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

[Beautyspin]

I think the main concern is the role of a government, any government, telling Apple what to do with its services.

Apple has to be told what is right. Otherwise, Apple will only do what gives it more money because, according to Apple, that is the right thing. It might not be the right thing according to the government. Since governments make legislations, Apple has to follow. Both in China and the EU. However, Apple is quick to follow the rule in China because it needs to stay in China at any cost to make more money. It fights EU law or complies maliciously because it wants to defend its revenue.

For Apple, everything is about revenue. Ethics and Privacy are also about revenue. If there is no revenue, they would chuck them in a heartbeat, just like they do so regularly in China.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Yes you quoted something another guy said

That you agreed with.

I misunderstood & thought it was about governmental control over businesses?

Government control over businesses. Regulations. Also known as laws. I used building codes as an example. Those are laws that specifically regulate businesses. Construction businesses. You responded to the question “are you saying all regulations are bad?” with the answer “yes.” That is the same as you straight up saying “all regulations are bad.” So, again, because there is NO distinction between “regulations” and “laws” your comment begs the question: are you arguing for a lawless state?

Not about traffic laws et al? I mustve misunderstood the whole thread?

Traffic laws are a kind of regulation. I was making my point by expanding to show how broad a category “regulation” is.

 

[Surf Monkey]

Yes one is removal of an app in the App Store. A procedure that has been done before. The other is opening up apples infrastructure to all comers. Other than that difference they are the same.

The issue is the word “meddling.” That puts a specific spin on both actions, as if both are equal and equally negative in all respects. Clearly that isn’t true. These are vastly different cases. The 1:1 is false.

 

[I7guy]

The issue is the word “meddling.” That puts a specific spin on both actions, as if both are equal and equally negative in all respects. Clearly that isn’t true. These are vastly different cases. The 1:1 is false.

Government “meddles” in all of our lives every day 24x7. Someone used the word “meddle” to denote a lower form of a government ruling against the most extreme of dictates. That’s some spin. But we agree (even if we dont) that removing an app is a chasm of difference from being told to allow sideloading.

 

[zakarhino]

Why? WeChat has a solid track record of no security whatsoever. Has affirmed deep connection to CCP, a foreign adversary. Isn’t that enough incentive to investigate and determine its risk to national security? Or even the security of the democratic world?

If WeChat had no security the Chinese wouldn’t allow it, there is a big emphasis on data sovereignty in China. You said a worldwide ban based on China being a foreign adversary. Who are they an adversary to? The majority of the world doesn’t consider China an adversary.

Maybe “the democratic world” (you mean Europe and NATO countries) should investigate WeChat but why they would waste time with that is beyond me because nobody really uses those apps outside of China except diaspora. Instead they use American owned services. Given the evidence of the US engaging in state level surveillance against citizens and leaders of “the democratic world”, the US celebrating the role of their social apps in color revolutions globally, and attempts from US intelligence services to build backdoors into services like Telegram (not even an American company), wouldn’t you agree the priority should be to investigate American apps and issue a “worldwide” ban on communication apps with connections to the US? Moreover, should countries outside “the democratic world” consider adopting WeChat because it’s controlled by a state they trust?

 

[trusso]

Sure. Because there's a chance the courts in the EU will side with Apple. No such chance here.

The hypocrisy is the problem, but you seem to be okay with it.

 

[zakarhino]

Or more like it is not encrypted at all because it can be decrypted at will, making encryption useless.

Nobody’s explained this yet:

Still waiting for someone in this thread to explain why China allows Chinese iCloud customers to enable the same Advanced Data Protection as US customers which deletes encryption keys from iCloud and only stores them on device, rendering CPC/Apple spying extremely difficult. Everyone here assured me China banned privacy or something.

 

[iHorseHead]

People celebrating EUs control must be super excited about this too?

Completely different things in my opinion.

 

[SoldOnApple]

Facebook having a WhatsApp button under EVERY post is so annoying. Accidentally press it and WhatsApp opens, which I don't even use. And WhatsApp makes you use your phone number as a username, so if someone text messages you it comes through WhatsApp. What a PITA.

 

[tCdemon]

Are they being pulled because China can't decrypt the encryption for these apps?

 

[zakarhino]

Are they being pulled because China can't decrypt the encryption for these apps?

No the apps were already non functioning and have been for years via the Great Firewall. This move is mostly a formality. China are very careful about allowing social networks into their country that do not fall under their jurisdiction.

If Chinese citizens want encrypted messages on iPhone they can just use iMessage with Advanced Data Protection enabled on their iCloud account.

 

[startergo]

Ever been to China?

To see the CCP? We have here the democrats they are the American version of the CCP… no need to go to china for that (t)reason.

 

[Judo]

Apple knows who their master is.

It's their share price. This is just capitalism at work.

 

[laz232]

Good to Know that signal works as expected

exactly - it's like a seal of approval...

 

[211]

Nobody is stopping me but I hate the idea of changing the ethos of the Os to act like lagdroid.

Windows phone tried it and we saw what happened. We wound up with windows 10 mobile.

If you want an os like lagdroid get lagdroid and leave IOS performing as it is

What about macOS? You can use apps and other stores, not just ones from its App Store

 

[chmania]

To see the CCP? We have here the democrats they are the American version of the CCP… no need to go to china for that (t)reason.

Living in a large island in a pond won't let you know how the world outside lives/exists. The world is not just McDonalds or Starbucks.

 

[vicviper789]

US: Do this. Apple: lol no
EU: Do this, please. Apple: *sues*
CN: Do this now. Apple: Yes dear, great idea!

