TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Securing Lasting Freedoms for All

41 点作者 chj超过 4 年前

12 条评论

sillysaurusx超过 4 年前
I take a cynical view here: the only reason Epic is doing this is to make more money. They want that last 30%. i.e. this is a PR stunt and nothing more.<p>You can feel various ways, but personally, my reaction is &quot;This is the hill you want to die on? You won&#x27;t win this. No judge will ever order Apple to let you participate in their app store in violation of their ToS. And if they do, it&#x27;ll take years of litigation.&quot;<p>Still... Kudos to them for this ambitious plan. It takes guts to intentionally kill off your iOS revenue stream. I wonder what percentage of revenue fortnite iOS generated. Perhaps iOS simply wasn&#x27;t too lucrative. But if it was lucrative, then this took guts.<p>Remember that struggles for money and power are often dressed up as struggles for morals and righteousness. You start to see that pattern everywhere.<p>The other side of this is, Apple needs to play this carefully. It has the potential to quickly spiral out of control. For example, banning all games built on Unreal Engine would ignite a real fury, and would make <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;paulgraham.com&#x2F;apple.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;paulgraham.com&#x2F;apple.html</a> true – 11 years later.<p>Removing notarization for Fortnite on MacOS is another overstep, but it doesn&#x27;t seem like it will cause Apple to lose the war.
评论 #24288824 未加载
评论 #24288863 未加载
评论 #24288813 未加载
评论 #24288861 未加载
评论 #24288894 未加载
评论 #24288845 未加载
评论 #24288875 未加载
评论 #24288789 未加载
评论 #24292795 未加载
评论 #24288834 未加载
评论 #24288818 未加载
评论 #24288882 未加载
评论 #24288774 未加载
jfmercer超过 4 年前
Isn&#x27;t &quot;securing lasting freedoms for all&quot; a hyperbolic title for this issue?
评论 #24288791 未加载
评论 #24288967 未加载
评论 #24289931 未加载
Waterluvian超过 4 年前
Epic wants more money. Watching them raise the banner of freedom makes me want to vomit a little. But Apple’s 30% take is ludicrous and the enemy of my enemy is my friend so I really hope they prevail.
评论 #24288873 未加载
评论 #24289324 未加载
superkuh超过 4 年前
Tell it to the people who used to play Rocket League on linux.
评论 #24288853 未加载
lajawfe超过 4 年前
Here I give my analysis of what the best solution could be. Would like to know your thoughts too.<p>0. Lower rate from 30% to 15% -Apple still has monopoly, nothing changes.<p>1. Side loading apps: Not good! malicious apps can run amok, eg. $BIG_CORP$ will say - you will get 20$ credits if you sideload our app, and then surveil everything that is possible on the device. Here, we expect an average user to give all the permission that the app requests for.<p>2. allow secondary app stores: -not good as it depends on the quality of enforcement in secondary app store. For Apple, it is in their interest to maintain app quality in their appstore to maintain overall good user experience in their device, but motivations are not same for secondary app store. May allow malicious apps which deteriorate the user experience&#x2F;privacy similar to 1. And there will be a state where you will have to install 10s of app store just to install specific programs which is also not ideal.<p>3. Allow secondary payment methods: -Average user will have to give up their payment info to everyone who asks for it. Most of them will not be trustworthy nor we can expect all of them to maintain good security standards for saving payment info.<p>The biggest culprit of all this drama is Apple does not allow secondary payment inside apps AND also, if you have secondary payment outside of app, they do not allow that price to be lower. There is no competition, thus Apple can get away with whatever it chooses to. Thus the monopoly.<p>4. SOLUTION:<p>a) charge a flat fee for reviewing&#x2F;serving apps. If necessary, linearly increase it based on daily active users if they need more resource to support that app.<p>b) allow whitelisted secondary payment providers. Only whitelisting few payment methods which are trustable eg applepay, googlepay, paypal, stripe, etc will maintain security of payment data.<p>c) allow secondary payment price to be lower than Apple.<p>With this solution, there will be competition between payment providers which will drive the price down.
评论 #24288960 未加载
评论 #24289013 未加载
评论 #24288973 未加载
aaronbrethorst超过 4 年前
<i>We are committed to securing lasting freedoms for all. This is why we fight.</i><p>This seems so out of touch given what&#x27;s happening in the United States and around the world today.
enchiridion超过 4 年前
I understand the disgust some people are expressing, but I can&#x27;t really sympathize with it.<p>It seems like a case of aligned incentives.
ndarilek超过 4 年前
