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

Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

871–880 of 996 posts

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#871

Post by neop1x »

floatingatoll wrote: post #478
untog wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Notarization is about protecting users who are not capable of making an informed decision about code safety from developers who refuse to comply with Apple's terms of service. Epic willfully violated their terms with Apple to make a point, and Apple is responding in the same way that they did to Facebook: taking away their access to the users, because they cannot be trusted to comply with the restrictions placed on…

If Epic chooses not to follow the rules, then Apple chooses not to trust them to deliver executable code to users. You are arguing that Apple is incorrect to assert that rulebreakers should not have privileges to deploy code to end-user devices worldwide, when the rule is not one that protects users. Apple's counter-argument would presumably be that this business rule exists specifically to protect users from being h…

The problem is the Apple, who owns the whole platform is deciding here on behalf of users. Taking 30% is like paying taxes to IRS. At the same time look at Apple's marketcap and tax evading practices in Ireland. Why is there still government and police if Apple can protect users themselves and dictate what users can and cannot do on their devices?

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#872

Post by kalleboo »

arvinsim wrote: post #853
kalleboo wrote: post #780

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not at all on Apple's side in the App Store battle, but on this point, Apple is still consistent. Anyone breaking the App Store rules this blatantly would have their developer account terminated, wether they went public or not.

It's not consistent at all. App Store rules are basically whatever Apple deems it to be. Why do you think Amazon, Netflix, et al can get away with some "violations" while small developers cannot?

Epic added the violating payment system to the app in an update internal to the app (not through app store review). Doing an end-run around review is what gets you terminated.

Amazon, Netflix etc submitted their payment systems to app review and got those updates rejected, which Apple is fine with.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#873

Post by benhurmarcel »

laurent92 wrote: post #580
brundolf wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's important to note that you can still run unsigned Mac apps. Apple isn't preventing users from running a tool they want to run, it's just showing them a big scary warning and making them jump through some extra hoops. It's incredibly scummy and inappropriate, but I would put it more along the lines of an attack-ad than an outright ban. Edit: Now, one thing that isn't totally clear is whether or not devs who have…

Apple, with code-signing signalling, will actively be telling users Fortnite is a security danger. It is not the same as code signing, which would be vendor-agnostic and politically neutral. I would be surprised if the European Commission does trigger an inquiry into abuse of dominant position.

> Apple, with code-signing signalling, will actively be telling users Fortnite is a security danger.

Sounds like Apple will rather teach young consumers to ignore security warnings.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#874

Post by pjc50 »

sushid wrote: post #341
pjc50 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, this starts the taxi meter running; every dollar that Epic would have expected to make will get added to their demand for damages.

Source? They specifically state that they're not suing for damages and I doubt they have changed their case in the last few days... > Apple’s conduct has caused and continues to cause Epic financial harm, but as noted above, Epic is not bringing this case to recover these damages; Epic is not seeking any monetary damages. https://cdn2.unrealengine.com/apple-complaint-734589783.pdf

That's in the middle of the document, but at the end:

> C.Awarding any other equitable relief necessary to prevent and remedy Apple’s anti-competitive conduct;and

> D.Granting such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper

It's also totally normal for a course of action that was deemed unlawful and resulted in losses for one party to be compensated. Anyway, we have a decade or so to find out; these cases are not quick.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#875

Post by ernst_klim »

neop1x wrote: post #867
ernst_klim wrote: post #850

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> careless people They are not careless, they are uneducated on topic. Are you advocating for finishing FDA and drug regulation, because if people bought wrong drugs, it's their carelessness and consequences are just? That's nonsense. Historian should not know much about computers, just like me, a computer guy, should not know much about drugs. If there is a company allowing safe computing, which Apple is, people are…

Anti-phishing and malware mechanisms should just be "recommendations" to users and not straight blocking and banning. It's sad people don't see that difference. Browsers warn you about potentially harmful websites but still give you the choice.

