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

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#791

Post by nicce » Sat, Dec 09, 2023, 11:09 AM UTC

unyttigfjelltol wrote: post #787

nicce wrote: post #775

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not expecting to be able to turn it into a business, or a popular app, that wouldn't quickly be shut down. That's just common sense. When I noticed that there is 2 dollar subscription required to use this app, then all my blame from Apple went to these developers. You can't really expect to do business with other company's service's without asking permission or cooperating. Especially, if the required interfac…

It's called a "phone". It works with the "phone network", AT&T communicates with Verizon. They each fund themselves and are interoperable.

For "phone" features, there are own standards and all the "phones" support them. They are public and everyone cooperates.

iMessage is like Discord. It is messaging service tied to specific backend, and also devices in this case.

What if I reverse-engineer Discord, make a commercial application which uses their non-public backend (not with webview) and never tell anything for Discord? Should the "phone" argument hold in this case?

Discord is not the best example, because it 'allows' third-party level clients on some level, but above should not be the case.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#792

Post by throw310822 » Sat, Dec 09, 2023, 11:11 AM UTC

increscent wrote: post #188

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.

I recently switched from Android to iOS just for iMessage. SMS is quite unreliable even in 2023. SMS messages don't have the same delivery guarantees as IP-based messaging services. And often I have internet access, but spotty cellular service. The thing that pushed me over the edge was that my carrier happened to block all my SMS for a day. I only found out about it later in the day, after I had missed many (unrecov…

I don't understand, why don't you force them to use Whatsapp (or Signal, or whatever) to contact you? Get an app that rejects by default SMSes coming from certain numbers. They want to text you at all? They need to use Whatsapp, otherwise they can go fuck themselves. (It worked for me when a friend wanted to force me to contact him on Telegram rather than Whatsapp- I resisted for weeks but at the end I gave in).

Once you automatically reject SMSes from those contacts, such that you don’t even know they're trying to contact you, the ball is entirely in their park to take action.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#793

Post by nurettin » Sat, Dec 09, 2023, 11:14 AM UTC

dzikimarian wrote: post #605

crazygringo wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Where is the hacker spirit here? The hacker spirit is the fun of reverse engineering. The hacker spirit is about personal use. It's not expecting to be able to turn it into a business , or a popular app, that wouldn't quickly be shut down. That's just common sense. > Myself for example owns a Macbook, but an Android phone. Am I not allowed to use iMessage? I paid the toll. Of course you can. It's sitting there on y…

No. Hacker spirit is owning your machine to its full extent. For fun, for profit or just for mayhem. Apple using instant messaging, where no meaningful innovation happened for decades to build their moat is pathetic and disgusting.

> Hacker spirit is owning your machine to its full extent.

I thought it was about owning anyone's machine to the full extent. Did this change during the past 30 years?

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#794

Post by lotsofpulp » Sat, Dec 09, 2023, 11:19 AM UTC

nani8ot wrote: post #613

LargeTomato wrote: post #589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I switched because people think android users are poor and I don't want to signal to others that I am poor.

It's a self fulfilling prophecy. Once everyone has an iPhone to not be perceived as poor, the only people still using Android will actually not be able to afford an iPhone. At least it sounds like that's what happens across the ocean.

Even the bottom income quintile in the US uses iPhones, especially young people. They are not that expensive.

Knowing someone has an iPhone tells you nothing about their wealth/power.

What people think it does tell them is where someone is on the cool / weird spectrum. See:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38578103

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#795

Post by Hackbraten » Sat, Dec 09, 2023, 11:26 AM UTC

ComputerGuru wrote: post #66

This was why I never shared my iMessage for Windows: https://neosmart.net/blog/imessage-for-windows/ They’d block an account out of spite without a second thought.

This is amazing. Truly a labor of love. Kudos to you for accomplishing this, and then polishing it to perfection. Good on you to withhold it, as proved again today. I’m so glad that I finally left the Apple ecosystem.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#796

Post by sbuk » Sat, Dec 09, 2023, 11:27 AM UTC

twodave wrote: post #610

ShamelessC wrote: post #552

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were a number of similar comments on HN when they announced. The real lesson? The internet is a shit show.

I don’t know about you, but I’ve worked with plenty of “engineers” who can’t even properly read a stack trace. Not meaning to offend, most software developers are unable to reason about a system even as straightforward as a messaging client with accuracy, especially a closed source one.

This is true, we see it anytime a discussion around email comes up.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#797

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Dec 09, 2023, 11:28 AM UTC

irdc wrote: post #789

This is likely going to be buried, but: now Bleeper has standing to argue that Apple, as owner of the largest mobile messaging platform in the US, is a monopolist.

[deleted]

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#798

Post by mrweasel » Sat, Dec 09, 2023, 11:29 AM UTC

123sereusername wrote: post #104

Why not just use signal?

This comes up in just about any conversation regarding iMessage, and it's pretty out of touch with the real world. Apple backed iMessage into the same app that does SMS, so you can't not use that app, SMS is still relevant. So iPhone users are going to use that app. Now imagine that 90% of your friends and family use iMessage, but not by some deliberate choice, but because they just view it as fancy text messaging. How on earth are you going to convince all those people that they should download Signal, WhatsApp or Telegram? The answer is that you don't. You might get a few people who already use Signal to start contacting you that way, but the rest... they aren't going to install yet another app just because you don't like iMessage, and when SMS still works just fine. But now you're excluded from all group chats and videos or largish images.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#799

Post by latexr » Sat, Dec 09, 2023, 11:31 AM UTC

lofaszvanitt wrote: post #706

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One of Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak's first projects was selling blue boxes Which didn’t scale because it doesn’t scale because the blue box stopped working. Sort of like Beeper.

Beeper's true purpose was to show people that it's possible without an iPhone. What you don't know how many other clients like this worked and for how long...

> Beeper's true purpose was to show people that it's possible without an iPhone.

What’s your basis for saying that? Honestly asking. Seems like Beeper’s true purpose could just as well have been to make money.

Of course this is possible without an iPhone. Apple could build it anytime they want, they just don’t. Which I disagree with, but that’s a different argument.

Re: Apple cuts off Beeper Mini's access

#800

Post by lotsofpulp » Sat, Dec 09, 2023, 11:32 AM UTC

nomel wrote: post #279

mh8h wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I also assume there are iMessage rate limits in place, that if exceeded, trigger some analysis. If that's true, then hardware costs would also be proportional to rate. I suspect there's some dark market for broken iPhones, and perhaps some rate limit for activations within a city block/building. The last time I had iMessage spam was years ago, so maybe it's not so practical.

The first time I received iMessage spam was Aug 22, 2023 from +1 626 453 4929. And the second time was Oct 11, 2023 from edgardonikko@gmail.com trying to get me to click a link to malware.