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

Apple takes down ICE tracking apps after pressure from DOJ

foxbusiness.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 645 posts

Re: Apple takes down ICE tracking apps after pressure from DOJ

#161

Post by magicalist »

xvector wrote: post #157
valleyer wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that most people will not hear about this app being removed. (Though note that it's being reported here in "normal people" news, not tech news.) But it's far from the only way Cook has aligned himself with Trump in just the last few months. The dumb gold-glass plaque and the UK royal visit are two much more visible examples.

Doing what he needs to avoid tariffs is fine in my book. It's practically his responsibility towards shareholders.

> Doing what he needs to avoid tariffs is fine in my book

So are we talking anything?

Re: Apple takes down ICE tracking apps after pressure from DOJ

#162

Post by snickerbockers »

kumarvvr wrote: post #138
gottorf wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take a breath. Obama drone-struck and killed more than one American citizen. Biden's rhetoric against his political opponents was no less "fascist" than Trump's. Do you find yourself nostalgic for the civility of the McCain-era Republicans? He was called a Nazi by his detractors, as well. Trump doesn't hold a candle to FDR when it comes to being an authoritarian.

> Biden's rhetoric against his political opponents was no less "fascist" than Trump's. Can you point to any speeches that Biden gave, that talk about sending troops to republican majority cities? > Trump doesn't hold a candle to FDR when it comes to being an authoritarian He holds a lighthouse.

>that talk about sending troops to republican majority cities

not that specifically but he did actually threaten to use nuclear weapons against american citizens. although FWIW it looks to me more like a manifestation of his advanced-stage alzheimer's than an intentional threat.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/SHLHkmWoYDU

>He holds a lighthouse.

FDR is the one who illegally imprisoned 120k ethnically-japanese people (including at least 80k US citizens) in concentration camps solely on the basis of a hypothesized loyalty to the country their ancestors came from.

Re: Apple takes down ICE tracking apps after pressure from DOJ

#163

Post by b_e_n_t_o_n »

jjav wrote: post #146
b_e_n_t_o_n wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem isn't the centralized control, it's the power the governments have.

> The problem isn't the centralized control, it's the power the governments have. The governments will always have the power, that's pretty much built into the definition of government. So, technology needs to be built with this reality in mind. Thus, avoid all centralization.

The government is a centralization of power, it doesn't matter if our devices are "decentralized" if the government can simply make it illegal to use unlocked devices. Or encryption. Or VPNs. Etc.

Re: Apple takes down ICE tracking apps after pressure from DOJ

#164

Post by scoopdewoop »

imoverclocked wrote: post #154
jjav wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that Apple is a company that has to obey the rule of law. Right, so the fundamental problem is having a device where the software that runs on it is controlled by a single company. It creates the attractive nuisance of being able to choke off anything the government doesn't like because, as you said, that single point of contact can't avoid obeying the government. Computing needs to be open and controlled o…

That’s your belief and there is a platform that allows just that. The fundamental problem here is not specific to Apple; It’s specific to a regime that is overstepping its bounds daily.

What platform? Android is removing installing software from "unverified" developers which leads to this exact same scenario.

Re: Apple takes down ICE tracking apps after pressure from DOJ

#165

Post by ajross »

imoverclocked wrote: post #121
saurik wrote: post #8

FWIW, everyone who claims that Apple fundamentally needs the centralized ability to control apps on their platforms "for everyone's safety" -- despite how that obviously and repeatedly makes them become patsies for governments all over the world to enforce their censorship regimes -- are complicit in this stuff (in addition, of course, to the people who build it at Apple...).

I think that Apple is a company that has to obey the rule of law. Maybe the problem here isn’t Apple but the rules they are being forced to abide by?

> Apple [...] has to obey the rule of law.

No, Apple has to obey the law.

The idea of "rule of law" is a shorthand for the set of norms and practices understood by everyone under a single regime, including both specific laws and authorities and more general principles. One of those, notably, is "the government shouldn't force private companies to censor their app stores".[1]

The rule of law is indeed being violated here, but in the other direction.

[1] Or "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech", if you swing that way.

Re: Apple takes down ICE tracking apps after pressure from DOJ

#166

Post by magicalist »

imoverclocked wrote: post #159
magicalist wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You left out the pretty important part of § 372 " by force, intimidation, or threat ". Please don't just make up cover for capitulation. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/372

[flagged]

So you're suggesting that prior restraint on constitutionally protected speech is justified because Pam Bondi, mouthpiece for the president, asserts that publishing publicly observable information about federal officers is designed to put them at risk from waves hands, and not that the risk, if there actually was one, should be dealt with from whatever she's waving her hands about?

It's always funny when people are willing to toss the first amendment completely under the bus because of made-up risks but god help you if you suggest putting guardrails on the scope of the second amendment because of actual risks.

Re: Apple takes down ICE tracking apps after pressure from DOJ

#167

Post by snickerbockers »

I don't want to fall into the fallacy of implying that this is somehow justified because of something "the left" did a few years ago but I would like to highlight the hypocrisy of how many people were totally okay with this sort of executive censorship when Biden was in charge.

> "We reached out to Apple today demanding they remove the ICEBlock app from their App Store — and Apple did so," Bondi said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

I don't think this is something that trump or biden should be allowed to do, but the classic argument that your constitutional right to free speech ends when the president "politely" asks a software company to censor you on his behalf and they acquiesce is equally [in]valid in both situations.

Re: Apple takes down ICE tracking apps after pressure from DOJ

#168

Post by jayd16 »

imoverclocked wrote: post #121
saurik wrote: post #8

FWIW, everyone who claims that Apple fundamentally needs the centralized ability to control apps on their platforms "for everyone's safety" -- despite how that obviously and repeatedly makes them become patsies for governments all over the world to enforce their censorship regimes -- are complicit in this stuff (in addition, of course, to the people who build it at Apple...).

I think that Apple is a company that has to obey the rule of law. Maybe the problem here isn’t Apple but the rules they are being forced to abide by?

There's no rule that says they need to block other app stores. That's a choice they made. The consequences are also a choice they made.

Re: Apple takes down ICE tracking apps after pressure from DOJ

#169

Post by pkaeding »

philipov wrote: post #54
clarkmoody wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For all the talk of Trump being Hitler, I never saw any real tax protest movement to defund the regime...

Most people have their taxes withheld directly from their pay by their employer, and don't get the option to not pay their taxes, because the government gets the money before they do.

Because the employers are 'complicit' in paying these payroll taxes, and the employees are 'complicit' in supporting them by showing up for work.

/s

Post reply on HN