Comment by Fischgericht | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Fischgericht | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

It's quite shocking what appears to be the common ground here.

The EU has been trying to give users (YOU!) freedom of choice when it comes to YOUR personal data. But you are complaining that businesses tried to circumvent this with cookie banners?

In this case the EU is trying to make sure there is COMPETITION, which benefits YOU. Capitalism, Free Markets, etc. Not a fan?

And coming up next: The EU is trying to make sure that YOU are allowed to install any application you want on a device YOU own. Again, a device YOU own, not Apple.

And this time around, Apple is going pure evil on this, by trying to force application stores offering open source (isn't this supposed to be a thing here, you know, HACKER news?) to pay them for allowing YOU to download a free open source app onto the device YOU OWN. Are you guys again going to defend them for that move?

Apple has absolutely no legitimate reason for all of this. Not by any commonly known definition of the term "free market".

There is so much shit going on here in my region (Central EU). There is a lot to complain about when it comes to the EU. But complaining about a governmental entity fighting for the rights of the people instead of the oligarchs for a change?

Seriously, what's wrong with some of you guys? Do you really want to live in a world where a tiny number of mega corporations, some of them run by lunatics, are allowed to have full control over devices you own AND all of your personal data?

I am SO looking forward to the EU smashing Apple to pieces for the disgusting stunt they are right now trying to prevent users getting back some control over their hardware.

I would assume that a US-based hacker/nerd/tech enthusiast would respond to what the EU is trying to achieve here with: "Hey, why can't we over here also have some of that? Is it normal that OUR government is not fighting for our basic rights?".

Sorry for the harsh words, but this really needed to be said. Some people really need a reality check and look at this site's title. No, it's not "i-want-musk-to-rule-the-world-and-eat-my-firstborn.com".

> Do you really want to live in a world where a tiny number of mega corporations, some of them run by lunatics, are allowed to have full control over devices you own AND all of your personal data?

Long story short, yes, a lot of people here do. It's the temporarily embarrassed millionaire syndrome that drives a lot of American politics, but in a tech context.

They believe that one day, they could be the lunatics running the mega corporation and exploiting users, and when that day comes, they don't want the EU to stand in their way.

But still: How on earth could a nerd/hacker/tech enthusiast have the position of "I should not be in charge to decide what Software I install on hardware I own"?

Do these people really think that Apple knows what's best for them and has the sole right to decide? Do these people not trust themselves at all to know what Apps they want to install, what music they want to listen to, and what content is safe for them to read?

This just doesn't make sense to me.

The enthusiasm is for money and power. The 'enthusiasm' broadcasted over "hacking", "autonomy", "libertarianism", etc, is virtue signaling because of the kind of message board HN is 'supposed' to be.

I agree on the virtue signaling. I'd prefer to call it "trying to find common values", but yeah, it does fit the definition.

But I disagree about the "supposed to be".

It genuinely strikes me as completely illogical.

Albeit used much less in those circles around here in the EU, I had my fair share of contact with hackers/nerds/geeks/devs/etc that use MacBooks. When asked why they accept working with such a locked down platform the response I got most of the time was "it's BSD, I can run and compile whatever I want".

But that's not the case when it comes to the IPhone. Here right now as an owner you don't have much rights on something that you own.

I sure can see that you simply can be indifferent on that - such as one might have the position to be happy to have an "open" platform on the desk, and a walled garden in their hands. But being in OPPOSITION of having those who also want the platform in their hand to be open? I still find that very counter-intuitive and strange.

Most of the discussions here are about logical subjects, and positions typically appear to me to be very rational.

But the comments I often see here whenever "EU tries to enforce data privacy laws and enforce free market access" comes up don't appear to be very rational to me. For what I would call the "hacker community" over here in the EU, even when using the broadest possible definition of the word, appears to be cheering in unison whenever - often with the help of that community - another goal post has been moved when it comes to regaining some personal rights.

