Hacker News
points by boxed 1 day ago | 0 comments
It's funny. When Apple goes in and changes peoples systems deeply without consent then it's Apple being evil. When they don't, it's Apple being evil. Heads I win, tails you lose.
[–] 1970-01-01 1 day ago
Let's pretend there's a night and day difference between pushing some MP3 onto all iPhones and distrusting a chain of certs that hold the value of '4'. At minimum Apple need to revoke everywhere these joke-level certs live and as fast as possible, and on all devices which also means out of support. Breaking is acceptable here as CA trust is fully compromised.
[–] mattstir 1 day ago
Yes, there would be crowds of angry people, furious that Apple... released a critical security patch? Framing removing compromised certs as "changing peoples systems deeply" seems intentionally in bad faith.
[–] 1718627440 1 day ago
It's funny, when I do steal something I get called bad, and when I do nothing and turn the blind eye to others stealing, I get called bad too.

Morality doesn't solely depend on action or inaction, it also matter what you act or don't act to.

[–] simondotau 1 day ago
I've seen this referred to as the "All Roads Lead to Rome" fallacy.
[–] cromka 1 day ago
Eh? Changes systems without consent? Is that the ONLY way to update a fatal flaw in system? Normal update channels don't work?

Besides, how does this relate to my Linux point, where no one installs anything without you knowing it?

[–] boxed 1 day ago
Because in the linux situation, you wouldn't get such an update automatically anyway so it'd be worse?
[–] cromka 1 day ago
How would it be worse? Linux distros patched things almost immediately and you'd get a notification, typically after a daily check.

How is that worse than NOT having any sort of fix from Apple?

[–] kqp 1 day ago
I don’t think you understand what consent means.