It's still being investigated by the EU.

Calling that tyranny really devalues the word, especially when you had to buy an Apple device to be "subjected" to it, and there are alternatives.

Why would alternatives be any better? It is clearly in the vendor's interest to lock down their platforms. Or are you talking about an open source alternative?

I was thinking about Android, or Librem, or jailbreaking.

I hope you don't consider Apple's acquiescence to government surveillance tyranny then. After all, you've got so many options like Android, Librem or jailbreaking.

The government using the power of the law to invade the privacy of its citizens, against the overwhelming preference of its citizens and international human rights norms... is abusive. It isn't tyranny on its own, but it should be avoided.

Not liking how a company provides a service, when there are other companies providing the same service? That's not tyranny. That's not like a government threatening you with jail or violence.

If you think it is then the time has come, IMO, to log off for a while and get back in touch with the world outside of the internet and tech.

My bad, I'll come back in 4 years when you lot are begging for safe alternatives.

How many years have you been saying that for?

12 years give or take. Now the shoe is on the other foot and people want their rights back, it's delicious. Europe was right all along.

you do realize the eu is the reason apple is allowing sideloading to begin with, right?

Calling this "alternatives" misleads into thinking they are reasonable and there's no duopoly:

https://mastodon.sdf.org/@jack/113952225452466068

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26639261

True alternatives, GNU/Linux phones, are not as polished as iPhones are.

Not having the alternatives you want isn't the same as not having alternatives, nor is it tyranny.

Duopoly is not a free market. It doesn't offer true alternatives.

Again, "true" is not a synonym for "what I'd prefer."

Sure. Just like duopoly isn't a synonym for freedom. So, just because you'd apparently prefer that it be, that doesn't make it true.

I didn't say that, I said that talking about tyranny in this context is divorced from reality, and it is. I'm not even engaging with the "duopoly" thing, I know how hopeless a conversation like that. I just wish that people could represent their desires and complaints on this topic like rational adults.

> talking about tyranny in this context is divorced from reality, and it is

This is plain false, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duopoly#Characteristics_of_duo...

Do you understand how me saying "Tyranny" and you responding "Duopoly" isn't really a conversation or even debate? We're literally talking about different things.

edit Since this seems to need clarification: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tyranny

So what exactly do you mean by "Tyranny"? I mean that customers do not have a choice and can't affect the market, due to high entry barriers and the presence of monopoly elements.

Still, neither duopoly nor even monopoly really amount to "tyranny". When was the last time some duopolist threw you into a GULAG, or their death squads slaughtered people willy-nilly in the streets?

Stop misusing words like that. It debases them.

> Still ridiculous apple got away with this one

I'm sure enough that Apple won't get away with it, that I'm willing to bet money on it. The arms of regulation moves slowly, but they do move. Wouldn't be the first time someone got fined for not following the spirit of the regulation and trying to work around it.