Bitcoin users smash their iPhones after Apple bans Blockchain from App Store | Hacker News Reader

Bitcoin users smash their iPhones after Apple bans Blockchain from App Store

digitaltrends.com

81 pointsblottsie39 comments

This is most likely a ploy by blockchain.info, if you pay attention their app conveniently got "banned" [0] after they announced their new HTML5 wallet service just a few days before [1]. Their app broke the rules by being on the store in the first place, and has been untouched for years up until today? Too coincidental.

Given the constant connection between blockchain.info and Kyle Drake on reddit and their blog, I would put money on the new blockchain.com service using at least part of his CoinPunk frontend. They're pumping it up far more than is reasonable for something which is, after all, a competitor to their web wallet service.

[0]: https://twitter.com/blockchain/status/431219726333648896

[1]: https://twitter.com/blockchain/status/429934616082804736

You know that apple has been baning every bitcoin wallet app right?[0]

[0]http://www.pcworld.com/article/2095060/apple-removes-blockch...

They always have, these just happened to slip through the net. If it were a real effort by Apple they would have all been done simultaneously. Blockchain.info evaded the reviewers by presenting them with a version of the app that did not allow spending (allowed) and then changing the server behind it to re-enable the sending features. This is certainly breaking the rules, which is why they didn't update their app again- they knew it wouldn't work a second time.

If it was a systematic ban, there wouldn't be some left — https://itunes.apple.com/au/app/coinjar-for-iphone/id7252098...

> Sadly, Coinbase, Gliph, and CoinJar have all been sacrificed on the altar of innovation.

Interestingly enough, nobody bothered to check this before putting it in their blog post.

I doubt it's a ploy. I saw people commenting about doing this early this morning, in r/Bitcoin, so this seems something that came from the community as a form of protest.

The Bitcoin community has been getting increasingly more frustrated with each Bitcoin-related app being banned by Apple. This just broke the camel's back, because Blockchain is very popular, and it was also one of the very last Bitcoin apps to remain in the store (the final line of defense, if you will).

Also, it's sad to see that people don't even question Apple's policies anymore, no matter how ridiculous they are. They just throw it as "oh, well it was Apple's policy that they didn't want a Bitcoin app (was it?!) - so it's their fault!".

Rather than smashing $500 into oblivion, wouldn't it be better to sell it and donate the money to some worthy cause, you'd probably be able to get better publicity coverage for that too. I can't help but feel disgusted with people smashing their iPhones out of rage over an app, throwing away hundreds of dollars, while many families can't even afford to eat. Sig, first world problems.

Red herring fallacy. Why are you typing and reading this instead of volunteering right now?

It's a symbolic protest. Baudrillard noted the opacity of Americans to perceive symbolic protest. It points out that Apple will no longer have the privilege of revenue from these particular devices.

They should have gone to their local Apple store and given it to someone inside about to buy an iPhone, much bigger revenue hit in almost every case.

I think in the general population you'll find a lot more people who would be so annoyed at the people smashing their phones that their message will be drowned out with anyone they might possibly be trying to influence.

People won't see this and think "Apple is bad for blocking these types of apps" they'll think "I can't believe those guys smashed perfectly good phones!" and the message is lost.

As for the lost revenue they only revenue Apple will be losing is future iTunes store purchases. Should they give the phone away to someone that was going to buy one they will probably cost Apple around $300 in lost profit. Given Apples take from the iTunes store it would take a very long time for most users to hit that level of profit. So it's not even effective as revenue denial.

But this wouldn't affect Apple as much. By destroying the phone, they're effectively reducing the number of users. If they sold it, the number of iPhone users stays the same. Not to mention that it makes quite a dramatic statement: "I'm so upset, I'd rather lose $xxx dollars than continue passively supporting Apple's policies"

Proof of rage?

Selling the iPhone means someone else is getting it. The point of this "protest" is to get Apple to have fewer users.

Why is this even on HN, this is a non story. What next, a story on people tossing their phones because Flappy Bird is too hard? What Apple does or not do when a app breaks the rules is not really hacker news I want to read and I'm an iOS developer.

I think you're missing the bigger picture. This is not just about an app breaking rules. It is a story about how bitcoin, something that was virtually unheard of just a few years back, is now able to rile up people's emotions. This points to, at least in part, how serious people are taking this thing and raises several questions. 1) Is this something that was the doing of the developers of the app to gain publicity? We often see stories on HN about other apps being banned by the lines of Apple/Google and there's little recourse but to raise a PR stink. 2) How the owners of bitcoin, and a community like /r/bitcoin has really vested interests in keeping bitcoin popular because of how much it has become an investment vehicle over a means of currency.

