Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
Top-level
Cory Doctorow

The comments on that article are *wild*. It's just a litany of people saying, "If you want to choose where you buy your apps, you shouldn't buy an iPhone." That this is exactly the same argument the fictional Absterge CEO makes about his dishwasher ("People who don’t want to go the Absterge way don’t have to") is lost on them. As far as they're concerned, any Apple customer who wants have the final say over how their $1,000 pocket computer works isn't a *true* Apple customer.

13/

27 comments
Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

This is a very weird idea. But weirder still is how it captured lawmakers, like the former Canadian Heritage Minister #JamesMoore. In 2010, Moore and his colleague, the disgraced sex pest #TonyClement, tabled a bill that would make it illegal for Canadians to modify their iPhones (and other gadgets) to work in ways that benefited them at the expense of corporate shareholders.

14/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

They ran a consultation on this measure, and the responses overwhelmingly rejected it (6138 submissions opposed to the measure, 54 in support!). They pressed ahead anyway:

michaelgeist.ca/2010/04/copyco

When the public demanded an explanation for this, Moore said that opponents of the measure were "radical extremists":

cbc.ca/news/science/copyright-

15/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

This was a bridge too far. I'm a bestselling Canadian author whose copyright-related income is royalties, not industry campaign contributions. The Heritage Minister branding me a "radical extremist" got my goat, so I picked a fight with him on Twitter, where he unwisely took the bait:

web.archive.org/web/2013040710

Moore's responses were straight out of the comments from "If iPhones Were Dishwashers." Quoth the Minister: "Don't use Mac. There are other options out there."

16/

This was a bridge too far. I'm a bestselling Canadian author whose copyright-related income is royalties, not industry campaign contributions. The Heritage Minister branding me a "radical extremist" got my goat, so I picked a fight with him on Twitter, where he unwisely took the bait:

web.archive.org/web/2013040710

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

Remember: the *only people who could use an alternative iOS store are Apple customers*. Moore - a Minister from the Conservative Party - went on record saying that if you want to use your private, personal property in ways that the corporation that manufactured it objects to you, the government should step in to defend the corporation from you.

This is not the property-worshiping, market-based ideology the Conservative Party claims to support.

17/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

The only way to square that circle is if somehow, the people who want to install apps on their phones without the manufacturer's approval are not *really* customers. They're pretenders. Apostates. They're holding it wrong:

wired.com/2010/06/iphone-4-hol

These religious apologetics for Apple's business practices are a devastatingly effective defense against the public outcry that would accrue to any other business that abused its customers in similar fashion.

18/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

Every time Apple finds a new way to cheat its customers, the cult is there to insist those aren't *true* Apple customers at all!

Think of Apple's years-long war on repair. When Apple gets a veto over where you fix the small, slippery, glass object you carry everywhere and hence break a lot, they can get up to all kinds of mischief. They can gouge you on parts and service charges, sure. But they can also simply rule out fixing your device *at all*, declaring it beyond repair.

19/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

This prompts you to buy another gadget from them, and they get to offer you a trade-in. That means that your old gadget gets "recycled" by Apple, who - uniquely among electronics manufacturers - drops all its "recycled" gadgets in giant shredders, ensuring that parts from old phones don't find their way into the secondary market for use by independent repair:

pluralistic.net/2022/05/22/app

20/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

Apple isn't coy about all this! #TimApple's 2019 shareholders letter spelled it out explicitly: Apple's revenues are falling because its customers are fixing their phones rather than replacing them:

apple.com/newsroom/2019/01/let

Apple led the coalition that killed dozens of state #RightToRepair bills for *years*.

21/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

When repair advocates pointed out that this was creating mountains of immortal #ewaste that included tons of #ConflictMinerals, Apple's religious adherents stepped into insist that Apple customers *preferred* to get their iPhone fixed by Apple and its approved depots.

22/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

Again, this is obvious nonsense. If it were the case that No True Apple Customer would patronize a third-party repair depot, then Apple could simply step out of the way of Right to Repair campaigns and those independent phone fixit places would sink without a trace. People who own *Android* devices don't get their phones fixed with unauthorized *iPhone* parts.

23/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

The chorus of credulous, faithful shouters gives Apple enormous cover to get up to the worst behavior. Apple keeps making announcements about its commitment to repair that get trumpeted to the heavens, even though these announcements barely bother to cover up how Apple will continue to block repair in practice:

pluralistic.net/2023/09/22/vin

24/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

This #RealityDistortionField is remarkably durable. It remains intact even when rivals take the exact opposite position and demonstrate exactly what a *real*, non-pretextual pro-repair policy looks like:

404media.co/google-formally-en

A key tenet of the Cult of Mac is that Apple's sins are actually virtues, because all its monopolistic conduct is in service to its users' privacy and security.

