Apple Has a Putin Problem (fastcompany.com) 162
harrymcc writes: New legislation in Russia -- known as the 'law against Apple' -- mandates that smartphone makers must preinstall government apps that will give authorities access to an array of information about the phone's user. Apple, not surprisingly, is trying to wriggle its way out of complying. But whatever happens, it's another case of an authoritarian government pushing around a U.S. tech company for very un-democratic reasons. Over at Fast Company, Josh Nadeau reports on the issue and why the stakes are so high.
"Government apps" (Score:5, Interesting)
There was no such thing mentioned in the law as "government apps". The law was passed explicitly to promote Russian app developers and the IT sector. They're probably talking about things like yandex or rambler mail, maps, and social networks like vk or odnoklasniki.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I didn't believe you at first, so I followed the links from the article and found that you are correct (via Google Translate) ...For each type of product, different lists of types of software will be installed. Preliminary for smartphones are: search, antivirus, navigator (maps), instant messenger, social networks, public services, MIR personal payment system. For tablets, computers, and Smart TVs, this list will be complemented by audiovisual services and applications that broadcast 20 required public chann [google.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I mean you trust the russian government to mean exactly what they say?
Re:"Government apps" (Score:4, Informative)
Oh, I forget, it's Ok if the US does it, if anyone else does it they are an "authoritative regime" with a despot instead of a democratically elected president.
Pot kettle black.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
I don't get the fuss, they simply require the installation of Russian software. So Apple does it and provides an app to remove them should the customer choose to do so. Done and finished with zero whining. Apple will lose this, to keep the income, simply install what ever they want and provide the app on the device to remove it and if they ban that, provide the app on an international server with a link on the device to download and run the app. Same for security, they wand backdoors on devices as sold, fin
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is that the USA has no such requirement so you can still protect yourself (for the time being) with end to end encryption.
Sad (Score:5, Interesting)
And globalization seems to be kicking into reverse gear, with distrust (see also: Huawei), tariffs, and incompatible government demands from all quarters, and national firewalls for the Internet. NATO eroding, Brexit happening.
It's weird, in the late 90's everything seemed headed in the opposite direction. Bringing democracy to China through capitalism does not seem to have worked like we hoped.
Re: Sad (Score:2)
Capitalism is not a democratic thing. The end result is a civilisation of poor and disaffected bring ruled by a filthy rich few.
Which describes China perfectly.
Re: Sad (Score:5, Insightful)
The end result is a civilisation of poor and disaffected bring ruled by a filthy rich few.
History would disagree with you. The capitalist Western democracies have been among the most prosperous nations whereas the communist nations of the same era have either collapsed or transitioned to mixed economies. China is precisely most prosperous in the areas which allow the greatest degree of economic freedom.
Which describes China perfectly.
Whereas under Mao, China was a society of peers that were all immensely wealthy?
I never can understand people who remark the corporations have too much power concentrated into them, who in turn wish to replace this with a system of government which represents an even greater concentration of power. Do you think that the same avaricious types you lament for lining the board room or filling the C-level positions at corporations aren't exactly the same type that would attempt to seize the reins of an even more powerful government? There's a reason that communist countries devolve into totalitarian hellholes. Venezuela is a recent example where something like a tenth of the population has fled the country in recent years to avoid starvation. Odd that the daughter of their former president is immensely wealthy [msn.com] in a country so impoverished.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"History would disagree with you."
If by "history" you mean "the first two centuries after the founding of the USA". But there's more to "history" than 1776 - 1976 in North America. And things in the USA today are VERY different from just a decade or two ago.
a) Singapore is a capitalist economy. It is not democratic.
b) Russia reorganized its economy around generally capitalist principles, but simply transferred the mechanism of dominance from political structures to rule by overwhelmingly powerful economic e
Re: Sad (Score:4, Informative)
"I never can understand people who remark the corporations have too much power concentrated into them, who in turn wish to replace this with a system of government which represents an even greater concentration of power."
Ok let me explain it to you. A formal government is given power willingly by the people. In exchange (in theory), that government will be made up of representative, each of which is elected by their region. In addition, the executive head is voted in, again by the people.
