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

Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#251

Post by zem »

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.

i am just flabbergasted that we are living in a timeline where the phrase "proprietary protocol" is a real thing

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#252

Post by 1123581321 »

MBCook wrote: post #186
makeitdouble wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Won't spammers just continue using the macos bridged other services instead of the direct to Apple way ?

What do you mean? There are no services bridged to iMessage.

He refers to Mac apps like AirMessage that relay information from iMessage’s SQLite database or control the screen, and are connected to a messages app on Android.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#253

Post by Despegar »

StressedDev wrote: post #143

One thing which is really confusing is why are Android users obsessed with iMessage? Android users can send text messages to iPhones, the can call iPhone users, and they can use third party messaging apps to communicate with iPhone users. It really isn’t clear to me why so many people are so angry they cannot use iMessage on Android.

It's just become a meme among tech enthusiasts (on Reddit, HN, etc) and tech journalists that "blue bubbles" are a real social problem. The origin of the meme was this amusing post by Paul Ford 8 years ago [1]. They took it and ran with it for their own purposes. For some it was to explain away the iPhone's success versus Android and for some interested actors like Epic it was part of their antitrust campaigning to illustrate the "lock in" effects. It however was never a social problem in the real world (more than, say, young people feeling depressed about seeing their peers' manicured lives on Instagram) or the reason why iPhones sell well (you only had to look to China, or now India, to see the success of the iPhone in places where iMessage wasn't the dominant messenger).

[1] https://archive.ph/OcDaO

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#254

Post by okdood64 »

KomoD wrote: post #144
etrautmann wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find this a bit confusing though. It seems like this was an inevitable outcome, but what do they gain from this technical investment aside from exposure. Their website doesn't steer users to anything other than the now cut-off Beeper mini?

They have another product, Beeper Cloud, does the same thing + includes a bunch of other messaging services but (as the name implies) runs in the "Cloud"

Wait, how do they run cloud with iMessage?

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#255

Post by [deleted] »

Grustaf wrote: post #225
CharlesW wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keep in mind that this is spin — Erik's statement is ridiculous, and he knows it. To think that Apple would somehow not treat Beeper like any other bad actor hacking iMessage protocols is delulu.

Sure, that's fair. But if he knows that, why spend the time to build this app in the first place? Is it a marketing play? It did buy them a whole lot of attention.

[deleted]

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#256

Post by mh8h »

makeitdouble wrote: post #118
blindriver wrote: post #108

As someone in tech, I think it's awesome they were able to find a way into iMessage. As an iPhone user, I hate the idea that spammers can now use iMessage, and I'm glad the service was taken down. Both things can be true at once.

Won't spammers just continue using the macos bridged other services instead of the direct to Apple way ?

If they have to use real Apple hardware, and those devices are blocklisted by Apple when the spam is reported, spamming stays cost prohibitive.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#257

Post by meepmorp »

bastard_op wrote: post #112

I knew that was going to happen, it's become a status symbol of like good vs. bad, the blue vs. green. Its become like a racial slur the blue vs. green, and that's exactly what Apple wants to sell cellphones. You can't contact the cool kids until you have a blue bubble, that means you're like, cool or something. You can message me if you can afford an iphone apparently.

> Its become like a racial slur the blue vs. green

Take a moment to say this out loud to yourself, so you can hear how fucking ridiculous it sounds. Notwithstanding the trivialization of actual racism, it's just a throughly silly statement.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#258

Post by johnbellone »

madeofpalk wrote: post #62
trynumber9 wrote: post #47

The EU should, like they did years ago with PC operating systems, mandate a default browser selection screen. And a default messenger selection screen. And a default app store selection screen. Not that we'd get it in the US but it would help reduce Apple/Google market capture efforts.

'Nobody' in the EU uses iMessage, even on iPhones. Everyone here already uses Whatsapp. This demonstrates a lack of a monopoly and how competition can flourish. Honestly - and EU-regulation that Apple faces over iMessage would just be collateral damage from EU targeting Whatsapp.

Every person I interact with in the EU uses iMessage. Let’s avoid making sweeping generalizations.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#259

Post by jeroenhd »

georgespencer wrote: post #219
LordDragonfang wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(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.wikipe…

> and Apple does not offer 2FA / OTPs via SMS

Last time I checked, Apple still used security questions any hacker can get answers to on Facebook. I'm not all that confident about Apple's approach to account security.

Apple has the ability to control security issues on Android: they can release an Android app, like every other E2EE messenger out there.

Apple chooses not to, and it's their choice, of course. It doesn't care about the privacy of it's non-users, and it doesn't care about the privacy of its users when they communicate with non-users. From what I can tell, it only cares if you stay within the Apple bubble.

Post reply on HN