271–280 of 645 posts
ICE tracking apps put ICE agents in danger, and the same kind of app for, say, tracking Meta employees or “people who wear Team Blue T-shirts” or any other group would obviously be a danger as well. How on earth do people find this controversial..?
When a group is performing unconstitutional activities they should be tracked and stopped where possible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> can website do push notification? Text or e-mail.
Not exactly fool proof though. An adversarial government could force Google or the telecoms providers to block such email/text messages?
Texts, probably. E-mail, improbably. At least not trivially in America.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> That’s your belief and there is a platform that allows just that. A platform that's just about to take it away with user registrations. And that isn't just a 'belief' - that's what a lot of people do with their phones. But the problem here isn't about an alternative. Apple platform is popular enough to make it a juicy target for tyrannical regimes. And when that happens, millions of people find their devices useles…
Yes. There is nothing surprising to me about the current situation.
> Apple platform is popular enough to make it a juicy target for tyrannical regimes.
Agreed, if for nothing else than its size alone. It is also a target for so many folks to say, "if it was different in this one way, it would be amazing (for me.)"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Websites don’t need an App Store.
Did we forget about WEI already? I'm sure Google is waiting for the right time to try it again. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Environment_Integrity
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[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…
I have no idea how you got there but if you brought a case with a team of lawyers to get the apps re-instated based on the 1st amendment, I'd be happy about it. It would be interesting precedent too.
However, my point is nothing about that. What should Apple do while following laws and being accused of hosting apps that endanger law enforcement?
If it can be abused, it will be abused.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Avoiding being where ICE agents are is not against the law. Even being in the country while eligible for deportation is not against the law. Crossing the border not at a designated point of crossing is against the law; this app is not for that.
>>Avoiding being where ICE agents are is not against the law. Sure if you are the one avoiding arrest. How about if you rob a bank and I help you evade arrest? You could make a case that these apps are doing something similar. With a good prosecutor I wouldn't want to take my chances defending myself against that. >>Crossing the border not at a designated point of crossing is against the law; this app is not for that…
Multiple times now they've been found to have removed innocent people with little chance of recourse. Only after huge public outcry have ICE been shamed into returning a select few.
So 100% people should be avoiding potential removal without due process.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
If that opinion had legal weight, then it could have been laundered through a legal instrument like a court order. It is complete nonsense legally. People who have wanted to find ICE agents to attack have succeeded in finding their headquarters and attacking them there. The more obvious purpose of the app is to identify ICE agents in order to avoid being victimized by them. Regardless of the actual purpose of the app…
Agreed. However, the weight of the DOJ and DOD (aka: DOW) are enough to make even Apple flinch, unsurprisingly.
> There's a[n] irony here
There are so many ironies and strange twists. If I remember the previous apologies, it was because conspiracy theories were being suppressed along with bad vaccine information. It was predominantly Republican lines of questioning during these hearings even though it was "under Biden."
The current administration wants to now censure in the opposite direction, weaponizing the very thing Republicans fought against in order to push current agendas. Nothing has really changed, it has just progressed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 h…
I agree. However, the way things work is such that these things take time to sort out, if they get sorted out at all.