The concentration of power is managed by the three arms:
1. Legislature (directly elected, and so represent "the people") who make the rules.
2. The executive who are tasked by the people with applying them as they are (but are not allowed to change them).
3. Judiciary, who ensure that the legislature always makes rules that are aligned with the constitution and also that the executive only ever applies the rules as they are without overreach.
These three arms act as interlocking checks, to ensure that the specific rule that are made align with the fundamental principles that we all agree on (the constitution), that the executive behaves itself, and that there is always a recourse to an independent body if people in positions of power misbehave.
However, this system of checks and balances is undermined when people with sufficient power from outside the government can bribe or blackmail the actual people in these positions into making decisions that are actually not in line with their role. This is what we are seeing today. Special interest groups influence congress into voting for laws that do not suit the people that they represent. They can also influence the executive into, let's call it, "selective enforcement". ANd with their power, they can hire expensive lawyers who can construct legal arguments to twist the law, and so the court, into doing whatever they say.
At the moment at least, this malfunctioning government at least happens in the open. We have C-Span and a (supposedly) free press to inform us just how badly things are going.
Now imagine all these shenanigans were to happen inside private board rooms, where board members are not elected but are appointed by the elite, where there is no C-Span, and where the media is shut out by heavily armed private security contractors.
Just because the government system is malfunctioning, doesn't mean the concept of government is wrong. It just means the current implementation is broken and needs fixing. Replacing congress with boardrooms will make things far, far worse. Given how things are going, we're going to find that out the hard way.
Re: (Score:2)
Capitalism is not a democratic thing. The end result is a civilisation of poor and disaffected bring ruled by a filthy rich few.
Which describes China perfectly.
Are you seriously saying that capitalism is incompatible with democracy? Or did I read this wrong?
Capitalism has it's issues, to be sure, but any other possible system has issues which are worse. Socialism depends on the government to distribute wealth and resources, which destroys the motive to produce wealth and ends up with everybody being poor (except for the select few "leaders" who can claim all the resources they wish). Such societies, like North Korea and Venezuela, are rife with poverty and star
Re: (Score:2)
"Are you seriously saying that capitalism is incompatible with democracy? Or did I read this wrong?"
Yes, you read that wrong. I said "capitalism is not a democratic thing". Perhaps that's ambiguous, but I was saying that just because a country has capitalism, that does not guarantee democracy. Take Singapore as an example. They have an economy very strongly aligned with capitalist principles, but it is most definitely not a democracy in anything but name. Capitalism is a great tool for the efficient structu
Re:Sad (Score:5, Interesting)
It's weird, in the late 90's everything seemed headed in the opposite direction. Bringing democracy to China through capitalism does not seem to have worked like we hoped.
It was always a fool's bet to believe that China would liberalize because of consumerism. Freedom makes fertile ground for Capitalism, but Capitalism alone makes no ground for freedom. Or anything else for that matter, save making money.
The thinking in the West was "If we just give them access to iPhones, Lady GaGa, and Hollywood, then they'll be just like us!". Which completely ignores that different peoples have different cultures with different values. Just because we're willing to sell our souls for the latest gadget here doesn't mean the Chinese are the same way. They have an ancient culture that heavily values centers of authority. You're not going to wipe that away with the latest Xbox.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends how many you drop and from how high up.
Re: (Score:2)
It was always a fool's bet to believe that China would liberalize because of consumerism. Freedom makes fertile ground for Capitalism, but Capitalism alone makes no ground for freedom. Or anything else for that matter, save making money.
That's a rather simplistic view, trade relations has been a cornerstone of alliance building since forever. Mutual interests have often been the catalyst to work out our differences and create stronger bonds. Finding common ground even though it may be "trivial" like learning we like the same food, music etc. is often the foot in the door for diverse people to find together. Of course thousands of years of relative isolation isn't undone in a few decades with the Internet, but I think culture itself is unde
We have a Global Poverty Decline Denier here (Score:2)
Capitalism alone makes no ground for freedom. Or anything else for that matter, save making money.
