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

721–730 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#721

Post by Terretta »

HenryBemis wrote: post #670
russelg wrote: post #336

Where is the hacker spirit here? The number of Apple apologists that have crawled out to say "see? I told you so!!" is saddening. It is a bit dicey when you're charging for it, but since Mini was entirely client-side it would be feasible for a free version to exist. Apple claims iMessage is E2EE, do we have proof they aren't siphoning the messages from the client once it's been decrypted? The level of trust we have t…

> siphoning the messages from the client once it's been decrypted? If you got iCloud backup enabled then they absolutely siphone everything that happens on your phone. And the disgusting part is that when enabling a new iphone it automatically has it switched on. I remember the case with some terrorists that Apple have to the US authorities everything on the dude's iCloud backups, but the authorities weren't content…

You mean the San Bernardino terrorist where Apple refused to break open the phone for the US government?

And recently, they've released an updated version of cloud sync that doesn't even let Apple have your keys.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#722

Post by pjmlp »

keepamovin wrote: post #682
russelg wrote: post #336

Where is the hacker spirit here? The number of Apple apologists that have crawled out to say "see? I told you so!!" is saddening. It is a bit dicey when you're charging for it, but since Mini was entirely client-side it would be feasible for a free version to exist. Apple claims iMessage is E2EE, do we have proof they aren't siphoning the messages from the client once it's been decrypted? The level of trust we have t…

I like/love Apple, but it's not really about hacker spirit. I think Steve and Steve were at the start, for sure. But then, it's like Steve figured out how to "evolve" hacker spirit into a business model. And not just any business model: but a totalitarian vertically integrated model. I mean, fabulously successful and don't let the negative political connotations of totalitarian offend you here, it's but a minor jab,…

To be fair, all computing business from the 1980's was vertical integration, the exception being CP/M, the university folks porting the UNIX tapes into their vertical integrated mainframes, and Compaq getting lucky on how they reverse engineered IBM PC's.

CP/M systems eventually died, UNIX startups created by some of those university folks were just as vertically integrated as the mainframes they replaced, leaving only the PC clones.

Had Compaq not gotten lucky, and today's computing landscape would look much different, probably like the laptops and all-in-one PCs that are being pushed nowadays as the OEM margins cannot get any thinner.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#723

Post by dwaite »

graphe wrote: post #166
ElijahLynn wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The good thing though is that Apple finally announced RCS support > https://9to5mac.com/2023/11/16/apple-rcs-coming-to-iphone/

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.

RCS Universal Profile.

Vendors are going to have to actually work on improving the standard (and Apple has committed to working within GSMA on an appropriate multi-vendor E2EE mechanism)

In the absence of interoperable standards through GSMA, there will likely still be quite a bit of broken behavior, e.g. when it's not a Google RCS Server and all Google clients.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#724

Post by simondotau »

jocaal wrote: post #654
simondotau wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Epic Games give developers "total freedom" with Unreal Engine or will they insist upon their royalty when applicable? You can read their FAQ and there's literally a section titled "Why does Epic think it’s fair to ask for a percentage of a developer’s product revenue?" What's good for the goose, etc.

5% Royalty past $1m for using the most high tech game engine in the world is a totally reasonable price. Just like 3% for using payment services is totally reasonable. But 30% for using a distribution service is just absurd. The only reason the app stores can charge that much is because of their iron grip on the platforms.

By agreeing that some amount is acceptable, you've conceded the principle. As the famous saying goes, we’re just haggling over the price.

As for whether 3% is reasonable, again we can look to Epic for evidence. Epic's own Steam competitor takes a 12% cut — and they admitted in court that it was a money-losing venture. That should stop and make you think. The Epic Games Store isn't even a complex ecosystem, it's just a glorified Windows app downloader and even then they couldn't make a profit at 12%.

Apple argues that their 15% fee for most (30% for the ultra-successful) pays for a lot more than just payment services. It pays for absorbing the cost of fraud. It pays for dealing with refunds. It pays for developing the APIs. It pays for employing an enormous team to perform some imperfect-but-useful oversight over the 1,800,000 apps in their store. It pays for a lot of things.

If you think Apple makes too much money, fine. That's a perfectly fine argument to make. That's a very different one to claiming that they're not entitled to make money. Or that the government should dictate prices at them.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#726

Post by simbolit »

silasdavis wrote: post #685
tlrobinson wrote: post #622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Obviously Mini was using the encryption properly else it wouldn't have worked to begin with. Just want to point out this isn’t inherently true. For example an insecurely generated session key would work fine but not be secure. > Of course, it's very unlikely Apple is doing that. Just putting the thought out there. Apple is doing what? Not using encryption properly? What reason do you have to believe that?

> Not using encryption properly? They didn't mean that, they meant siphoning off data client side, for reasons, like CSAM. The point, which I agree with, is having to trust a single closed source implementation of a client is not so different to trusting the servers of a non E2E service.

The BIG difference is that you have to trust the hardware and the operating system already, and as these are made by apple, you already have to trust them.

"Trusting the servers of a non E2E service" is adding another trusted party.

If you don't trust apple, you don't have an iPhone.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#728

Post by boxed »

dylan604 wrote: post #409
russelg wrote: post #336

Where is the hacker spirit here? The number of Apple apologists that have crawled out to say "see? I told you so!!" is saddening. It is a bit dicey when you're charging for it, but since Mini was entirely client-side it would be feasible for a free version to exist. Apple claims iMessage is E2EE, do we have proof they aren't siphoning the messages from the client once it's been decrypted? The level of trust we have t…

It has nothing to do with a lack of spirit. It's a 800lbs of reality crashing down. There's nothing wrong with trying to hack the Gibson. However, this wasn't just a hack, but a severe threat to Apple's walled garden. As long as they are allowed to have it, they will protect it at all costs. Thinking any differently is just naive. So of course this is the ultimate result.

Seems like if this is allowed to stand you'll get massive spam issues on iMessage within a few months... better to kill it fast.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#729

Post by rezonant »

martimarkov wrote: post #629
s3p wrote: post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Of course you can. It's sitting there on your Mac As I am sure we all understood, OP meant on their Android.

The the OP should read what he is buying. I have a TV from 95 am I not allowed to watch Netflix? It runs on my phone. Yes the limitations are different but you know them beforehand you just go and say it’s unfair I can’t have everything just the way I want it. You don’t like iMessage - we have plenty of alternatives.

iMessage is just the iOS texting app. When someone says "I'm having trouble getting Stranger Things to play on Netflix" you don't tell them "You should switch to Hulu". Netflix (iMessage / texting apps) has Stranger Things (texting) and Hulu ("alternatives" like Whatsapp et al) do not.

As an Android user, in theory I shouldn't care about iMessage. However, because of the way that iMessage creates schisms, miscommunications, lost communications, broken texting experiences and more between my Android friends and my iPhone friends, I have to. I would like the texting features of these phones to interoperate so we can all text together in peace.

I wrote up a scenario (user story?) that I think helps to explain the problems I think should be solved that seem to fly over so many people's heads, especially when they advocate for over-the-top messaging apps like Whatsapp to solve the problem (particularly in the US context): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38578101

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#730

Post by boxed »

singpolyma3 wrote: post #384
asylteltine wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is actually a great point I didn’t originally consider. People could easily infiltrate the iMessage fort with spam and other stuff which at the moment requires a genuine Apple device.

Still need a valid phone number with a SIM that can do the special SMS needed for this, so it's hardly going to produce a big spam farm too fast.

Better to kill it early. I get spam calls on WhatsApp (an app which I absolutely loathe)
Post reply on HN