This is a surprisingly personal legal battle for me.<p>I&#x27;m totally blind. For a long while now, iOS has been the mobile accessibility leader, and unless you as a blind person have some specific reason to use Android, you&#x27;re encouraged to use iOS.<p>Back in 2009 when Android accessibility was a joke, by which I mean as a developer I found major API issues within a few hours of development, I wrote one of the first and most popular Android screen readers. I think it was at least the first to be publicised even before TalkBack, where by &quot;publicised&quot; I mean TalkBack wasn&#x27;t in Android&#x27;s release notes, but I at least had an APK installable via tinyurl and posted to a mailing list. I quite literally had nothing else to do with my time at that point in my life, and Android 1.6 had an accessibility API, so on a lark I started writing a screen reader. The project has since died out, but for a long while, Spiel was a thin on Android.<p>iOS won&#x27;t let me do anything like that. Further, iOS won&#x27;t even let me code for it unless I use MacOS, and while MacOS has some decent accessibility features, it&#x27;s been a royal pain in my ass to code on. I could elaborate, but to keep this comment brief, take it as a given from a subject area expert that developing on MacOS as a blind person is worse than any other platform I&#x27;ve used to date. And that&#x27;s saying something, since Linux is my primary platform, and there are a number of blind developers who won&#x27;t touch it with a 10-foot pole. I don&#x27;t want to claim that coding on MacOS under VoiceOver isn&#x27;t possible, but it&#x27;s more difficult than it needs to be.<p>Yes, these are two huge corporations slugging it out, and it&#x27;s hard to muster much sympathy for Epic. But I wouldn&#x27;t be the developer I am today if it weren&#x27;t for Android&#x27;s openness letting me build a screen reader, and its further openness letting me build an accessible GPS navigation app which I&#x27;ve hacked on in some form for around a decade now, and which I&#x27;ve come to rely upon. It bugs me to no end that the more accessible mobile platform is so locked down such that a budding blind software engineer handed an iPhone can&#x27;t code for it using JAWS or NVDA. So Apple is handing blind people internet-connected mobile computers with all sorts of sensors, and telling them the only way they can develop for these devices is by using a sub-par development environment that&#x27;s going to fight them every step of the way and, likely, turn them off of software development more broadly. Then maybe we wonder why we don&#x27;t see more blind software engineers?<p>So, go Epic. If they start being asses later then of course I&#x27;ll oppose that, but if they have a big enough saber to start breaking up Apple&#x27;s stranglehold on the most accessible mobile platform, they&#x27;ve got my support 100%. Hell yeah, the web wouldn&#x27;t have been possible under Apple&#x27;s rule. And while I respect those of you who want more secure devices and a curated experience, don&#x27;t under-estimate the harm caused by locking blind developers out of one of the most accessible computing environments they&#x27;re ever likely to get. No, jumping through certificate hoops to install something that will expire after a week isn&#x27;t anything near what I&#x27;m asking for.<p>And to those of you who say &quot;Just tell your blind friends to use a Pinephone,&quot; I wish I could, but Linux accessibility infrastructure has no support for touchscreens and touch events. Any of you millionaires reading this interested in funding that development? ;) Serious question, I&#x27;ll work to put you in touch with the right folks.
Andrew_nenakhov超过 4 年前
If Epic pulls this off and Apple will be forced to allow app sideloading and third party appstores, I pledge myself to install Epic Store on some of my desktop computers.
happytoexplain超过 4 年前
This is one immoral company fighting another for money and simply hoping people will see the other as more immoral.<p>There&#x27;s something disgusting about their technique of preparing a propaganda film portraying themselves (a massive corporation) as the courageous underdog representing the people, then purposefully breaking ToS for the purposes of provoking the obvious reaction which they could then &quot;react&quot; to by releasing the film.<p>Of course all of this is independent of Apple&#x27;s actual sin, which is indeed an overbearing ToS.
评论 #24288912 未加载
评论 #24288919 未加载
评论 #24288929 未加载
TedDoesntTalk超过 4 年前
&gt; Apple’s policies would have even blocked the World Wide Web if it had been invented after the iPhone, because Apple policies disallow running code not reviewed by Apple, accepting payments directly from customers, and accessing content not reviewed by Apple — all fundamental features of the web<p>YES!
评论 #24289040 未加载
评论 #24288854 未加载
bassman9000超过 4 年前
This argument will be useful next time a brick and mortar store tells me they only take cash.