It makes a lot of ground for reducing poverty.
https://reason.com/2019/01/31/... [reason.com]
Why has Hickel engaged in such statistical subterfuges and Edenic anthropological handwaving? Because he despises "free market capitalism" and wants to issue "a ringing indictment of our global economic system, which is failing the vast majority of humanity." Except, as we've seen, it is not. During the past two centuries, that system has lifted billions out of humanity's natural state of abject poverty, ignorance, and violence, and that process of economic uplift has dramatically accelerated in the past four decades.
Re: (Score:2)
The thought was that media promoting freedom as a value would promote freedom. But ha ha, they just demanded edited versions that don't promote freedom, and we gave them to them because greed. So the thought may well have been valid, but it was irrelevant.
Re:Sad (Score:4, Insightful)
We tried bringing democracy to China by freely trading with it, hoping the exposure to the fruits of our democratic and capitalistic system would stoke the fires of democracy within it. It hasn't worked.
We tried bringing democracy to Cuba by cutting off trade and isolating it, hoping that being cut off from the fruits of our democratic and capitalistic system would cause it to give up its non-democratic system. It didn't work.
I think it's about time we accepted that the only ways to spread democracy are
The first has some uncomfortable implications when it comes to foreign aid, refugee assistance, and a lax immigration policy - these things may actually be counter-productive to the goal of spreading democracy. They may do more harm than good by leeching off the very people most likely to rise in a revolution, thus allowing the regime they're fleeing to stay in power longer.
Re: (Score:3)
As a foreign country, trying to decide when it is acceptable to step in and assist in a revolt is extremely difficult as shown by the second half of the 20th centu
Re: (Score:2)
It's just that Hitler's rise to power wiped away all that progress the Weimar Republic made within a couple of years.
The Weimar Republic was a result of the loss in WW1 where they tried to reorganize the country from a constitutional monarchy into a republic, but not forced upon Germany by any external power.
Re: (Score:2)
Erm. Germany had democracy before 1945.
Germany's Weimar Republic democracy lasted until July 1933, when Hitler outlawed all parties except the Nazi party.
Re: (Score:2)
After 1945 democracy was then forced and reinforced by some external powers - the Allies. By the Soviets, not so much.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree. I remember the debate in the 80s about doing business with China, and the thinking went "where capitalism goes, democracy will follow." Well, we saw how that's turned out in both China and Russia. Xi and Putin are bent on becoming "leaders for life" and are putting the screws to their people more and more.
If the post-Cold War years have taught me anything, it's that culture will always trump ideology. Ideology can change quickly in whatever direction the political winds blow, but culture is much mo
Re:Sad (Score:4, Interesting)
After June 4, 1989 it was blatantly obvious what China was.
But a lot of wealthy people stood to make a ton of money if we started trading with them. So we did, and they got even richer. It ruined our working class by putting them in competition with slave labor, but who cares about those deplorables?
And neither China nor Russia are totalitarian. They don't give a shit what you do in your spare time. They don't even care if you talk shit about the government. They only care if you start organizing people to start opposition.
And let's not romanticize what we did to Russia in the 90s. Here's TIME magazine in 1996 bragging about how we interfered in the Russian election. [i.redd.it] Neoliberal shock therapy was horrible for Russia. The number of people living in poverty in the former Soviet Republics rose from 14 million in 1989 to 147 million in 1998. In the period from 1992 to 1998 Russia's GDP fell by half-something that did not happen even under during the German invasion in the Second World War. Under Yeltsin's tenure, the death rate in Russia reached wartime levels. David Satter, a senior fellow at the anti-communist, Washington DC-based Hudson Institute, writing in the conservative Wall Street Journal, described the consequences of this victory of Democracy: "Western and Russian demographers now agree that between 1992 and 2000, the number of 'surplus deaths' in Russia-deaths that cannot be explained on the basis of previous trends-was between five and six million persons."
Re: (Score:2)
But between China and Russia, that's an awful lot of people backsliding into totalitarianism.
Backsliding? They've been there for years.
Decades even.
