undefined | Better HN

0 pointsqPM9l3XJrF5y ago0 comments

I'm a moderate, I didn't say it should be Apple's business, I'm saying maybe it's a good thing if our comms infrastructure affords Apple the flexibility to do this.

If Apple wants to change their TOS and say "publishing personal information is now OK", that is one thing. Maybe publishing personal information should be allowed. The point is that there is an intelligent human being weighing tradeoffs and trying to make a good decision as we muddle our way through the 21st century.

Infrastructural changes, on the other hand, aren't as reversible. Screwups are more likely to be permanent. You're flipping a switch that can't be flipped back. That is the point I was trying to make by mentioning terrorism--there can be unintended consequences which you don't necessarily anticipate, so retaining flexibility is good.

0 comments

1 comments · 1 top-level

nobody99995y ago

>I'm saying maybe it's a good thing if our comms infrastructure affords Apple the flexibility to do this.

I'm having trouble understanding your point. Apple makes devices. They sell (not rent or lease) those devices.

As such, just as if I were to buy a gun or a knife or a dozen chicken wings, what I do with such a device isn't anyone else's business. It's mine.

If I use that gun or knife to injure or kill someone, is the gun or knife manufacturer involved? No. Because I, not the manufacturer, am responsible for my actions. They have nothing to do with it.

If I insert those chicken wings into orifices other than my mouth, is that any business of the restaurant who sold them to me? No. For the same reasons.

As such, Apple is no more part of the "comms infrastructure" (and especially in this case, as it isn't Apple software -- like iMessage -- being used) than the knife manufacturer is part of my circus knife throwing act.

This issue is broader than the awful stuff going on in Belarus.

Who owns the stuff you purchase? If the manufacturer (and/or other private entities) can unilaterally decide what you can or cannot do with your own property, then you don't really own it.

And there will always be some folks who object to the use of, well, just about anything.

Should the folks at PETA[0] be able to block communications between a group of friends going hunting for deer or quail?

In their understanding, that's exactly the same as a group plotting to kill humans.

The situation in Belarus is more complicated, as it pits the the government against the governed. Even so, I say it's not the place of a manufacturer to tell someone what they may or may not do with a product once it has been sold.

What's more, Telegram needs to decide what happens on their infrastructure and Apple has no business being involved at all.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_for_the_Ethical_Treatme...

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse