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

Apple vs the Law

formularsumo.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 450 posts

Re: Apple vs the Law

#11

Post by JoshTriplett »

saubeidl wrote: post #7

All-time great read about Apple/EU conflicts: https://www.baldurbjarnason.com/2024/facing-reality-in-the-e... From the conclusion: > Normally when the EU regulates a given sector, it does so with ample lead time and works with industry to make sure that they understand their obligations. > Apple instead thought that the regulatory contact from the EU during the lead time to the DMA was an opportunity for it to lectur…

> If Apple had faced reality and tried to understand the facts as they are

When the EU attempts to legislate crypto backdoors, do you plan to say "If Signal had faced reality and tried to understand the facts as they are"?

Re: Apple vs the Law

#12

Post by saubeidl »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #11
saubeidl wrote: post #7

All-time great read about Apple/EU conflicts: https://www.baldurbjarnason.com/2024/facing-reality-in-the-e... From the conclusion: > Normally when the EU regulates a given sector, it does so with ample lead time and works with industry to make sure that they understand their obligations. > Apple instead thought that the regulatory contact from the EU during the lead time to the DMA was an opportunity for it to lectur…

> If Apple had faced reality and tried to understand the facts as they are When the EU attempts to legislate crypto backdoors, do you plan to say "If Signal had faced reality and tried to understand the facts as they are"?

That is a bad-faith argument and a false equivalency I will not engage in, lest I be warned by the mods for falling for obvious bait again.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#13

Post by leosanchez »

pyman wrote: post #9

Note: I know some folks working in big tech won't like this comment, but it's time we talk about the elephant in the room. Tim Sweeney is the only billionaire and computer scientist who's actually fighting against inequality. The big difference between him and folks like Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Larry Page, and Marc Benioff, is that while those billionaires talk about universal basic income to make up for the mass layo…

> billionaires keep getting richer and computer scientists are out of work

Not just computer scientists right ?

Re: Apple vs the Law

#14

Post by idle_zealot »

interpol_p wrote: post #10
grishka wrote: post #3

> "...unfortunately, it's impossible to do all the complex engineering to comply with the Commission's current interpretation of the DMA..." There's nothing complex and impossible about removing some "if" statements responsible for code signature enforcement.

It’s extremely complex. I’m not debating whether they should comply - they should. But it’s gonna cost them years of engineering effort, and maintenance far into the future. See, for example, BrowserEngineKit https://developer.apple.com/documentation/browserenginekit They needed to engineer, maintain, document and support a whole class of APIs so that third parties can create their own competitive browser engines (th…

Or, they could just let their pocket computers run the software users download and install, like every single other computer ever made and sold, rather than special-case engineer padded cells for every use-case, application class, or bit of interoperability.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#15

Post by JoshTriplett »

saubeidl wrote: post #12
JoshTriplett wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Apple had faced reality and tried to understand the facts as they are When the EU attempts to legislate crypto backdoors, do you plan to say "If Signal had faced reality and tried to understand the facts as they are"?

That is a bad-faith argument and a false equivalency I will not engage in, lest I be warned by the mods for falling for obvious bait again.

It is an argument made in good faith.

Companies and individuals should fight against bad laws. And a press campaign is a legitimate, and sometimes effective, tactic for doing so. Different people may disagree about which laws are good or bad; I fully expect, for instance, that more people support the DMA than would support crypto backdoors. But it seems shortsighted to suggest that those who think a law is wrong should simply accept it anyway, rather than fight tooth and nail against it.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#16

Post by EMIRELADERO »

interpol_p wrote: post #10
grishka wrote: post #3

> "...unfortunately, it's impossible to do all the complex engineering to comply with the Commission's current interpretation of the DMA..." There's nothing complex and impossible about removing some "if" statements responsible for code signature enforcement.