Re: (Score:2)
As for the rest of the stuff you mention. Yeah, humanity is undergoing some sort of
Re:Sad (Score:5, Insightful)
While I'll agree that fully realized communism almost certainly requires a totalitarian state, suggesting that socialism is mutually exclusive with democracy requires that one first redefine "socialism" as something other than how the term is most commonly used today.
For instance, you seem to be using it in a very narrow sense to refer to those who advocate for the communist end of the spectrum of economic systems (essentially using it synonymously with "communist"), whereas most people use it to refer to anyone who advocates for an economic system that exists somewhere in the gap between unfettered capitalism and fully realized communism. While we Americans love to deny it, the truth is that the US itself exists somewhere in that middle ground, given that we operate loads of socialist programs/systems ourselves. Just off the top of my head, there's Medicare, Social Security (which even has "social" in the name), the ACA, food stamps, PBS, public libraries, and the list goes on and on. Hell, even the interstate highway system smacks of socialism, since they're publicly owned roads built with taxpayer dollars. And yet, despite the best efforts of some, we still seem to be a democracy.
I do agree that as one goes further and further towards the communist side of the spectrum, it does become harder and harder to operate as anything other than a totalitarian state. Conversely, as one goes further and further towards the capitalist side of the spectrum, it becomes harder and harder to operate as anything other than a plutocracy. Arguably, democracy only works if your economic system is somewhere in the middle.
the same word but referring to different thing (Score:2)
While I'll agree that fully realized communism almost certainly requires a totalitarian state, suggesting that socialism is mutually exclusive with democracy requires that one first redefine "socialism" as something other than how the term is most commonly used today.
Unfortunately, the way the term "socialism" is used today is in multiple different meanings, so that it is hard to figure out what it actually does mean.
This leads to political discussions with people talking past each other, since they use the same word but are referring to different things.
FTFY (Score:2)
as one goes further and further towards the capitalist side of the spectrum, it becomes harder and harder to operate as anything other than a plutocracy.
To fix that for ya,
As one goes further and further towards the capitalist side of the spectrum, it becomes harder and harder to find people who are living in extreme poverty. [reason.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Your link doesn’t make that claim.
Your linked article’s central thesis is that extreme poverty rates have declined in recent years, despite some suggesting otherwise. It’s a notion with which I have no disagreement, but the article doesn’t speak whatsoever to your alleged inverse correlation between extreme poverty and the degree to which a country adopts pure capitalism, nor even mention capitalism at all, other than in a non sequitur opinion proffered in their closing statement. An
Re: (Score:2)
Flag-waving Americans don't recognize the difference between Socialism and Communism.
No, they're not the socialist programs the USA depends upon: It's the corporate welfare, tax-breaks for the rich, prisons-for-profit, "tough on" crime, "war on" something and yes, the inter-state highway, that ensures (corporate) people have a comfortable life.
Communist Russia had elections too. The term "by the people" doesn't define a meaningful standard. Perhaps the best indicator of democracy, is a champion of minori
Re:Sad (Score:5, Interesting)
You can't bring democracy to communists or socialists because both are totalitarian in nature (regardless of their PR,) you can only destroy them and build a democracy from the ruins. No democracy has been born from a totalitarian society until the totalitarian society was destroyed.
Curious, but it seems to me that your blanket statement may not be totally true. The creation of the USA was the breaking off of a chuck of people from a totalitarian based rule (the king of England and the Church of England). And if you hold up your hand and point out that the UK was a parliamentary system by that time, I'm going to point out that they arrived at that system from a full on "the King is God" system without having to totally destroy their country and rebuild. So in at least a small way, we got democracy born from totalitarian, albeit in a couple of steps and hundreds of years.
Tough for Apple (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...or put the government mandated apps into a VM in the phone (optionally doing the same for all apps). That way, they all get to see each other, but don't get to see the crown jewels.
Apple's policy of "no competing apps" would present more issues - if there's a russian mail app that needs to go on, then it competes with apple's mail client. They could possibly just play along and add a "connect to $russian mail provider" option in their own mail client though.