For me it's now two years that Apple again and again is rejecting to accept an Open Source community app to its store due to it on initial sign-up requiring a connection to an OAuth2 provider in a dedicated browser Windows. Once. As this is a requirement from the OAuth2 provider. Apple is rejecting this again and again on the sole comment that this dedicated browser window opening up once after installation would be a bad UI experience. All while 100,0% of the users of the app are just happy with that, and that the vast majority of apps on the App Store using for example Gitlab as an OAuth2 provider have the exact same flow.

It's two years now that the Android users are happy, and the iOS users have to live with installing one "preflight" version after another.

So yeah, there you have it: Of course I was looking forward to simply providing the app via Sideloading or an alternative App-Store, but by simply ignoring the laws the EU has made with a "come, fine me" attitude, I probably can wait another year before the EU has success enforcing its laws. It's hard for me to grasp that anyone in the developer community could justify Apple blocking both sideloading Apps and installing them via third party app-stores, no matter how much fan posters of any giving company they may pinned to their wall...

I don't understand the dissonance myself, though as I'm neither a developer nor a "hacker" of any sort that might affect my opinion. The desktop computer is the most open computing platform ever developed and the first to reach the masses, and the way things are looking it will be the last; yet this is something the libertarian free-market capitalists here cheer? They complain about tech illiteracy but want to keep everyone in a state of learned helplessness? I just don't get it.

In another thread about Apple's compliance with the DMA, people were arguing that the locked down nature is why they bought from Apple. They believe it's beneficial.

I guess it's the same kind of person who, in other circumstances, might prefer an authoritarian government that would restrict their rights (e.g. women who are against women having the right to vote); they genuinely want it because they think it produces better outcomes than something totally free, and they don't value their own freedoms as much as someone more independent and libertarian would.

I think your comparison with women's right to vote is spot-on. But in most parts of the world there has been and still is progress.

But thinking about it, the US moving backward on this subject, too - a lot of people now believe it's OK to take control over someone else's body. And there are women who actually are against reproductive rights for women.

All of this feels so strange to me. Since the IBM PC the industry got a huge boost due to the PC being an open platform. Back then outside of IBM it was pretty much unimageable that anyone would say "don't open up that platform, we prefer a walled garden". But now, 40 years later, the lessons appear to be forgotten.

Maybe those who have this belief that a locked down computer platform is a good idea are young, and due to there not being computer history lessons in schools simply have not experienced those decades themselves?

I am not sure how much those groups / beliefs really overlap, but I have the feeling that those who want an almighty Apple might be the same people who want a "lean" government. Which means that they have more trust in a corporation where they don't have any say compared to a government that they can (more or less these days) elect themselves.

That again might be due to potentially missing history lessons. Maybe people simply don't know what Microsoft back then tried on dirty tricks to destroy the open source movement, and now is trying again trying to force you to use Edge, just as Apple wants to force you to use Safari. Again I would expect that people in this forum agree that it will be beneficial for humanity that there are multiple browser engines available. I mean - I guess nobody here would find it attractive to only have two different car manufacturers, who also exercise full control over what you can do with the car that you OWN.

Just to give another example: Pretty much everyone watches porn. Do they find it attractive that Apple is deciding on what on is OK and what is not? I know that people in the US are much more prudish and inhibited compared to most EU countries. But EU magazines got banned from the app store due to showing women's breasts in a medical context etc. Again I don't understand why people even trust a corporation to know better about their sexuality then themselves.

Humans are weird, and only to be enjoyed in small dosages. But I expected that people who prefer free markets, choice and empowerment of the users to be the fast majority on this forum. But that clearly is not the case.

Weird.

99% agree

but it is not oligarch who get the taxes, apple stock owners I guess

it is somehow the job of Apple management to maximize profit, they are doing this

question is whether they really optimizing future profits with this behaviour, they could have moved on already

I wanted to buy my mum an iphone, I am all linux and android, my partner has iphone and ipad and even if I dont like apple and microsoft logic, they are good products

I thought with face id it is easier to be safe and she will not really see that I forced a pass manager on her :)

and I was sure now apple abandons this behaviour and they were put on the right track, apple was somehow an option for me... until this happened

no way I ever buy an iphone anytime in the future for anybody

but I am probably a minority... I think this kind of behaviour is disgusting that apple does

however, if app store revenue is 100B dollar, every year, logically understandable, 500 million fines are noting

still, the world is governed by emotions too, and I will never forgive Apple

I'm using the term "oligarch" here to try make it clear why "let's have a very small number of not democratically elected people/organizations in control of your human rights" historically has proven not to be a very good idea, and why it's somewhat better to have a functioning democracy taking care of that. And as a huge chunk of our human rights are now digital and managed by corporations, it means that it's essential to maintain a free market, so that at least some choice is left.

