[JumpCrisscross]

>On Friday, State Senator Mark Leno of California, a Democrat, is expected to introduce legislation requiring all smartphones and tablets sold in the state to include this kind of feature.

This should be a required option, even if it's opt out. The consumer should be able to turn off this kind of remote authorisation over their device, even if it reduces the "herd immunity".

Killing core functionality goes a step beyond IMEI blacklisting, which can be circumvented by selling the phone outside the blacklisted jurisdictions. An IMEI-blacklisted phone is a phone with a reduced market. An effectively "killed" phone is worth its recycling rebate.

[cheald]

Why should it be required, exactly? If people want phones with anti-theft technology, they can buy phones with anti-theft technology. What this smells like to me is a government wanting to have the power to sever your communications at will.

Having the ability to remote-brick my phone is great if I want it, but someone else having the ability to remote-brick my phone is a frickin' huge liability.

[sigzero]

Exactly! California can go F itself. They should not be legislating this crap.

[ChrisNorstrom]

They've been unable to mind their own business for decades now. They legislated the forced use of fire-proofing chemicals in mattresses, couches, & cushions in all furniture sold in California and years later scientists discovered those chemicals are harmful hormone disruptors and don't even realistically prevent fire in real world situations. Furniture companies can't create 2 different SKUs of furniture (one without the chemicals and one with) so they just included fire retardants into all their furniture by default. All the USA has now been affected with hormone disrupting fire retardants all because one state's puppet master legislators want to enforce their enlightenment on everyone.

[sabbatic13]

And people who willfully confuse a couple dopey activist legislators from the state's goofiest city with the entire state can...what you said. Also, none of that hate for NYC, or did you not bother to read that this BS is coming from both states, or more precisely, from a few dumb legislators based in the most full-of-themselves cities in the country, backed by politicians in law enforcement uniforms who can't stop crime, so they advocate putting the burden elsewhere?

[wtbob]

> And people who willfully confuse a couple dopey activist legislators from the state's goofiest city with the entire state can

We're talking about a state legislature and governor which did in fact just ban lead bullets, a state legislature and governor elected by the entire state.