25/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

After all, this is the company that faced down the FBI when the US government tried to force it to weaken its encryption:

eff.org/deeplinks/2018/04/fbi-

And it's true, they did! They also added anti-tracking features that shut down Facebook's ability to spy on iOS users, a move that Facebook claims cost it $10b in the first year alone (you *love* to see it):

arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/0

26/

After all, this is the company that faced down the FBI when the US government tried to force it to weaken its encryption:

eff.org/deeplinks/2018/04/fbi-

And it's true, they did! They also added anti-tracking features that shut down Facebook's ability to spy on iOS users, a move that Facebook claims cost it $10b in the first year alone (you *love* to see it):

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

But Apple's commitment to your privacy and security is always contingent, and when its own profits are on the line, the company will swiftly stuff you and your safety out the airlock. Apple refused to weaken its security for the FBI, but when China threatened its access to cheap manufacturing and hundreds of millions of customers, Apple eviscerated its products:

pluralistic.net/2022/11/11/for

27/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

Apple blocked Facebook from spying on you, but when it wanted to build its own surveillance advertising empire, it switched iOS spying back on, gathering exactly the same data as Facebook had, but for its own sole use, and then lied about it:

pluralistic.net/2022/11/14/lux

28/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

Then there's #iMessage, Apple's default messaging tool - "default" in the sense that there's no way to use other apps without taking additional steps. IMessage has #EndToEndEncryption - but only when you're communicating with other Apple customers. The instant an Android user is added to a chat or group chat, the entire conversation flips to SMS, an insecure, trivially hacked privacy nightmare that debuted 38 years ago - the year *Wayne's World* had its first cinematic run.

29/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

About 41% of American mobile phone users have an Android phone, which means that any time an Apple customer tries to have a conversation with a colleague, a merchant, a loved one, a friend or a family member, there's a 4 in 10 chance it's going out "in the clear," with *zero* privacy protections.

30/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

This is *not* good for Apple customers. It exposes them to continuous, serious privacy risks. Our mobile devices are keepers of our most intimate secrets, and when mobile security fails, the consequences are grave, as Apple discovered in the hardest way possible, ten years ago:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_cel

Apple's answer to this is grimly hilarious. The company's position is that if you want to have real security in your communications, you should buy your friends iPhones.

31/

This is *not* good for Apple customers. It exposes them to continuous, serious privacy risks. Our mobile devices are keepers of our most intimate secrets, and when mobile security fails, the consequences are grave, as Apple discovered in the hardest way possible, ten years ago:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_cel

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

Presumably, if those friends - or merchants, or colleagues - don't want to change operating systems and throw away their device and all their apps, you should just stop talking to them:

finance.yahoo.com/news/tim-coo

One of the clinical signs that someone is in a cult is that they are encouraged to isolate themselves from people who aren't also in that cult:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolatio

32/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

But there are billions of Apple customers and only a small (but vocal and obnoxious!) minority of those customers are actual cult members, which means that there are billions of people who'd prefer to have private, secure communications with everyone in their lives, not just their fellow Apple customers.

33/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

That's where #BeeperMini comes in: it's a third-party Android version of iMessage that builds on the work of a teenager who reverse-engineered iMessage and found a way to let Android users receive secure messages sent by Apple customers:

pluralistic.net/2023/12/07/blu

34/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

This was an immense service to Apple customers, correcting a gaping security vulnerability in Apple's flagship product, that had been deliberately introduced, putting the company's profits ahead of its customers' safety and privacy.

Apple immediately rolled out a series of countermeasures to block Beeper Mini. When The @verge's @davidpierce asked them why, Apple said they did it *to protect their customers' security* (!!):

theverge.com/2023/12/9/2399515

35/

This was an immense service to Apple customers, correcting a gaping security vulnerability in Apple's flagship product, that had been deliberately introduced, putting the company's profits ahead of its customers' safety and privacy.

Apple immediately rolled out a series of countermeasures to block Beeper Mini. When The @verge's @davidpierce asked them why, Apple said they did it *to protect their customers' security* (!!):

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

The company claimed that there was some nonspecific way in which Beeper Mini weakened the security of Apple customers, though they offered no evidence in support of that claim. Remember, the gold standard for security claims is #ProofOfConcept code, not hand-waving:

nostarch.com/gtfo

36/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

For its part, #Beeper engaged in a brief but intense cat-and-mouse game with Apple, taking countermeasures and countercountermeasures to preserve Apple customers' access to secure communications with Android users:

eff.org/deeplinks/2023/12/with

37/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

Apple used its $3 trillion megaphone to condemn Beeper Mini even after Beeper published source code for Beeper Mini so anyone could verify that nothing nefarious was going on:

blog.beeper.com/p/beeper-movin

Meanwhile, Apple's cultists rallied behind the company. Not only would No True Apple Customer ever want to have secure communications with an Android user, but it was unfair for Beeper to profit by accessing Apple's messaging infrastructure, which Apple has to pay to maintain.

38/

Apple used its $3 trillion megaphone to condemn Beeper Mini even after Beeper published source code for Beeper Mini so anyone could verify that nothing nefarious was going on:

blog.beeper.com/p/beeper-movin

Meanwhile, Apple's cultists rallied behind the company. Not only would No True Apple Customer ever want to have secure communications with an Android user, but it was unfair for Beeper to profit by accessing Apple's messaging infrastructure, which Apple has to pay to maintain.

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

This is some serious upside-down cult logic. *Beeper* isn't accessing Apple's infrastructure: Apple's *customers* are accessing Apple's infrastructure. If there were no Apple customers trying to talk to Android users, there would be no load on Apple's servers.

But those customers don't count. They aren't real Apple customers, because they want to do things that benefit *them*, not Apple's shareholders. In other words: they're holding it wrong.

39/

Cory Doctorow replied to Cory

I'm Kickstarting the audiobook for *The Bezzle*, sequel to *Red Team Blues*, narrated by #WilWheaton! Pre-order the audiobook and ebook, DRM free, as well as the hardcover. There's also bundles with *Red Team Blues* in ebook, audio or paperback:

thebezzle.org

eof/

Go Up