As a general rule, if a corpo is against something the EU does, it means your government should do it too because it's a good thing.
this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2025
430 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
72764 readers
1469 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Except breaking end-to-end encrypted messaging. That’s the one sore spot.
and also introducing hardware backdoors, courtesy of Going Dark
The EU like any large government is filled with people of varying quality. Some of them are absolutely amazing at their jobs and some of them can barely operate at light switches.
Normally whenever some dumb tech related regulation comes in you usually find it's being pushed by the idiots. You can usually tell by reading the text of the legislation and by the end of it you will have come up with about 300 problems.
A good example of this is reading the Tracking Cookies legislation (bad) and the GDPR legislation (good), the difference in the size of the text of the bill is visually apparent.
some of them can barely operate at light switches
Here's a short story for this fact.
I have sold coffee machine on Monday. Next day got a message that it doesn't work. I ask what is up with it and she told me it won't start. I asked if she turned switch in the back in ON position? 1h later she writes me that it works!
I mean yeah, there is a switch in the back and a big ass ON button on the front. But I totally think that basic troubleshooting would solve this enigma before shooting the gun at me for selling a faulty device.
We used to have a poster up at work in the IT room that had a picture of a person scratching their heads and looking blankly at their laptop and the text "I've tried nothing, and I'm all out of ideas".
Some people have zero troubleshooting skills and don't even try. Their immediate reaction is to try and make it someone else's problem.
This is brilliantly stated. Thank you for sharing the light.
Yeah, but I still feel like the majority of people are stupid. That's kind of how apple got such a huge market share to begin with. People just happily locked themselves in to a closed garden with shit for options.
If you pay for a device, you should be able to do whatever you want with it. Apple having so much control over it means that you don't fully own it.
But… something something security and something something not a monopoly… am I doing this anti-consumer white knight thing right?
No no no apple knows whats best because they made it. did you make a phone? no? didnt think so. checkmate.
(Pay no attention to the fact that it took apple 14 years to add t9 dialing, one of the simplest features a 'dumb' phone could have.)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Apple to ~~Australians~~everyone: You’re Too Stupid to Choose Your Own Apps
fix'd
Their reasons for not opening the App Store aren’t even good logical reasons like it would make the platform unsafe but then they claim the Mac is a safe platform. That’s what makes it so insulting.
I’d be less frustrated with them if they were just honest and said it’s about the money.
Mac is only a safe platform due to obscurity.
To be fair that's not really true. Gatekeeper is deeply integrated into the OS and is extremely strict.
As opposed to windows, macOS will effectively refuse to run any software that is not signed and notarized by Apple themselves.
I'm not a fan of this behaviour but that's the way it is.
As opposed to windows, macOS will effectively refuse to run any software that is not signed and notarized by Apple themselves.
You can put Windows in strict mode but it makes the computer virtually unusable. The other thing been is it there are techniques that attackers can use to bypass these checks thus making the signatures irrelevant anyway.
You can also use an immutable Linux distro (SteamOS being the most popular) and install software with flatpak, which is sandboxed using bubblewrap.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I’m pretty sure that can be turned off in security stings.
If not, you can hold down control or command when launching the so the first time to have the option to run the software anyway.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I want to hard agree with Apple that people are, in fact, too stupid to choose their own apps, but not following Apple's greedy logic.
Look at the top apps and sites people use. The tech billionaires. It's stupid as hell
Same. I agree that people are too stupid to know what apps they should use. But that also includes those using some of apples closed down, limited apps and features haha
As an Australian, my government can go for it. None of the tech companies have appreciated the Australian government's attempts to regulate them ~~(e.g. trying to make Google and Meta pay for using our journalism).~~ (edit: not a good example)
That said, we have had idiots in power from time to time that definitely have worked against us, usually arguing the "security over privacy" nonsense (metadata collection laws, encryption backdoor legislation, etc.).
Happy cake day!
I'd be happy for the Australian government to take them to task over this one. But I'm afraid you've fallen for Murdoch propaganda with the journalism thing.
They weren't "using our journalism". They provide a direct benefit to the news organisations. It's a mostly symbiotic relationship, with people going to Google and Facebook because it's a good way to find news that interests them, and news organisations being funnelled traffic directly to them for free. But honestly, if money should be flowing in any direction, it's to Google and Meta. The financial benefit for news organisations of the existing relationship is far greater for news organisations than it is for Google and Meta. People would still be Googling things and sharing on Facebook even if news didn't make up part of that.
Jeff Jarvis is a great thinker and communicator in this space, and he moderates a great discussion on the topic here. About 34 minutes into the video they hear from a QUT professor who is pretty scathing towards the NMBC.
Thanks.
Really appreciate you taking the time to explain that. Unfortunately the journalism issue is one of those that I haven't had a chance to look into. I like to think I'm aware of the Murdoch propaganda (and the other major "news" outlets here) but there's still clearly some topics which don't register as problematic until I dig into them.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Apple has always said this about their users. Too stupid to allow choices outside of a few curated options.
Yeah, it's a messed up position. It's made more complicated by then being half right. People do often like having fewer choices. Making a streamlined OS that doesn't allow them access to the kernel or crucial components, that they literally can't break by accident, that is indeed an appealing feature to many. But it's not appealing because they're stupid, it's appealing they're rational.
This has always been Apple's method, make everything intuitive, easy to use for anyone and their mother. And a big part of that is removing all the extra clutter from the interface, all the options users would rarely if ever use. This is also the contentious part, removing the advanced options that power users might want access to.
