Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by kayodelycaon 881 days ago
Calling this “retaliation” is rather dramatic. There are a number of communication platforms that don’t allow 3rd party apps to access their networks and will ban people who attempt it.
1 comments

What would you call it other than retaliation? Punishment? Surprise behavior?
It's just banning.

It's no different than if you get caught running cheat software in an online game.

The company isn't "retaliating" against you, or even "punishing" you -- they're just banning you. You broke the rules and that's what happens.

> The company isn't "retaliating" against you, or even "punishing" you

yes they are

> You broke the rules and that's what happens.

And when it happens its called a "punishment", which is a kind of "retaliation". Words don't stop applying because you don't like their connotation.

No -- words like punishment and retaliation have a connotation of being personal and being emotional, or punishment can be linked to the justice system.

They're not appropriate words for mere policy. Like if you damage your apartment and don't get your security deposit back, that's not punishment or retaliation. It's just policy.

Same thing if you try to return something after thirty days and that's against policy. When they don't take the return, they're not punishing you.

Does that help clarify?

The difference is in trying to highlight the "policy" as being fundamentally just and fair, versus arbitrary and capricious. If I have a "policy" of beating up anybody who looks at me funny, that doesn't make it any less retaliatory. On the other hand, the justice system has a habit of avoiding the term "punishment" because they don't like the connotation.
> Words don't stop applying because you don't like their connotation.

Yes they do. The world is full of shills and boiled frogs.

This site rightly has a different attitude when, say, HP remotely bricks working printers because someone used unauthorized ink. We don't sit back and say "you broke the rules and that's what happens."
> when, say, HP remotely bricks working printers because someone used unauthorized ink

There is evidence of intent and immutability, i.e. nobody has shown Apple won’t reverse the ban when shown the device is legitimately accessing iMessage.

Kinda like how HP will make your printer work again if you simply buy and install approved ink?
You cannot argue with Apple users on any topic that is critical of Apple. For them, Apple can do no wrong. If Apple hardware breaks due to manufacturing fault, they will criticize the person for not buying Apple-care and then suggest just buying another Apple device. Apple is their identify. In this case iMessage is the safe haven that they can trust and allowing external (non-Apple) users would violate that feeling of safety.
Jeez, you’re painting with a broad brush here. I use Apple products and like them but I think they should open stuff up more. Unfortunately, I don’t have the time I used to for dealing with tech issues on Linux or the other open source stuff, so I buy Apple which is certainly better to customers than Microsoft, for example.

I don’t get where the idea that Apple users are zombies came from. Apple users like the products and services Apple provides, nothing else, there’s no ulterior motive there.

I've remarked many times but it's absolutely insane just how casually android users drop the "apple SHEEPLE" or "brainless blue bubbles" shit. It's so absolutely completely normalized that they don't even comprehend that it might be offensive to the people actually in the discussion with them.

statistically speaking about half this site probably has apple and most people have very specific reasons for picking them. And they've been hearing people exactly like GP casually dump on them for years - even if a particular person isn't being this direct and coarse about it, they know that's the thought process underneath.

After a while it's just another microaggression, and since they're micro you're not really supposed to call them out or act on them, but again, everyone knows what the score really is.

Protecting the security and integrity of the platform.

I fully support interoperability. But it needs to be done through regulation and standards.

Not through intentional abuse of the platform for monetary gains.

Protecting imaginary security is no protection at all.

If Apple doesn't like the particular way Beeper works, they're free to give them a better API to use.

They are free to give them the hammer too.
Consequence for acting against Apple's terms of service.
Everybody be on the lookout for ToS breakers! The scum must be outed, shamed and alienated. No one should feel sorry for them and we should all compare their actions to piracy or cheating in a video game. Clearly these “beeper” using are infiltrating the platform so they can spam our legitimate users by purchasing $3000 laptops and claiming that they’re only using said app for convenience!

Round them up boys!

PS: my iMessage account was flagged for sending spam (never happened) and unsolicited messages from a legit device. Apple can’t tell where the messages are coming from is what that means.

Expected behavior.