I'd say 2 is the bigger issue. I can't say how sick I am of seeing people recommend bitcoin as a solution for every problem when 99% of the time it will not help at all.

"I'm having issues with chargebacks on my service, how can I lower chargebacks?"

"Use bitcoin no chargebacks!" (Thanks, but that doesn't help with the majority of people who want to use credit cards)

"Which cc processor should I use?"

"Use bitcoin! It has almost no cost unlike credit cards" (Thanks, but that doesn't help my problem and you're ignoring the costs/difficulty of putting money into and pulling money out of bitcoin).

etc, etc.

The community as a whole seems bent on spamming it everywhere at the moment and I am seeing a lot more backlash to it in various online forums I frequent.

> Trading in an iPhone 5 for a Nexus 5 makes little sense, economically speaking. Apple no longer offers the iPhone 5, but you can pick up an unlocked version of the 32GB model on eBay for around $500. The Nexus 5, which is only available in unlocked mode, will cost you $400 for the 32GB version.

I'm kind of confused as to what the author is trying to say by this. It seems to say that it doesn't make sense to trade in an iPhone 5 (which doesn't do what you want) for a Nexus 5 that is cheaper and does what you want. How does that not make sense?

Because if it costs more it must be better.

I think he meant you could sold your iPhone 5 on ebay for $500 with that money buy a Nexus 5 for $400 and still have $100 left over

I believe his logic is that you can sell an iPhone 5 on craiglist for $500 and use $400 of that to buy a Nexus 5, and pocket the $100 difference. What the author doesn't understand is that the $100 difference is what these guys are throwing away to send a message about how they feel about the decisions Apple has made about BTC.

Which would make sense if they understood apple's decision, but since they don't it's just a tantrum.

He meant that you could have sold the iPhone on ebay for $500. You could have then bought a Nexus 5 for $400. You would then have an Nexus 5 and $100. By just smashing the iPhone (as they did here) you just get a Nexus 5.

Apple making decisions about bitcoin apps in it's store is hacker news. Childish smashing of iPhones is not.

Why is this silly or immature? I mean, sure it's a ploy for attention on the issue, but a protest is not immature or silly. Can it be funny, amusing? Sure. Childish? I think that's a stretch. This is an important point that has long been criticized of Apple, a closed garden is not a benefit to consumers. Sure, the quality issue will always be there, but the outcry & reparation of that should come from the consumers, not the other way around. I'm not saying Apple shouldn't have the ability to remove certain apps, but it certainly shouldn't have the ability to pick & choose. Plain and simple Apple is becoming increasingly anti-competitive.

Breaking something expensive when you don't get your way is the act of a petulant child.

Detailed discussion of Apple policy is welcome, giving attention to the noise of 'fuck Apple' and shattered iPhones is not.

The App Store is a store. Breaking things because your sense of entitlement doesn't allow a retailer to pick what they sell is not something I, and (I believe) the majority of HN viewers want to see.

I think you're missing the point, that they didn't break it for free, like a child smashing their gameboy for example. The broke it explicitly for a trade & too protest. This has little to do with entitlement.

Smashing your iPhone to protest Apple after they already have your money. Not sure how this really effects Apple...

Apple loses the passive revenue stream (30% of app purchases.)

Apple loses a teensy bit of revenue from the (perhaps) couple hundred people who'd do this. It's a rounding error for them.

If it makes the BTC folks feel better to pitch a fit, fine, but let's not pretend it's anything more significant than that.

Plus, I'm sure Apple would prefer not to have videos of people smashing their iPhones doing the rounds - it doesn't quite present the image they're after.

The real issue is apple banning bitcoin? for what reason? Anyone know?

Can you make transactions from this application? My guess is that Apple wants a cut of it.

Then they could just demand they get a cut of every transaction. Also, you can do homebanking on your iPhone (I assume, I use Android), and Apple doesn't want a cut on every wire transfer you initiate.

If I had to guess, I'd say there is just a gentlemen's agreement between the powers that be and Apple (and other companies) to keep Bitcoin down.

As someone mentioned above Coinjar is still available on the store.

It is far more likely that Apple simply doesn't want to be associated with Bitcoin wallets which historically have a very high likelihood of people losing money.

The banking example is really great. Same goes for Venmo, Square, etc. Apple doesn't get a cut of those transactions, so the dispute must lie somewhere else.

Well, I guess everyone is passionate about something.

I would submit that there are more deserving things in the world, but then again that is true of things I care about as well.

For some reason I can't keep myself from thinking this is marketing trick...

"Users" Lol..1 guy threw his 3GS in the grass.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com