It makes me feel old, but I do remember the times when the US lectured EU countries about those concepts. It's frustrating that people here who clearly are expected to be well educated and who might be coming from that country that used to lecture others about freedom, free markets and ownership rights no longer put any value in that.

It all appears to be empty words these days. "Stand your ground"? No? It's my hardware. I paid for it, with money I got from doing work. I own it. It's mine. I decide what Apps I install, I decide what music I listen to, I decide if I want to watch porn on it. Why has the concept of "owning" something lost all meaning to some?

well in a sense the right word may be oligarch...

US companies control all OSs but linux... they are surely working together with NSa and the US government which in turn let them become extremely powerful monopolies... what are oligarchs? people who play together with strong governments... Ithink the upper management of these US companies not just become oligarch-rich from soaring stock prices but the actual thing oligarch enjoy is power which is not 1 to 1 money

in the economical sense stock companies have shareholders, simple employees and management and the goal is to maximize profit... totally legit and apple is seemingly doing this by crippling the web because using apps from taxed app store and using browsers to browse simple websites is what fits their thinking and current(!) sales model

but you are right, why do people argue for apple I really dont understand... all you have to do if you want to stay simple and apple-safe to follow their suggestions, use safari, never download other browsers, do not use other app stores etc... a choice will not make their system worse

and what I want to add, I am not sure Apple actually on the profit max way with these decisions... not because I never buy iphones ever again because most people who buy apple rather tend to beleive them and accept and follow which is an understandable strategy when there is so much information around

but they missed making Safari THE browser where they now could distribute Apple products on all OS which may have lead to doubling the great profits we see nowadays... they could have bought tesla or porsche which fits this individualistic walled garden system they are so good at...they missed the cloud business, missed ai and who knows what else

and sometimes it is better long term if you lose some money but you let your developers experience some real competition which leads to actually better present value of long term future profits even if you lose some monopolistic profit

is it not apple have become? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3NASGb5m8s

and they do not have to disappear to fail, we never know the relative path, what could have happened... maybe being the biggest market cap company of the world is still failing relative to following a path with more competition, innovation etc...

> In this case the EU is trying to make sure there is COMPETITION, which benefits YOU.

No, EU adds only bureaucracy and regulations. There won't be another 'EU Apple', quite the opposite.

> I am SO looking forward to the EU smashing Apple to pieces

Exactly this, you are not looking EU having their own companies of the Apple/Google scale. You are willing to smash something to pieces.

well if you think that you are a proud US citizen who somehow has Apple/Google, I think they actually pay their taxes in Ireland?

"When a customer buys an Apple product outside the United States, the profit is first taxed in the country where the sale takes place. Then Apple pays taxes to Ireland, where Apple sales and distribution activity is executed by some of the 6,000 employees working there. Additional tax is then also due in the US when the earnings are repatriated."

of course as means of power like NSA-level information you have them :)

and in the end, third party cookies are banned (cookie banners is not required actually if you do not have tracking)

you should read dma to understand the matter more :) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELE...

dictatorship has of course its advantages too, you do not have to think or choose

No one mentioned having an "EU Apple." Did you misread their comment?

Hm? Quote: "There won't be another 'EU Apple'".

But now, reading it again - I indeed might have misunderstood the comment as "There won't be a company like Apple coming from the EU" (which I agree to), while they might actually have meant "Apple can't split in half to apply different rules for the EU and the US". That I would absolutely not agree to. Apple is apply to comply with Chinese laws to the fullest extend, which at least at this point in history still differ quite a lot with the US ones ;)

It's just that Apple for now is still taking Chinese authorities more seriously than the EU ones...

(But maybe I am now misunderstanding YOUR interpretation of the parent-posting. Dunno.)