 

[chmania]

US: Do this. Apple: lol no
EU: Do this, please. Apple: *sues*
CN: Do this now. Apple: Yes dear, great idea!

Global South: Do this now! Yes, of course!

 

[Shirasaki]

If WeChat had no security the Chinese wouldn’t allow it, there is a big emphasis on data sovereignty in China. You said a worldwide ban based on China being a foreign adversary. Who are they an adversary to? The majority of the world doesn’t consider China an adversary.

Maybe “the democratic world” (you mean Europe and NATO countries) should investigate WeChat but why they would waste time with that is beyond me because nobody really uses those apps outside of China except diaspora. Instead they use American owned services. Given the evidence of the US engaging in state level surveillance against citizens and leaders of “the democratic world”, the US celebrating the role of their social apps in color revolutions globally, and attempts from US intelligence services to build backdoors into services like Telegram (not even an American company), wouldn’t you agree the priority should be to investigate American apps and issue a “worldwide” ban on communication apps with connections to the US? Moreover, should countries outside “the democratic world” consider adopting WeChat because it’s controlled by a state they trust?

Then you have no idea what CCP really wants from people: total and absolute control. People are not people in normal sense, but products in the same fashion to us carrying phone around and be used in various fashion. After said product is no longer fit for purpose, throw It away.

You say the world doesn’t consider China an adversary, then you fail to read the message between the lines. Yes, US spearheaded the CHIPS Act and pressure other countries to ban China from accessing advanced semiconductor design and manufacturing technologies, but those countries on their own are not stupid either, especially for countries like Japan and various SEA countries. They carefully pick the word in statements to not directly piss off CCP hard but the diversification is their recognition of how dangerous China can be in the world’s supply chain.

As for the whole investigation things, they don’t need to care about the reality that most people outside of China (who is also not born Chinese) don’t use or care about WeChat. High profile person (key political figures for example) using them and having trouble is already enough to let them investigate. Just recently an Australian policeman was arrested and charged with crimes later found not committed at all simply because he is on TV critical about CCP and CCP wants to put dirt on him.

You think world must ban communication apps with connections to the US. Then I can say the same to WeChat and TikTok because both have affirmed connections to China.

 

[chmania]

Then you have no idea what CCP really wants from people: total and absolute control.

You have to be a Chinese in China for that.

You say the world doesn’t consider China an adversary, then you fail to read the message between the lines.

No, the world doesn't. Ever heard of the Global South? The US is considered the adversary!

Yes, US spearheaded the CHIPS Act and pressure other countries to ban China from accessing advanced semiconductor

Which only makes China to make their own, and they will. Asia will back China when time comes. Japan is not considered, but the Japanese are.

As for the whole investigation things, they don’t need to care about the reality that most people outside of China (who is also not born Chinese) don’t use or care about WeChat.

Well, there are 1.41 billion Chinese in China only. That is more than the population of the EU + North America. By the way, in India too, the upcoming world economic leader. The old world is losing, and rapidly.

You think world must ban communication apps with connections to the US.

The world is not US. There's more out there than the large island in the pond. Isn't it just hard to find a made-in-the-US device around the house/at work?

 

[startergo]

Living in a large island in a pond won't let you know how the world outside lives/exists. The world is not just McDonalds or Starbucks.

If China is “the world” thank you, but no thank you. I have visited most of the countries on earth including China.

 

[scorpio vega]

What about macOS? You can use apps and other stores, not just ones from its App Store

macOS is not iOS. iOS has always worked in its own distinct way.

 

[chmania]

If China is “the world” thank you, but no thank you. I have visited most of the countries on earth including China.

The world is outside "the-island-in-the-pond", usually called the Global South, excluding the EU.
China is absolutely allowed to develop itself, without all those "sanctions" from the self-styled "policeman" of the world.

 

[Shirasaki]

You have to be a Chinese in China for that.

So I guess news talking about overseas Chinese police stations never goes into mainstream media. Oh wait, it is?

Which only makes China to make their own, and they will.

Yeah, I am looking forward to their catchup efforts to make up for decades lost in fundamental research in various scientific fields supporting semiconductor development, which they can't really steal.

Well, there are 1.41 billion Chinese in China only.

First, it is still a bit in the air whether China actually HAS 1.41 billion people at any point. They are well known for re-touching data. Second, their birth rate is declining and more young graduates choosing to give up on marriage due to the huge financial burden carried after having kids. So let's see the real population number after a couple of decades.

The old world is losing, and rapidly.

Losing? Maybe. But at what rate? And those people living in your so-called "old world" definitely won't stand idly by watching their world crumble.

The world is outside "the-island-in-the-pond", usually called the Global South, excluding the EU.
China is absolutely allowed to develop itself, without all those "sanctions" from the self-styled "policeman" of the world.

What the heck is this "Global South"? All the African countries and South American countries? Cause if anything, Australia and New Zealand certainly don't count in that group. And yes, China can develop those stuff themselves, but at what cost and for how long? Remember, China received tons of foreign help when they opened to the world for business, otherwise, their political infighting would be everything. Western people didn't really bother about how China grew and how the policy went as long as China played nicely on the world stage. Now things have changed.

 

[chmania]

What the heck is this "Global South"? All the African countries and South American countries?

Your news media won't inform you on that?
All countries, except the US, Canada, Australia, NZ, maybe today's Argentina, Japan, S. Korea, the EU, UK and some of the satellite countries, Israel for example. The old world is former colonial countries, and some newer colonial countries, including the US, Canada, Australia, NZ and of course Israel.