Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by codetrotter | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

codetrotter

I don’t understand what argument that is.

On my iPhone I have:

- Kraken Pro app, where I can buy and sell bitcoins

- Ledger Live app, which I use with my hardware Ledger device for my self custody Bitcoin

Using these two apps, I can buy Bitcoin, sell Bitcoin, and transfer Bitcoin to anyone using my iPhone.

What is it that Apple is preventing these people from doing?

If I want to send Bitcoins to you, we don’t need that Apple allows Venmo or other “peer to peer” payment apps to use cryptocurrency. Those kind of companies are irrelevant for that goal anyways.

All we need is that you either have an account on an exchange, or a self-custody wallet, and I can send Bitcoin to you. All of this is possible using an iPhone.

View on HN

From the article:

> They argued that a peer-to-peer app based on "decentralized" crypto technology "would allow iPhone users to send payments to each other without any intermediary at all."

Kraken lets you access crypto that is held in custody by an exchange company. Ledger Live lets you access crypto that resides on a separate physical device.

To the best of my reading, plaintiffs argue that Apple is preventing people from holding cryptocurrency on their iPhone. As in, the private keys are stored in the app's secure storage space, so the crypto is actually "in" the phone and not with a company or on a separate device. So to answer your question, that's what it seems plaintiffs are alleging that Apple prevents people from doing.

Trust Wallet does exactly thaf. TBH I have no idea what the plaintiffs are actually contending.

After reading the lawsuit more closely, it seems like they’re arguing that Apple rejects applications that include cryptocurrency features but weren’t submitted by regulated financial institutions.

One of their examples was a social network app that was rejected for including a crypto tipping feature.

> but weren’t submitted by regulated financial institutions

This was detailed on an Apple support page for an app submission:

  Guideline 3.1.5 - Business - Payments - Cryptocurrencies

  Your app facilitates the transmission of a virtual currency but was not submitted by a corresponding exchange or recognized financial institution.

  Next Steps

  To resolve this issue, please provide documentary evidence demonstrating you have the necessary licenses and permissions to distribute an app with cryptocurrency exchange features in all the locations where your app is currently available.

Hard to disagree with Apple here. Crypto "absolutists" fail to acknowledge how prevalent crypto scams are, so a blanket enablement of any and all apps to have crypto payment features would be highly dangerous.

As "dangerous" as Safari, right? What difference does it being an app make? Apple's always so vigilant to keep us safe from danger in this one area of "payments that happen outside of the web browser" despite the fact that the web door is wide open and that's where scams always happen.

I can't imagine Apple's allergy to crypto payments is anything other than an insurance policy against the likes of Epic getting ideas to launch a cryptocurrency, which conveniently can be used to pay for in-app digital goods, circumventing the holy 30% tithe that is due to Apple.

> As "dangerous" as Safari, right? What difference does it being an app make?

Apple’s pitch from day one has been that the App Store is more trustworthy: it launched in the era where a common joke this time of year was going to have thanksgiving with your parents and removing all of the malware they’d installed on the home PC. Part of the justification for the restrictions on developers was explicitly that they’d benefit from being in a place customers trust, kind of like how much effort companies will spend to get a prestige retailer to carry their lineup.

> can't imagine Apple's allergy to crypto payments is anything other than an insurance policy against the likes of Epic getting ideas to launch a cryptocurrency

This wouldn’t change the situation so there’s no reason to believe this is intended to be some 5-dimensional chess game rather than a simple desire not to play in a scammy space with a much higher risk of complaints and regulatory issues.

I'm not a fan of Apple, but it looks like they're trying to lock down what they can and accepting what they can't.

I've no doubt that Apple would like to lock down the web too, but they don't have the clout to unilaterally change the internet. They can unilaterally do whatever they want to iOS though.

you shouldn't trust Trust Wallet

there have even been private key exposing bugs in it after the Binance acquisition too

but yes, the conversation is about whether crypto wallets have been approved before in the app store, and that's true, its a seemingly tenuous relationship though

I don't. I have a Ledger hardware wallet now for the smidgen of Dogecoin that I hold onto for the fun of it.

But I did have Trust Wallet for a little while, downloaded straight from the official App Store.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com