'Fuck You, Make Me' Without Saying the Words

'Fuck You, Make Me' Without Saying the Words(daringfireball.net)

14 points by nopakos 127 days ago | 24 comments

ggm 127 days ago |

All kinds of things could be said about the second order effects of them booting an app, and most of them do ultimately involve the threat aspect of state actors or other rich VC class people and what they do.

I think we tend to forget, that their legals will be telling them they simply don't HAVE to do this. Not, what they should think, or do, but providing the cash focussed getout: you have no obligation here.

That passivity brings them advantages. Not having to act, means choosing to "wait and see" is a low bar justifiable decision inside their role and obligations. Not what you and I might think, what they feel obligated to do.

Remember that when Apple did voluntarily explore CSAM scanning logic, the community pushed back hard. So they have recent experience to drive wanting not to act. It hurt last time.

bigyabai 127 days ago | |

> that their legals will be telling them they simply don't HAVE to do this.

Their legals are, outright, telling them not to do this. Apple has an App Store monopoly, the moment Grok or X gets booted off then it's lawsuit time for them. Apple could at any point forfeit their monopoly by supporting third-party app distributors. But this is what they chose, and Apple has to balance the abuses with the judgement calls as a result.

> So they have recent experience to drive wanting not to act. It hurt last time.

What does that have to do with anything? Apple doesn't care how much things hurt their users. Any company that would suggest client-side-scanning is entirely willing to hurt their users, you just said it yourself: "most of them do ultimately involve the threat aspect of state actors"

ggm 126 days ago | | |

Their decision to code CSAM "pink detecting" logic and deploy, hurt them. It hurt in terms of reputation, it hurt in terms of lost sales, and development costs which couldn't be recovered.

I wasn't discussing hurt to users.

JohnFen 127 days ago |

> These men aren’t beholden to shareholders, per se. They’re doing their duty to institutions they’ve devoted their lives to.

But what about doing their duty to the nation?

nopakos 127 days ago |

It's another sign that -by some measure- "America has crossed the line into competitive authoritarianism". There was this opinion piece some months ago in the New York Times by Steven Levitsky, Lucan Way and Daniel Ziblatt which I recalled when I read this. [https://archive.is/WZMpM]

aebtebeten 127 days ago | |

In 1940, the face-eating leopards were crocodiles:

> Each one hopes that if he feeds the crocodile enough, the crocodile will eat him last. —WLSC

gsf_emergency_6 126 days ago | | |

Re: feeding estuarine man-eaters

The left ("authoritarian" or not) is currently better at getting outraged (bottom, "delicatus"/"pasivo"?), and the right is better at trolling (top-- "activo"(?))

(This was the unambiguous Roman ideology I was maybe hinting at ..so you know Scott Locklin is indeed "non authoritarian" just like he claims

https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/

I basically picked the book because of this, and because wakipedia said it was the world’s most offensively misogynistic series of novels (all four novels were in this book). I was disappointed in this;

Note that here he applies the incorrect strategy --> )

Long before we get to selfdeprogramming, mutual reprogramming looks like the left trolling the right, and the right learning how to get outraged.

Thus.. tips from homophilic role-switching ex-Nazis (leather lovin' fans of Rome long before the SV-neocon detente)?