It’s extremely complex. I’m not debating whether they should comply - they should. But it’s gonna cost them years of engineering effort, and maintenance far into the future. See, for example, BrowserEngineKit https://developer.apple.com/documentation/browserenginekit They needed to engineer, maintain, document and support a whole class of APIs so that third parties can create their own competitive browser engines (th…

Somehow, Android manages to do it. Not only for browsers; all apps have JIT access without any entitlement/review needed.

It doesn't seem like the average Android user is worse-off because of that, security-wise.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#17

Post by Aeolun »

Fizzadar wrote: post #4

I really hope the EU keeps up the pressure. The level of control the gatekeepers have is beyond ridiculous. Sure there’s the “take your money elsewhere” option but we’re at a point where that’s just not realistic to be a normal person. (My sons nursery for example requires an app that only exists on iOS/Android). EU looks set to be the only big enough institution with any spine or willingness to take this on. Will pr…

Starting to feel like it'd be more sensible to just have the EU fund an independent phone OS/Hardware. Export the hardware specs so everyone can build the hardware for it, then come preinstalled just like Android is doing now.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#18

Post by FirmwareBurner »

pyman wrote: post #9

Note: I know some folks working in big tech won't like this comment, but it's time we talk about the elephant in the room. Tim Sweeney is the only billionaire and computer scientist who's actually fighting against inequality. The big difference between him and folks like Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Larry Page, and Marc Benioff, is that while those billionaires talk about universal basic income to make up for the mass layo…

>those billionaires talk about universal basic income

Because they don't expect that UBI money to come from their profits, but from the taxes paid by the working class.

They're just cosplaying socialists to score brownie points like they did with rainbow flags in the past, knowing it will be on other people's money, and it's all performative.

Edit: @pyman

>My biggest fear is that UBI can turn into a tool for control,

CAN?! It WILL be. The same way state pensions in Europe are used by the government for control of the population. "Vote for me and I increase your pensions. Step out of line and I cut off your pension and make you homeless like we did to that German woman protesting against the government."

EU isn't regulating AI for the good of the people, it's regulating it for control since they don't want to leave the freedom of speech and the freedom of opinion to entities they can't control that can tell people opinions that are not state approved.

Re: Apple vs the Law

#19

Post by EMIRELADERO »

The greatest gem is found in the footnote, IMO

> "They managed to convince the courts that iPadOS is a separate operating system to iOS (it's not), which delayed iPadOS being designated as a gatekeeper for almost a year. They are currently challenging all of the rest: the iOS, Safari, and App Store designations, and successfully managed to avoid iMessage being designated at all. They have taken the DMA law to court for an apparently ambiguous comma in article 5(4) - the payment one, and for somehow infringing on human rights law in article 6(7) - the interoperability one."

Looking at the actual filing[1], Apple says:

> "First plea in law, alleging that Article 6(7) of Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 is inconsistent with the requirements of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and the principle of proportionality, and that Article 2(b) of the European Commission Decision of 5 September 2023 is unlawful insofar as it imposes the obligations under Article 6(7) of Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 on Apple in relation to iOS."

For context, here are the full contents of Article 6(7):

"The gatekeeper shall allow business users and alternative providers of services provided together with, or in support of, core platform services, free of charge, effective interoperability with, and access for the purposes of interoperability to, the same operating system, hardware or software features, regardless of whether those features are part of the operating system, as are available to, or used by, that gatekeeper when providing such services."

[1] https://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf;jsession...

Re: Apple vs the Law

#20

Post by pyman »

leosanchez wrote: post #13
pyman wrote: post #9

Note: I know some folks working in big tech won't like this comment, but it's time we talk about the elephant in the room. Tim Sweeney is the only billionaire and computer scientist who's actually fighting against inequality. The big difference between him and folks like Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Larry Page, and Marc Benioff, is that while those billionaires talk about universal basic income to make up for the mass layo…

> billionaires keep getting richer and computer scientists are out of work Not just computer scientists right ?

Yeah, this affects everyone who isn't rich. Some billionaires are even running UBI trials, fully aware that the tech they're building or funding is going to cause social chaos:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-07-22/ubi-study...

Post reply on HN