Hacker News Reader

Comment by lilyball | Hacker News Reader

This article, and all the response here on HN, is really quite baffling to me. Apple complies with local laws. If the local government says the app violates their laws, Apple doesn't have a whole lot of choice here; either pull the app, or be in violation of the law. AFAIK all the app stores do the same thing.

View on HN

Maybe soon a local law in China will say everyone needs to report where all homosexuals live because they need to be executed, and then Apple will send that exact info to the police (e.g. anyone with grindr installed) and then you will say "Oh what? they are just folling the law". Yeah we know they are just following the law, still doesn't mean we shouldn't give them bad press and opinions about it.

Slippery slope is not a valid fallacy.

Is not a slippery slope (because I'm not saying it will happen, I'm just amplifying the core of your opinion), is just an example with a different law; that btw exists in other countries such as Nigeria, just be honest and say you agree more with this one law than the one in the example.

You're trying to compare Apple taking down an app that violates local laws (which, again, everybody does) with... I don't even know how to characterize your new law proposal except it's ridiculous.

Apple not publishing illegal content is a far cry from what you're proposing and it does not make sense to compare the two at all.

The core of your argument was "They are just following the law", it clearly wasn't "They are following a sensible law"; if you believe the law to be within the ethical bounds of laws that should be followed for the sake of keeping business there just say so but just saying "they are just following the law" is dishonest at best.

They are following the exact same law literally everyone follows and always has followed, which is to take down apps that violate the local laws. I don't understand why you're taking a particular issue with this. "Apple, in its capacity as an app store owner, shall not publish apps that violate local laws" is not even a remotely problematic stance. If you have an issue with this particular app being taken down, you should be directing your ire at the law that makes it illegal, not at Apple for complying with the law, because taking the app down does no more harm to anybody than the alternative, which is for Apple to take the whole store down and stop doing business in the country.

> because taking the app down does no more harm to anybody than the alternative, which is for Apple to take the whole store down and stop doing business in the country.

Only the future will tell if that's true

Plot twist: As of 2018, Grindr is literally owned by a Chinese holding company, Beijing Kunlun Tech Co Ltd.

It looks like they were asked by US regulators to sell it off due to privacy concerns: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-grindr-m-a-beijingkunlun/...

What Hong Kong law does this app violate?

From the article, the stated reason for removing the app, given by Apple is "Your app contains content - or facilitates, enables, and encourages an activity - that is not legal ... specifically, the app allowed users to evade law enforcement"

You're not answering my question (which is moot, since the app got reinstated)

Perhaps, I just answered giving what info I had.

The issue is that Apple doesn’t allow you to side load apps that aren’t in the App store and Google does. The ability to load what software you want on your own hardware seems like a pretty fundamental right to me and this is the reason I’ve always considered the Apple App Store a devil’s bargain.

Then maybe they should not portray themselves as the white knight of privacy. I am absolutely disgusted by their hypocrisy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com