As others have noted - Russia is just China's w
Fight please! (Score:2)
Devil's always in the detail (Score:2)
"Pre-installed approved apps". OK, but -who- is pre-installing them? The assumption is Apple right?
If Apple starts selling iPhones with its own Apps removed and Russian apps installed when do they get updates?
When iOS is updated, like the Apple Apps get them, or just as regular Apps?
Does the law prevent Apple's iOS popping up warnings, like I started getting about Facebook with iOS13, reporting things like "this creepy app is tracking you all the time? Wanna switch off it's access to your location?"
Apple ca
Oh those poor poor multinational corporations! (Score:2)
The ONLY reason they are complaining, is because it's work for them.
They couldn't give less of a shit about the livestock, err, users.
In fact, if it would make them money, they'd go around swinging "best Korea" flags.
And because they know they can make their TrumPet throw a tantrum for them.
Nevermind the TrumPet government mandating quite the same, except more covertly, because they still got a delusion to uphold, so the militant blackeyers keep defending them.
Oh how Russia and China wish they had a populat
Why conutries exist (Score:3)
We're finally back to understanding the reason that countries exist in the first place -- the reason that borders exist: I hate your laws, I'm drawing this line in this sand, and writing my own laws on this side of the line.
Global corporations can't exist forever as they do now. You can't ever expect a global population to have the same laws, the same climates, the same cultures, the same taxes, the same anythings.
That's what we're seeing here. We're seeing the impossibility of being the same company with the same products across different nationalities.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To adjust your last phrase, I believe it's actually the definition of nearly all wars.
Re: (Score:2)
We're finally back to understanding the reason that countries exist in the first place -- the reason that borders exist: I hate your laws, I'm drawing this line in this sand, and writing my own laws on this side of the line.
Global corporations can't exist forever as they do now. You can't ever expect a global population to have the same laws, the same climates, the same cultures, the same taxes, the same anythings.
That's what we're seeing here. We're seeing the impossibility of being the same company with the same products across different nationalities.
And this is the fundamental dilemma for the CEO and Board of Directors of any Publicly-Held Corporation that does business internationally: Which "duty" do they violate? The one to the Shareholders; who in the most capitalistic, financially-hard-hearted sense, could care less about anything other than gross profits; or the one to their Mission Statement, which in the case of Apple includes a pledge to protect their Customers' privacy, a policy about which they seem quite serious?
Re: (Score:2)
That's easy. "public" company means mission statement be damned. "private" company is the mission statement only.
But my point is this: one slave cannot serve two masters,
or as my grandfather would say, you can't dance at two weddings with one ass.
Now, to be fair, he's never clarified if "ass" is rear-end or donkey, but I think the point is the same either way.
One corporation can't be governed by two regulators. Pick a country. If you want to work in two countries, you get to have two corporations.
Re: (Score:2)
You've missed the entire point. It's not "caving" to any government. It's illegal to offer those things in russia. It's not caving. Will they "cave" to your government? of course. again, government represents what the people want (whether or not that comes from the people). you can't please two masters.
if you're in a democratic country, you should WANT them to capitulate to your government! If you're unhappy with your government's laws, then you ought to be fixing your government, not hoping that cor
Golden opportunity (Score:2)
Spot the psychopath (Score:2)
It's kind of like when
Apple has well over $300B (Score:2)
Ten pallets of unmarked hundred dollar bills would conclusively solve this problem.
https://www.groovewallet.com/w... [groovewallet.com]
Telling that it' Always Apple (Score:2)
Notice they don't need this law for any OEM besides Apple.
Wonder why?
Re: (Score:2)
Because the author of the article wants you to think that.
This will be a huge win for Apple (Score:2)
Russians are used to operating nalevo, to cheating their way around government restrictions. Ban secure iPhones, and people will go to the same lengths to get their hands on them as they did for Levis in Soviet times.
What about makers of Android-based phones? (Score:2)
What about makers of Android-based phones? Are they also "trying to wriggle out of complying"? Or do they sheepishly do whatever Moscow orders?
How did corps become more powerful than govs? (Score:2)
It seems that corporations are able to interfere with governments at an ever increasing scale. It's a bit odd that governments are too scared to start fining them and seizing their assets.
