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

Apple defined ICE as a "protected class" in blocking anti-ICE apps

boingboing.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 71 posts

Re: Apple defined ICE as a "protected class" in blocking anti-ICE apps

#31

Post by JuniperMesos »

jordanb wrote: post #22
intermerda wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know why you feel it's loaded if the language of "targeted group" is accompanied with every single group that is a protected class. > 1.1.1 Defamatory, discriminatory, or mean-spirited content, including references or commentary about religion, race, sexual orientation, gender, national/ethnic origin, or other targeted groups, particularly if the app is likely to humiliate, intimidate, or harm a targeted indi…

There's this crazy tendency to LARP as counsel for the defence whenever a big tech company gets bad press.

There's nothing objectionable about arguing that a particular piece of bad press that a big tech company gets is false or misleading or not actually bad. Doing so doesn't even imply that you generally like that big tech company or disagree with other criticism of it.

Re: Apple defined ICE as a "protected class" in blocking anti-ICE apps

#32

Post by fsflover »

like_any_other wrote: post #12

For anyone remotely surprised: Apple Told Some Apple TV+ Show Developers Not To Anger China - https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/alexkantrowitz/apple-ch... Apple quietly deletes nearly a hundred VPNs that allowed Russians to get around censorship - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41712728 Apple CEO Tim Cook "secretly" signed an agreement worth more than $275 billion with Chinese officials, promising that Apple…

Also:

Apple's Cooperation with Authoritarian Governments - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26644216

Re: Apple defined ICE as a "protected class" in blocking anti-ICE apps

#34

Post by deafpolygon »

derbOac wrote: post #26

Ok so what do we do? I'm serious. I'm sick of this corruption.

A good question. One I don't have any clean answers to.

A lot of folks will have a knee-jerk 'switch to linux' response, but that's not exactly that simple - is it?

Re: Apple defined ICE as a "protected class" in blocking anti-ICE apps

#35

Post by tyleo »

watwut wrote: post #30
tyleo wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t cover every protected class. You can look them up. > This "ackchyually" behavior from HN is so bizarre. Folks generally want to discuss the facts here, not hyperbole. The headline is hyperbolic. The fact is that Apple isn’t saying ICE is a “protected class”. The content of the article doesn’t even back this point up.

> Folks generally want to discuss the facts here, not hyperbole Are you new here? No they dont. Dolks here generally discuss like folks anywhere else, riffing off headlines and going by feels. We are overall more educated then average, more wealthy then average and biased tech way. That is it.

I’m sorry if that’s been your experience. It hasn’t been mine. Conversation here feels notably more fact-based than X or Facebook.

Re: Apple defined ICE as a "protected class" in blocking anti-ICE apps

#36

Post by SpaghettiCthulu »

fsflover wrote: post #33
derbOac wrote: post #26

Ok so what do we do? I'm serious. I'm sick of this corruption.

Support https://eff.org and switch to a GNU/Linux phone.

Would be safer to use GrapheneOS and distribute these apps on F-Droid, using a custom repo if the main one won't allow them.

Re: Apple defined ICE as a "protected class" in blocking anti-ICE apps

#37

Post by NaomiLehman »

goatlover wrote: post #13

Why don't citizens have the right to track federal agencies? Don't they serve us? Apple is capitulating to autocratic rule.

I'm gonna steelman an argument I don't hold: What about CIA? Revealing the identity of a CIA operative is a crime.

I'm just responding to the part "Don't they serve us?"

> Intentionally disclosing the identity of a U.S. intelligence agent, including a CIA officer, is a federal crime under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act (IIPA), which can result in up to 10 years in prison and fines. This law applies to individuals with authorized access to classified information and those without access who intentionally expose agents, knowing their actions could harm U.S. foreign intelligence operations.

Re: Apple defined ICE as a "protected class" in blocking anti-ICE apps

#38

Post by fsflover »

SpaghettiCthulu wrote: post #36
fsflover wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Support https://eff.org and switch to a GNU/Linux phone.

Would be safer to use GrapheneOS and distribute these apps on F-Droid, using a custom repo if the main one won't allow them.

I'm not sure it's safer if you consider their tight dependence on Google, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45208925

Re: Apple defined ICE as a "protected class" in blocking anti-ICE apps

#39

Post by Crushable-E »

NaomiLehman wrote: post #37
goatlover wrote: post #13

Why don't citizens have the right to track federal agencies? Don't they serve us? Apple is capitulating to autocratic rule.

I'm gonna steelman an argument I don't hold: What about CIA? Revealing the identity of a CIA operative is a crime. I'm just responding to the part "Don't they serve us?" > Intentionally disclosing the identity of a U.S. intelligence agent, including a CIA officer, is a federal crime under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act (IIPA), which can result in up to 10 years in prison and fines. This law applies to ind…

I mean sure, but ICE is not an intelligence agency or holds classified information.

Re: Apple defined ICE as a "protected class" in blocking anti-ICE apps

#40

Post by throwawaylaptop »

Crushable-E wrote: post #39
NaomiLehman wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm gonna steelman an argument I don't hold: What about CIA? Revealing the identity of a CIA operative is a crime. I'm just responding to the part "Don't they serve us?" > Intentionally disclosing the identity of a U.S. intelligence agent, including a CIA officer, is a federal crime under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act (IIPA), which can result in up to 10 years in prison and fines. This law applies to ind…

I mean sure, but ICE is not an intelligence agency or holds classified information.

They're some kind of law enforcement agency that is on a mission to capture people breaking laws.

If your local sheriff is on their way to serve a warrant of some kind, and you call the person and warn them to leave or alert them to destroy evidence, is that going to go well? I don't think it should.

Post reply on HN