Hacker News Reader

Comment by tartoran | Hacker News Reader

Apple should pay for it! They allow this type of apps because they get their 30% cut. I would definitely hold them liable for this

View on HN

Cryptocurrency enthusiasts talk endlessly about the virtues of decentralization, immutable transactions, “code is law” etc, but when they lose their keys or get scammed, it’s always some big, centralized entity that is apparently responsible for making them whole.

But Apple holds out the purported security of the IOS app store ecosystem[0] as the reason to pay them $1k for a phone (and the cheapest IOS phone is $450!) and 30% rent seeking for all transactions on the phone, and why they kick apps out of the store simply over speech that they disagree with, such as COVID misinformation or Chinese censorship.

Apple deliberately degrades the performance and functionality of web apps in the sole browser allowed on the IOS platform (Safari, all other browsers are a wrapper around it), slow walk and introduce bugs into standards such as WebRTC, and make it very difficult to install apps as a PWA in order to funnel everyone (50% of phone users in the U.S.) into the App Store, and ban all other app installation methods.

And, when they introduce new features like privacy nutrition labels, it's always so that they can force even more users into their walled garden, and strengthen proprietary apps like iMessage, and build up their ads business. It's like "nobody but us", where "us" is Apple.

So, yes, if they are holding out that all of this app review process is to benefit and protect the users, and the users get scammed because their app review process is apparently incapable of catching these obviously scam apps, then Apple should make the users whole.

0. Apple says its App Store is ‘a safe and trusted place.’ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/11/22/apple-s...

Apple charges 30% because they can, not because there is some sort of logical basis for it.

If Apple was somehow deemed responsible for policing crypto-scams, the only rational thing to do would be to ban Crypto apps.

> Apple charges 30% because they can, not because there is some sort of logical basis for it.

Agreed. Actually, they could probably jack it up to 90% if not for the inevitable lawsuits from state Attorneys General..

> If Apple was somehow deemed responsible for policing crypto-scams, the only rational thing to do would be to ban Crypto apps.

This might be true if the only scam apps were crypto related.

Apple's quest for control over the apps translates to a quest for increased control over their users;

Just as with Google's ability to control search results, when Apple can control how you work, which apps you can install, and even what you say in those apps, they ultimately control how and what you think.

That's a pretty powerful position for two of the most powerful companies in the world. It becomes self-perpetuating and people will automatically suppress any evidence that their opinions are being shaped.

I'm wondering how long it takes them to figure out people would immediately start scamming apple if they were liable. The risk of crypto is its freedom. I have no idea why people would not stay in regulated markets.

I think everything you say about Apple is true yet their phone is still the best choice for most people.

It's not just that app. There are several high grossing outright scam apps on the Apple App Store [1]

[1] https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/21/22385859/apple-app-store-...

I'm not a cryptocurrency enthusiast and think that it sucks that it empowers scammers to steal. But you know who else empowers these scammers? Apple.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com