Re: (Score:2)
You pick an example of a corporation defending the people against government oppression to bitch about corporate interference in government? I'm guessing NOBODY is letting you pick the cases they appeal to the supreme for their flagship causes.
In the US corporations have been standing up to governments for as long as there have been corporations. By and large this has been to the good, such as in this case. The bad times are when corporations comply with governments or worse operate under their direction.
Th
Putin is bad (Score:3)
This is bad, caving to Putin is obviously worse than the US but our own government is pushing Apple for much the same thing, demanding a backdoor.
I like neither Apple nor Putin (Score:2)
So for me, this is a win-win situation.
Nothing to do with the US (Score:2)
"But whatever happens, its another case of an authoritarian government pushing around a U.S. tech company for very un-democratic reasons."
This has nothing to do with Apple being a US company. If Nokia was still king Putin would have done the same with them.
Re:I have a Poutine problem (Score:4, Funny)
Sorry to hear that, eh ?
Re: (Score:2)
Take off, you hoser.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry
Re: (Score:2)
Pun not intended, but highly appreciated.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple could just grow some balls and pull out of Russia altogether.
This is interesting coincidence, following: https://arstechnica.com/tech-p... [arstechnica.com]
Re: (Score:3)
If Apple wants to give them some lines on an imaginary map to keep the chest-thumpers in
Re: (Score:2)
I'm curious how the map is drawn when you're in Kashmir. <shrug>
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It will encourage people to revolt because they can't buy an iPhone.
I was kidding, but it could actual help if the move puts pressure on other companies to do the same. For example, what if chocolate manufacturers upped and left? Pretty sure I'd revolt if I were Russian and Kit Kat were to stop sales in Russia.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Apple could just grow some balls (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple could just grow some balls and pull out of Russia altogether.
Sure, like they grew a pair and encrypted their backups of user data to protect the users' privacy.
Oh, wait, they caved to the FBI.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd hope so, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem with Apple pulling out of Russia is that China is watching this pretty closely. If Apple does grow that pair of balls and pulls out of Russia over government spying, China is likely going to put similar pressure on them...and unlike Russia, China has Huawei and Xaomi happy to have one less competitor. Apple investors *might* tolerate pulling out of Russia, but Apple simply can't tell off China at this stage in the game without watching its stock price get cut in half the same day.
Conversely, if Apple caves to China, Russia will basically ask for the same thing, and they'll need little more than for Apple to point the telemetry data to a different IP range. Whether the US will follow is an exercise for the reader.
Re: (Score:2)
I own Apple stock, and wouldn't care if my value was cut in half due to pulling out of china. I'm more worried that Apple is being watched by the US government, and they're likely to put the same pressure on them.... and unlike China and Russia... we stand to lose a lot if Apple is forced out of the country. That drop in stock value would probably bother me more.
Re: (Score:2)
I own Apple stock, and wouldn't care if my value was cut in half due to pulling out of china. I'm more worried that Apple is being watched by the US government, and they're likely to put the same pressure on them.... and unlike China and Russia... we stand to lose a lot if Apple is forced out of the country. That drop in stock value would probably bother me more.
I don't own any Apple stock, and I guess I feel like this will be fun to watch regardless of what path they choose.
On the other hand, I'm pretty sure they'll just cave in and do whatever they are asked by the Russians.
if Apple caves to China then trump will go ape shi (Score:2)
if Apple caves to China then trump will go ape shit till they add FBI unlock code to all phones.
Re: (Score:2)
When dealing with an oppressive leadership two things come to mind.
1. Can I live with being part of this evil.
2. How much worse would it be if I don't stay in and keep my area having some sort of morality. Because I see a bunch of other people wanting my spot who are much worse.
At this point Apple is pushing to keep their product as is. If they just pull out of Russia, then there is probably someone else with backward r android port and a phone ready to go in. Take the market with leaving Russia with a Put
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When dealing with an oppressive leadership two things come to mind.
1. Can I live with being part of this evil.
2. How much worse would it be if I don't stay in and keep my area having some sort of morality. Because I see a bunch of other people wanting my spot who are much worse.
