Comment by ziddoap
1 day ago
The choice was either eliminate it now (globally, via introduction of a backdoor) or eliminate it in the UK (but keep it globally).
So, perhaps this is a bit of a dangerous precedent, but it was the least-bad option.
1 day ago
The choice was either eliminate it now (globally, via introduction of a backdoor) or eliminate it in the UK (but keep it globally).
So, perhaps this is a bit of a dangerous precedent, but it was the least-bad option.
That’s a false dichotomy.
Another choice, however unpalatable to all parties, would have been for Apple to stop doing business in the UK.
Why do pro-privacy tech folks on here act like Apple is some charity? Apple is a business. It won't fight a citizen's fight on your behalf. It is on citizens to use their democratic power to ensure their representatives act as the voting base wants. Apple's goal is to make money. The government is a representation of your will.
> Apple is a business. It won't fight a citizen's fight on your behalf.
Being a business does not remove ethical considerations. And I’m an environment where corporations are considered people, it seems reasonable to expect some degree of alignment with normal citizens.
> Apple's goal is to make money. The government is a representation of your will.
The government is increasingly not a representation of the collective will, and is instead captured by those corporations.
I can’t help but feel the “but they exist to make money” line too often ignores the many ways this is not a sufficiently complex explanation of the situation.
3 replies →
Because while a business goal is to make money, it is not necessarily, unlike what you have 80% of the people here believe, to make the most money possible. Ethics can exist in businesses too.
1 reply →
I’m full in on Apple and hoped they nuked iCloud in the UK for this rather than compromise the product.
This is still better than a back door but it sets an awful precedent.
See my other reply.
They could also sell the entire business to Google. Why bother with listing options even worse for everyone involved?
I mean they could have tried not complying, and fighting a lawsuit at the ECHR (right of every person to a private life). Takes money and time but more attractive than the other options.
1 reply →
> would have been for Apple to stop doing business in the UK
Apple employes thousands of people in the UK. I really don't see any practical way they could have done that.
They could
They could pull out of the UK, and to hell with the consequences, but then if the EU decide to do the same thing, or the US, or China says "hold my beer", then the problem becomes much larger.
Losing the UK market wouldn't impact Apple that much - it'd be a hit to the stock, of course, but as a fraction of worldwide business, it isn't that huge. Larger markets would be a bigger issue.
When UK demanded a backdoor to e2ee in iMessage, Apple told them they’d rather get out of UK. Why not do the same here? You’re posing a false dichotomy.
> Apple told them they’d rather get out of UK
To my knowledge, Apple has always said that their response would be to withdraw affected services rather than break encryption.
> Apple has said planned changes to British surveillance laws could affect iPhone users’ privacy by forcing it to withdraw security features, which could ultimately lead to the closure of services such as FaceTime and iMessage in the UK.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jul/20/uk-survei...
True! Thanks for the correction.
IMO they could’ve categorized the whole iCloud service as “affected” and disable all of it.
1 reply →
What would that change, effectively, other than have Apple lose money?
The UK would still lose ADP (and then also just Apple products in general). A precedent would still be set.
Your posing a strictly worse third option. Sure, it's an option, I guess. Apple could also just close down globally, as a fourth option. Or sell off to Google as a fifth. But I was trying to present the least-bad option (turn off ADP), rather than an exhaustive list.
I totally get your point, but calling the UK's bluff could work. Are they really willing to ban Apple products in the UK? Maybe, maybe not
1 reply →