this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2024
188 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37717 readers
546 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
Los@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social
remington@beehaw.org
188
Apple will require notarization for apps from third party app stores, and will disable updates for apps installed via third party app stores if staying outside EU (support.apple.com)
submitted 8 months ago by brie@beehaw.org to c/technology@beehaw.org
48 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

As far as I can tell this basically means that all apps must be approved by Apple to follow their "platform policies for security and privacy" even if publishing on a third party app store. They will also disable updating apps from third party app stores if you stay outside the EU for too long (even if you are a citizen of an EU country, with an Apple account set to the EU region).

The idea that preventing app updates is in line with their claims of protecting security is utterly absurd. "Never attibute to malice what can be explained with stupidity," but Apple isn't stupid.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] drwho@beehaw.org 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

For a lot of corporations, malice and greed are pretty much the same thing. When a business decision is justified by "Who cares? Do it anyway." the distinction is a matter of words, not actions.

[–] PatMustard@feddit.uk 1 points 8 months ago

It's not malice though, it's cold, unfeeling greed. Malice implies they want to cause harm; all they want is to extract maximum profit. Sometimes it's by being malicious, sometimes it's by being altruistic, for instance pretending to care about an oppressed minority in order to improve their image. The only decision is "will the cost of this action be less than the profit it makes?"