> malware mechanisms should just be "recommendations"

Not when people don't thoroughly understand the possible consequences, no. Same as why drug prescriptions are not just recommended, and driving license is not optional.

It's either the enforcement of training, or the walled garden.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#876

Post by fellellor »

Waterfall wrote: post #499
dreamcompiler wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stallman is a difficult person to like and he is wrong about many things, but not about this, the central issue of his career.

What do you find him wrong about?

Not this shit again...!

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#877

Post by giovannibajo1 »

ForHackernews wrote: post #862
krrrh wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe in general purpose computers, I see them every day and I know they exist. I also believe in choice and experimentation when it comes to business models. If I want to buy some systems with trade offs and benefits that don’t always include being able to root and run Linux on them, who are you to prevent me? Believing that all systems must be maximally flexible is a scarcity mindset that felt more reasonable w…

> Believing that all systems must be maximally flexible is a scarcity mindset that felt more reasonable when families had to save to be able to afford a desktop computer that would be in use for several years. This is a good insight and it's entirely possible that general purpose computing was a historical aberration. You say you want to be able to choose between a real computer and a restricted appliance, but how lo…

I don't think there is a cogent risk that general computing open platforms will go away soon.

PCs can be self-assembled without buying them as an appliance from a specific vendor, and you can at the very least install Linux on them. If you care about Windows, Microsoft is adopting open source more and more, you can have install Ubuntu within Windows right now, I doubt they will change course on software installation.

I do have a Linux box in my home and successfully use it for many tasks. This doesn't mean that I feel that all devices that have a CPU in my home must absolutely run unsigned binaries compiled by me.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#878

Post by Tepix »

fermienrico wrote: post #390
rabidrat wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Richard Stallman founded the Free Software Foundation (FSF) for this very reason. You might think it's ridiculous but the fight for the right to modify the software running on devices you own has been raging for 35 years and is bigger than ever.

I am fine with this for most things except my phone. I trust Apple more than any party in the world. Even the government. Fortnight devs, Epic, whatever are not even on the same radar. They'll sell your privacy in milliseconds if they can get 2.5 cents for it. I would never ever own an open source phone. Not because the operating system is open source (probably good that it has eyes on it) but there is no way to cont…

Even if Apple allows people to install apps on their phone bypassing the official app store, noone is forcing you to do it on your phone.

Your phone's security will not be compromised by adding an extra optional feature.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#879

Post by garfieldnate »

skissane wrote: post #584
the_jeremy wrote: post #575

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A direct quote of RMS from his website[0]: The nominee is quoted as saying that if the choice of a sexual partner were protected by the Constitution, "prostitution, adultery, necrophilia, bestiality, possession of child pornography, and even incest and pedophilia" also would be. He is probably mistaken, legally--but that is unfortunate. All of these acts should be legal as long as no one is coerced. They are illegal…

A much more recent quote from his website[0]: 14 September 2019 (Sex between an adult and a child is wrong) Many years ago I posted that I could not see anything wrong about sex between an adult and a child, if the child accepted it. Through personal conversations in recent years, I've learned to understand how sex with a child can harm per psychologically. This changed my mind about the matter: I think adults should…

I'm curious if he's also changed his views on polygamy.

Re: Apple to kill Epic’s accounts on Friday the 28th

#880

Post by saagarjha »

grishka wrote: post #639
my123 wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need to do it that way. Boot to macOS Recovery and use csrutil(1) to disable SIP.

Sorry, I mixed up spctl and csrutil. SIP state is stored in an NVRAM variable that is a bitfield of what is allowed. You can't change all bits with csrutil, and you can't set the variable from within macOS, both main and recovery. You have to bypass that mechanism by either patching the macOS kernel to allow setting whatever you want, or booting into an OS that doesn't perform these checks in the first place. And you…

I am not sure if you can flip the bits in the NVRAM variable, but you can disable SIP from recovery mode including the flag for kernel debugging.
Post reply on HN