Apple Pulls WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, and Threads From App Store in China Following Order

[chmania]

Sideloading is no human right and human rights don't depend on sideloading.
But I believe there is (or should be) a human right for private communication.

If a government tries to take that away by banning the devices/tools that enable private communication, the ethical thing for a company is to make them accessible and free them government control.

I am sure if someone gets a heart attack, s/he would be operated on immediately in your country, but later s/he would get a massive bill to pay. Or, if you are getting old, and cataract is attacking, you might get your eyes operated, but the resulting bill will be too much. What if there are countries, where your mandatory insurance is so low, you get both the operations done and nothing much to pay, except for medicine, and even that is given free if you are past a certain age as long as you live. Now, which country has better human rights?

If a place to live is a right, food is a right, medicine and medical assistance is a right, education is a right, etc, etc, which country has better human rights?

If the word freedom is the keyword, but you are not allowed to buy certain electronic products and services, just because the ruling class doesn't like some country (like China), do you really have freedom?

Shouting "human rights" is quite easy, but how do you explain that to people, who live under bridges, shop fronts etc?

 

[AppliedMicro]

they should still be able to pick up a cheap android phone and sideload said app

Good luck in finding a cheap Android smartphone in China that isn't (or can't easily) be backdoored.

 

[AppliedMicro]

I am sure if someone gets a heart attack, s/he would be operated on immediately in your country, but later s/he would get a massive bill to pay

Yes, immediate surgery, but not a massive bill.

Or, if you are getting old, and cataract is attacking, you might get your eyes operated, but the resulting bill will be too much.

Yes, but the resulting bill will be affordable.
That's why we have comprehensive health insurance coverage.

If the word freedom is the keyword, but you are not allowed to buy certain electronic products and services, just because the ruling class doesn't like some country (like China), do you really have freedom?

I don't know of any Chinese products/services banned from sale in my country on grounds of disliking China.

 

[chmania]

Yes, immediate surgery, but not a massive bill.

Yes, but the resulting bill will be affordable.
That's why we have comprehensive health insurance coverage.

And, those who live under bridges do have that privilege too? To pay insurance?

 

[AppliedMicro]

And, those who live under bridges do have that privilege too? To pay insurance?

Yes. Health insurance is mandatory where I live.
And no legal resident (let alone citizen) has to live under a bridge.

 

[chmania]

Yes. Health insurance is mandatory where I live.

But still you have to pay for what's not covered. In certain countries, any medical assistance is covered.

And no legal resident (let alone citizen) has to live under a bridge.

True, a legal resident, citizen or a visitor, legal or otherwise. Especially the visitor, who should be treated better by the "natives." If they are treated as "aliens" then something is wrong.

 

[AppliedMicro]

But still you have to pay for what's not covered. In certain countries, any medical assistance is covered

That is the case: any medical assistance (within reason) is covered under a mandatory insurance scheme.
A patient‘s deductible is capped at an affordable yearly amount (approximately one half the average monthly wage at most).

If they are treated as "aliens" then something is wrong.

“Alien“ are creatures from outer space in common parlance here. Or, more officially, invasive plant/animal species. Not people.

 

[chmania]

“Alien“ are creatures from outer space in common parlance here. Or, more officially, invasive plant/animal species. Not people.

People considered as "Aliens" in some countries, who usually shout louder on the lack of "human rights" in other countries.

 

[DaPhox]

And, those who live under bridges do have that privilege too? To pay insurance?

Why would anyone want to live under a bridge? You think your hardcore social activism is appropriate in this theead? Or has any merit?

 

[chmania]

Why would anyone want to live under a bridge?

They appear to have a lot of freedom, or at least their country tells them that. The country, or its ruling class, and even the citizens, shout louder about the lack of human rights in other countries.

 

[Abazigal]

Good luck in finding a cheap Android smartphone in China that isn't (or can't easily) be backdoored.

Then it seems that they have a bigger issue than the inability to sideload apps on iOS.

 

[hagar]

There is no difference! Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it! Except it will be too late for you to do anything about it! Apple knows what is going on with the EU, they learned it all too well with China!

Come on. This is just absurd. The EU wants users to have more choice to put any app on their own phone. Apple may not like this as they have less control and revenue streams. But that’s the thing with people like you: trying to confuse people by conflating things.

 

[I7guy]

Only government guarantees fair competition. And that guarantee is not without stipulations in law. Companies may do what’s best for their bottom line as long as all applicable laws are followed.

“Fair” is subjective as shown by the various rulings. In the US apples business is fair.

 

[aevan]

Correct.

Ok, that makes no sense.

 

[I7guy]

Not matter how many words are posted in that response, it is devoid of any factual argument or willingness to engage in discussion.

as long as nonsense is posted, there is no expectation to any type of cogent discussion. The best course of action is to call hyperbole for what it is.

The ethical thing - if they care about human rights - would be for Apple to enable sideloading on their phones.

If they care about human rights the ethical thing is to clearly not allow side loading. Why make it easy to enable sedition and csam and human trafficking?

 

[AppliedMicro]

People considered as "Aliens" in some countries, who usually shout louder on the lack of "human rights" in other countries.

I know. Contrary to what you might have believed (see your previous reference to the „massive“ health bills in „my“ country), I‘m not a citizen or resident of such a country.

Then it seems that they have a bigger issue than the inability to sideload apps on iOS.

Well, they can still buy iPhones, can’t they? But they are (very) expensive.