They're just criticizing consumers who don't appreciate pro-consumer actions. Don't read too far into it lol.

Wow, this really proves my point. Are you assuming government only exists for the benefit of corporations?

No, the EU is not acting this way because they want an "EU Apple". Nobody over here has the illusion of any such mega corporation ever coming out of the EU. The IT industry we once had was killed mostly by price dumping from China in the late 2000ies.

Those mega-corporations are solely coming from non-free regions. If there is someone right now starting to massively take away market share from US mega corporations, then it's Chinese mega corporations.

The EU are doing this because they wish to protect the basic rights of their citizens. Well, and they are not purely doing this out of their own - a small number of hacker activist for the last couple of years have sued pretty much all EU institutions to make them enforce the laws we have here.

I would recommend you check out the very first three words of the US constitution again. Spoiler Alert: It's not "We the oligarchs" :)

> No, the EU is not acting this way because they want an "EU Apple". Nobody over here has the illusion of any such mega corporation ever coming out of the EU.

i don’t know what case you’re making, but “sore losers” isn’t a winning one.

> Those mega-corporations are solely coming from non-free regions.

all of them come from a place that is a lot more free than any country in the EU: the US.

> The EU are doing this because they wish to protect the basic rights of their citizens.

this is naive.

Ok, then let's assume that the European Court of Human Rights has been corrupted by evil forces from... erm... Mars... that want to ... erm... poison the planet by giving EU citizens control over their hardware and personal data. Or something?

Less naive, I guess.

I'm not playing your "sore losers" game. You are implying that all there is left to fight about is which mega corporations shall be in control of your personal rights.

Fine, if that's what you want.

I want to be in control of my data, and to be in control of the hardware I own.

This doesn't limit your freedom to have Musk, Google, Apple or whoever control your hardware. Give them your private keys. Give them your brain. All your choice and fine for me.

But my hardware stays my hardware, my freedom stays my freedom, and my data stays my data :)

Please try to look at it this way:

Just because I demand to be in control of my hardware and data instead of a corporation or oligarch does not limit YOUR rights to have a corporation or oligarch to be in control of your hardware and data in any way.

So what do you have to lose? What fight are your fighting here? What's wrong with EU people wishing to keep some of their basic human rights and a free market? It does not limit you. Just because Apple is forced to play by the rules in the EU does not limit them to play by the the-winner-takes-it-all concept that now appears to be common in the US now over there.

you somehow assume that i care about any of this stuff. i do not. i simply don’t think the EU knows anything about anything and that it has the best interest of citizens at its core.

i think the EU will continue to split the internet for people like yourself. while the rest of world will continue doing what they do.

i wish you and your data all the best.

I'd like to clarify on "was killed mostly by price dumping" - that was only part of the reason. Huawei selling below production cost killed much of the EU hardware vendors (Siemens, Alcatel Lucent), but there also was a massive lack of investment in education, a terrible failure culture, and a pretty much non-existent VC market to blame.

But anyway: There is nothing left over here that could only remotely catch up with the pace technology is developing in the US and China. We would be 10+ years late to any such game.

So: It's really just about making sure some of our basic human rights, democracy and free markets survive while the US and China are fighting it out on who is going to control us.

> We would be 10+ years late to any such game.

Yep, so `smash 'em`?

> basic human rights

Try again, perhaps revive 'Chatcontrol' again? This time it definitely will help.

You may prefer to say it in a different way than "smash 'em". But yes, if you violate the laws of the region you are operating in, there must be consequences. So, if you prefer: "Fine them. Jail them". Better?

And in regards of the chat control shit: Yes, this has been going on for decades now and pops up again and again. Originally it was pushed into the EU by the US via the UK. The crypto wars in the US appear to be over for now, but some European right-wingers are still dreaming about it.

But just this week the European Court of Human Rights has decided "chat control", aka weakening end-to-end-encryption is a violation of basic human rights.

This doesn't mean that the right wingers in various EU countries won't try again, but it's pretty futile. We, the people, won.

> No, EU adds only bureaucracy and regulations

Isn't, literally, that the job of the government?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com