Comment by zenexer | Hacker News Reader

Comment by zenexer | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Per Durov in his Telegram channel:

> Apple released a statement (https://www.gazeta.ru/tech/news/2020/10/09/n_15056407.shtml) saying they didn't want us to take down the 3 channels (https://t.me/durov/135) run by the Belarusian protestors, but just specific posts "disclosing personal information."

He goes on to clarify that the request effectively amounts to asking that the channels be deleted, but that restricting them on iOS should be sufficient.

Regardless of your take, at the moment, the following statement is false:

> Apple forces Telegram to Close Channels Run by Belarus Protestors

For now:

1. Apple claims that wasn't their request.

2. The channels won't be closed.

3. Telegram won't be removed from the App Store.

"Apple forces Telegram to Close Channels" makes it sound as though the channels are, in fact, being closed, which isn't the case.

It's one thing to call Apple out on their behavior here, but it's another matter entirely to scare users into thinking that the channels will be deleted--they won't, assuming you're not on iOS. If you're in one of those channels, statistically, you're probably not on iOS anyway.

Ah, comrade, the channels will not be closed, they will merely be... hm... adjusted.

What functional difference is there between banning access to the channel and closing it? And why do Apple have any interest in this, unless they are working at the behest of the Belarusian regime.

Because the regime contacted Apple legal, I guess. I am pretty sure there are no Apple offices in Belarus, they probably did it through the Moscow office.

> What functional difference is there between banning access to the channel and closing it?

Most of the protesters are probably on Android, not iOS. Apple is still terrible for doing this, but there’s a very important distinction from the perspective of the protesters. If they were to read the title of this article, they would probably think they needed to panic, jump ship, and switch to a different platform. That could be critical misinformation.

From the perspective of Silicon Valley, sure, there’s no difference. From the perspective of a demographic that mostly uses Android anyway and is already fighting against fear and misinformation, articles like this can wreak more havoc than Apple’s questionable tactics.

If the point of the channels is to share strategic information related to your oppressive regime, it's disingenuous to claim they "channels aren't being asked to be shutdown" when having delete those specific messages has the same impact - making the channels defunct - and giving Apple a plausible deniability scapegoat/gaslighting of "buT wE DIdn'T asK THeM to tAkE doWn tHE chAnnEL."

Apple is taking sides with an oppressor by requesting this, that they're choosing to ignore the circumstances - where doxxing otherwise generally is bad because generally it's not reasonable - is not reasonable and lacking nuance.

Correct. Apple is demanding that the posts be removed. Apple is not forcing the posts to be removed—as evidenced by the fact that Telegram is still in the App Store and the posts/channels remain visible on Android.

This doesn’t help Apple’s case at all. Apple is garbage here. It’s an important distinction for protesters, who don’t need to panic as long as they’re not on iOS. However, if a protester were to read this title, they would get the wrong information.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com