[eqvinox]

If you can call it, it's not private, it's that simple. Putting a "please don't call this" on is just naïve. Even in legal matters, it's already the case that laws that aren't enforced are worthless, cf. driving 5-10 mph over the speed limit being normal. It won't work any better on a weak statement on an API.

And either way, applications shouldn't be able to break the system like this. You can reasonably expect error handling to catch this, even if the error is "a private API was called".

This is on Apple. 90% at least. Maybe 10% on Electron.

[alsetmusic]

> If you can call it, it's not private

If I can walk on land that says private property, it's not private. I'll remember to use that argument when I get ticketed for trespassing.

There are APIs that are explicitly declared verboten for third-parties to use because they aren't intended for outside use. That doesn't make them magically inaccessible, but it does mean that when their unanticipated use breaks things, that's on the people who ignored the warnings.

I agree that this shouldn't be able to have the huge impact that it does and that Apple ought to have made their OS more resilient, but your logic is weak.

> Even in legal matters, it's already the case that laws that aren't enforced are worthless, cf. driving 5-10 mph over the speed limit being normal.

Just because all but one cop of the force ignore people driving over the speed limit doesn't mean the one who pulls you over is isn't able to write you a speeding ticket. Try that with a judge. It might work, but the law is very much still enforceable. This isn't like failing to protect a trademark.

[eqvinox]

> If I can walk on land that says private property, it's not private. I'll remember to use that argument when I get ticketed for trespassing.

Dude. Dudette. Duderino. Did you think this through before you hit post? I'm talking about enforcement. If you're getting a ticket, it's literally being enforced. And if it isn't, you get squatters! Thanks for the point in support, I guess?

I think this is the most braindead knee-jerk HN comment I've ever gotten as a reply, congratulations.

[Ed.: god, please, this genuinely hurts my brain.]

> but it does mean that when their unanticipated use breaks things, that's on the people who ignored the warnings.

Yeah. When it breaks things for them. Not when it breaks the entire OS' UI.

Let's stay with your analogy. Things change, Electron apps break? That's analog to finally getting around to calling the cops on squatters after dozing on it. Things change, your UI goes belly up due to Electron? That's you deciding to pay the bill for electricity and indoor plumbing for the squatters. No, wait, even better: you decided you finally want to build a new house on your plot, and now have to deal with getting the squatters out first. It'll happen, but you'll have to unnecessarily sink time and money into that. Apple's dealing with evicting Electron off their private APIs. What a nice analogy.

Of course the squatters are technically wrong. But why did you leave your front door open, and neglected and didn't check in for years? The part where you're making it hard for yourself is on you, mate. You're not going to get your lost time back. Why didn't you grab a lock at home depot?

> Just because all but one cop of the force ignore people driving over the speed limit

This is generally policy, not individual cops' discretion.

[blueflow]

rel: https://chaos.social/@equinox/115394652622711731

[eqvinox]

Indeed that Mastodon post refers to the sibling to yours. I genuinely can't bear the contradiction. My reply below is as polite as I could manage; on Mastodon there is no point in attempting to restrain my bafflement :)