller divisions, with a separate board and CEO, and make it that no one can be on more than one board at the same time. Make X low enough, 250, and all of this would go away: no more corporatism, no more monopolies, no more special groups interests payi…

Sure, it might seem appealing to do this now, but had this existed 20 years ago the convenience and pros of the Apple ecosystem wouldn't exist. You don't get the hardware+software experience that Apple provides. You'd get stuff like handoff (such as the handoff to Homepod functionality where you tap your phone to the top of it) maybe 10 years later when enough people finally get together to make a standard for it. Ap…

You make it sound like that is bad thing.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#219

Post by georgespencer » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:45 PM UTC

LordDragonfang wrote: post #145

Grustaf wrote: post #81

> "if Apple truly cares about the privacy and security of their own iPhone users, why would they stop a service that enables their own users to now send encrypted messages to Android users, rather than using unsecure SMS?" - Eric Migicovsky 1. If Apple sees this as a gap, it is very obvious that they would address that themselves, rather than by allowing a hack to exploit loopholes in their architecture 2. Since Appl…

(1) is exactly what that quote is pointing out. If Apple actually cared about its users' security, they would see this as a gap, and would have addressed it already. The fact that they haven't means that, despite all their posturing about being a security-first platform, they care more about lock-in and marketing than they do about user security.

Putting aside that I count at least two glaring examples from this list[^1] in your reply, I suspect Apple would argue that it is in fact _solely_ preoccupied with its users' security: that's why iMessage is end to end encrypted and Apple does not offer 2FA / OTPs via SMS. Apple does not generally try to mitigate security issues which are beyond its control (e.g. non-Apple devices, protocols).

[^1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#220

Post by tiltowait » Fri, Dec 08, 2023, 11:45 PM UTC

tiahura wrote: post #127

dmillar wrote: post #65

As usual, Gruber was right on the money. Via Threads yesterday: "My prediction is that Apple will make changes—fixing bugs and/or closing loopholes—that break Beeper Mini. It’s untenable that there’s unsanctioned client software for a messaging platform for which privacy and security are a primary feature. It’s a very nice app, remarkably clever, and for now works like a charm, but if Apple wanted an iMessage client…

Not sure that's worth much congratulation. Is there anyone that didn't think the exact same thing as soon as they saw the story?

I heard/saw quite a few people saying Apple either couldn't or wouldn't cut them off—and that even if they did, it would take a while. They were ridiculous takes, yes, but apparently made in earnest.