But at least initially, they understood that the reason for doing all this, their goal, was to make their products better. These days it seems like they're less clear on that goal. The idea that they're "dumbing down" their products and controlling everything because their users are too stupid, this is a new attitude, and it shows a misunderstanding of the principals their company was built on. Apple was only successful because they made very good products which were comfortable to use. They certainly never won popularity through competitive pricing or having the most powerful machines...
Personally, I think it's a foolish move to be this controlling over their iOS ecosystem. This is really making the product inferior. Sideloading apps will not destroy their walled garden, it just gives power users the options they want. Apple should be afraid of losing more market share, they don't have all that much to lose...
As an Australian, do I have anything I can do to help make sure that these regulations are implemented?
Tell your rep(s) you're in favor of it, and if you have a time, visit in person.
Apple "opinion" -> discarded.
It's the "Apple Way"
I choose the highway.
Unpopular opinion, but if I wanted multiple app stores (and all the associated benefits and risks) then I would have opted for an Android.
The walled garden approach works for me, and I don’t want to be inconvenienced and my data put at risk because a particular, necessary app is only available through a 3rd party platform.
Now, Apple being forced to reduce the % of app sales down from 30% to a more reasonable number I am all for.
You are missing the point. If you want to remain in the Apple infrastructure exclusively, nobody is forcing you not to. Those who want options will have them. So enjoy your walled garden all you want, and let each user decide if they want to keep being tools or not.
I respectfully disagree.
If I’m out at a restaurant with app-based ordering, or my Real Estate agent requires payment through their gateway, or to track my utilities usage, or am required to use any other number of niche apps that become only available through alternate app stores? Then I very well risk being put in a situation where I am otherwise forced to.
Let alone the headaches that will inevitably come from the older, less technologically savvy, and more vulnerable having their default app stores highjacked, and spoof apps stealing their credentials/credit cards.
Then we get into the more general issues of allowing unsigned code to be loaded and run on our smartphones - it will lead to the era of viruses, Trojans and ransomware.
I am reminded of this piece that Last Week Tonight did on Encryption, which is quite cogent given the topic at hand.
Best security practices involve minimising the number of places your sensitive (financial) data is stored. If a website doesn’t accept a known and reputable intermediary like Apple Pay, PayPal or a BNPL provider - I would refrain from using it.
If this is something that you want - then go ahead and Jailbreak your iPhone, or get an Android - more power to you; but please stop trying to enshittify iOS.
If this were to happen it would have happened on Android a long time ago but it didn't.
load more comments
(5 replies)
What you want is basically a recipe for the web turning into an exclusively corporate wasteland. Lack of installation freedom doesn't provide security from anything when the A/G app stores are already full of malware. Real security - security for users - lies in our ability to exercise choice - to use a FOSS app, or to pay conventionally via the web instead of having to put up with creepy opaque vendor portals (or worse, an app)
Phones are generic computing devices. We must able to operate and maintain them however we wish.
Again, I can understand where you come from, but it's been proven, time and again, that using apps from the main app store (ios or Android, doesn't matter) is not inherently safer or more dangerous than getting apps from other stores. The problems are the apps not the stores. Additionally, I have yet to see any company, institution or organization publish apps exclusively in alternative app stores,which means that, as far as I'm aware, every app "needed" will be in the platforms own store, which means that nobody has to get an alternative app store if they don't want to.
These facts render your arguments to block giving owners of devices options completely invalid.
Yes, if you feel safer with the platforms' default stores, you're free to remain there and avoid anything else, as this is your device, and therefore your choice. But these arguments you bring take away CHOICE for absolutely no good reason.
load more comments
(2 replies)
As much as I dig at Apple, this is a fair observation. However I will say that I have Android and have never actually used a 3rd party app store or felt the need to.
I use F-droid to get my open source apps. Much more trustworthy than Google play. It's my first stop for anything I'm looking for.
F-droid is something I genuinely enjoy browsing through, reminds me of the early days of Android 2.0-2.3 when I actually enjoyed using and customising my phone.
I miss the old days of phones being fun and looking forward to both hardware and software upgrades.
If Apple cashes in less than 30% next iPhone will be like:
Sorry, we can’t include a box OR wire for ~~savings~~ the wellbeing of the environment
I am too stupid. This is true. Too stupid to buy an iPhone too.
Have they looked at their own app store?
Is there a way to send and receive SMS and send/receive phone calls through a computer? Like if I wanted to ditch a phone for a cyber deck could I? And just use like a mobile hotspot for Internet?
I used this service breifly a while ago. Not enough to say whether it's good or not, but I remember it working just fine.
This is dope. I live in Scotland, but I'm from Canada, and having a cheap local number for recieving texts from stuff like my bank would be super helpful.
load more comments
(1 replies)
So many people angry about phones in here. Just let people like what they like. Yeesh.
We are, it's near ubiquitous. I'd suggest as high as 80% of us. Those folks will still use anything but the store anyway.
Being generous, most people are overwhelmed with choice .... in matters of no inportant (walk down the ceral aisle) , it's just with matters of importance they are given little choice.
That said I use Android becase I can sideload, some 50+60% of the apps I use regularly are sideloaded, stand out that aren't are banking and government. To have that taken off me would be shitty.
That said, I'm bemused at people that complain of a wall garden but also enable it to occur by being part of sipping at the kool aid.
My biggest gripe though is governemnt doing it, using Windows, MS Office etc etc and communicating using closed protocols. Maube like Demark and Germany we'll also move off that toxic shit.
view more: next ›