At this point Apple is pushing to keep their product as is. If they just pull out of Russia, then there is probably someone else with backward r android port and a phone ready to go in. Take the market with leaving Russia with a Putin favoring product, without limits, and causing him to take a step further and further.
Funny... You seem to be mistaking doing business with a known criminal for something akin to participatory democracy in a non-perfect system.
Maybe you should look up what happened to BP [rferl.org] once Moscow Midget (not to be confused with Moscow Mitch) decided that he's was not getting what he wanted.
Much like you, BP still thought that they were in a system based on rules. Then it happened again. [reuters.com]
TLDR: Morality? What fucking morality? It's a rogue state run by criminals.
Re: (Score:2)
Right? Just politely tell Russia "No." and stop selling in the country. Russians aren't going to stop buying Apple products just because they're not sold in country. If the Russian government wants to spy on their people, then they should have to make their citizens install the spyware themselves. See how that works out.
Re: (Score:2)
That would work for a short time. Russia's response would be obvious: They'll just pass a revised law that prohibits the import of non-compliant devices and requires service providers to add Apple's key servers to the national firewall.
Re: (Score:2)
China and Russia want this (among others) to keep track of people. US wants a similar power against criminals and terrorists (this is not Trump but every FBI, DOJ person ever.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
However, one could also argue the main difference is that we don't incarcerate people simply for disagreeing with our President.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
However, one could also argue the main difference is that we don't incarcerate people simply for disagreeing with our President.
Russia has an open and active anti-Putin movement. Russians are not incarcerated for mere disagreement.
China will arrest people for advocating separatism, but otherwise mainly relies on self-policing of dissent. Social media posts critical of Xi will be deleted, but the poster is not arrested. Nobody cares what you say in private conversation. Outside of Xinjiang, the vast majority of incarcerated Chinese are common criminals, not dissidents.
Re:Thinly disguised reference to Trump (Score:5, Informative)
Putin in an ex KGB operative.
Not quite. He's an ex-KGB thug.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple can choose not to play
That is if their stockholders let them.
Re: (Score:2)
Any device sophisticated enough to have software will have hardware built in multiple nations.
Re:Full Retard (Score:5, Informative)
Any nation that allows another nation's hardware or software in its borders is fucking retarded, full fucking retard tier fucking retarded.
So, pretty much every single country on Earth. Supply chains are global. Hardware is made in China. Software is developed in India. The NSA modifies the firmware while in transit in the USA and the end user can be in any country at all.
Re: (Score:3)
Then, by your definition, every nation in the world is "full fucking retard tier fucking retarded" and has been for decades. Good thing you're so smart.
Re: (Score:2)
Then, by your definition, every nation in the world is "full fucking retard tier fucking retarded" and has been for decades.
If you were wiser this would be an opportunity to realize the government isn't the thing to trust with competency.
Re: (Score:2)
Want an iPhone? nyah nyah [nyet] Ya can't have one!
I can totally hear Cartman saying this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Having a grammatical (well, actually just a plain error) in your sig (unless I missed the sarcasm tag) kind of defeats the purpose of the inappropriate pedantic finger-waving.
Hint: It's "intents and purposes", not "intensive purposes".
Re: (Score:2)
Apple have built something of a reputation for respecting their clients'
Re:Fight or cave? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Why is it okay for a US company to interfere with Russian Elections, however when Russia's alleged interference happened quick sound the alarm, start lobbing nukes... its WWIII time! Oh.. I forgot you can't see the double standards because you can't see past your exceptionalism.
Personally, I'd like it if the CIA would interfere with the Russian "Elections" and oust Putin.
And I think about 7/8 of the world (and 9.999/10 of Russians), would agree.
Hey Russia! If you're listening: How about a Criss-Cross? You oust Trump and we'll oust Putin!
Win-Win!
Re: (Score:2)
Found the Apple employee.
Re: (Score:2)
But this is about phones, not PCs. And even with PCs, most users don't reload the O/S. With phones (particularly Apple), that's not easy by a long shot.