That’s the rational choice. I mean, it all depends on your personal threat or risk profile. Same as why Snowden applied for asylum in Russia.

If you’re most concerned about Chinese actors (particularly) law enforcement/government spying on you, you’d rather use an operating system that’s (primarily) developed somewhere else, preferably in an adversarial country (such as the US)

In the US apples business is fair.

Not according to the country's Department of Justice.

not allow side loading. Why make it easy to enable sedition and csam and human trafficking?

The argument doesn't make sense, when there are already - as you've pointed out countless times in other threads - (Android) alternatives available that allow sideloading.

Also, it's lifted straight out of the playbook of any totalitarian or surveillance state.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Humans have a basic right to privacy. And yes, that means that there's a risk they'll engage in nefarious activity in private. Yet we as societies we tolerate that risk in order to maintain that basic right.

 

[I7guy]

[…]

Not according to the country's Department of Justice.

[…]

That is called an allegation. It has to be proved and will take years.

 

[Mousse]

Apple ”vigorously” resists most forms of regulation except when it comes from China.

When China sneezes, Apple catches a cold.

Good luck in finding a cheap Android smartphone in China that isn't (or can't easily) be backdoored.

Get a cheap phone that you can install LineageOS and sideload AFWall+. Done and done.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

That would not be possible without that closed ecosystem. On a Mac for example even China can't block any software.

 

[chmania]

That would not be possible without that closed ecosystem. On a Mac for example even China can't block any software.

They make all the Apple devices, including the Macs. And, everyone here are worried about backdoors...to supposed-to-be an "unfriendly" government. Who knows what your Apple devices have that even Apple doesn't know...

 

[AppliedMicro]

That is called an allegation. It has to be proved and will take years.

True.

In the US apples business is fair.

You and Apple claim it's fair.
The U.S. department of justices alleges it's not.

We can agree on that.

 

[chmania]

Here's something highly eye-candy and very efficient from that supposedly unfriendly (for the US) country. Been playing with it live for last hour. Its made on Linux, not Unix, and a community edition. I've used many kinds of Linux distros, but this is the loveliest, and most efficient. I am looking forward triple boot with macOS, Windows and Linux in my MBP, so this will be that distro. Interesting how it would fare with the touchbar.

By the way, there's a very interesting distro made by a kid from India, the next biggest economical challenge to the US. Not the kid, but India. At the moment there's not much badmouthing India, well, not yet. The kid, I suppose, started coding when he was around 8-9 years old. I'll dual boot his distro with Windows in the Dell.

 

[MacinDoc]

To those complaining that Apple is complying with Chinese government demands while fighting EU directives in court, there is a significant difference between the two. Apple fights those things in court which it feels it has a reasonable chance of opposing. Because many of these EU laws leave significant room for interpretation, and the courts are bound to follow the principles and precedents of western democratic law, there is a reasonable chance of success in opposing EU decrees. On the other hand, the sole purpose of Chinese courts is to confirm the agenda of the Chinese Communist Party, so opposing such demands in court would be a waste of time and money for Apple. Any company wishing to operate in China must do whatever the Chinese government requires. The alternative is to completely forego the revenue earned by sales in China, and possibly put most of Apple's production at risk.

Most of the time, Apple, as a corporation responsible to its shareholders, will take actions which it feels will be to its own benefit.

 

[chmania]

To those complaining that Apple is complying with Chinese government demands while fighting EU directives in court, there is a significant difference between the two. Apple fights those things in court which it feels it has a reasonable chance of opposing. Because many of these EU laws leave significant room for interpretation, and the courts are bound to follow the principles and precedents of western democratic law, there is a reasonable chance of success in opposing EU decrees. On the other hand, the sole purpose of Chinese courts is to confirm the agenda of the Chinese Communist Party, so opposing such demands in court would be a waste of time and money for Apple. Any company wishing to operate in China must do whatever the Chinese government requires. The alternative is to completely forego the revenue earned by sales in China, and possibly put most of Apple's production at risk.

Most of the time, Apple, as a corporation responsible to its shareholders, will take actions which it feels will be to its own benefit.

The EU considers the OS is the right of the users, and the future users, not the device its blocked in. So, there would be a time, when Apple would be asked to let macOS be allowed to be installed in any device.

 

[AppliedMicro]

To those complaining that Apple is complying with Chinese government demands while fighting EU directives in court, there is a significant difference between the two. Apple fights those things in court which it feels it has a reasonable chance of opposing.

That is obvious.

But I'm not sure it's much the legal opposition they're mounting in courts that some are perceiving as hypocritical. Because they're not only mounting legal challenges in courts. They publicly denounced the European Union and its Digital Markets Acts as "destroy(ing) the security of the iPhone".

They even went so far to implicitly link that to endangering the human right to privacy, as in their recent Complying with the Digital Markets Act pamphlet:

"At Apple, we believe privacy is a fundamental human right and we design our products and services with innovative technologies and techniques to protect our users’ privacy."

"Apple is deeply committed to upholding these core values in every single one of those places. That means finding a way to protect and preserve user security, privacy, and safety while following the law in every country where we do business."

"Dear Tim
Real emails received by Tim Cook about changes to iPhone in the European Union"

"Thank you for leading a company that puts customers first, no matter if it's in regards to their privacy, health, or human rights.
As an EU citizen, ... I will not be allowing sideloading on my devices"


👉 So yeah... where is Apple's comparable public response to non-backdoored end-to-end-encrypted messenger apps being censored elsewhere?