Apple takes down ICE tracking apps after pressure from DOJ

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/apple-takes-down-ice-tracking-app-after-pressure-from-ag-bondi

by aspenmayer • 10 months ago

659 514 10 months ago

aspenmayer• 10 months ago

DaiPlusPlus3• 10 months ago

Methinks this won’t be the last politically-motivated removal from Apple’s App Store; the more apps they remove then the more they weaken their own arguments about how a locked-in walled garden is in consumer interests.

JKCalhoun2• 10 months ago

Oh absolutely. Bondi demanded (!) they remove the app. Why would anyone think she won't demand they remove others?

myvoiceismypass• 10 months ago

Yep, anything DNC-labeled or affiliated will be next on the ban list. Truly scary stuff, that tens of millions of fellow Americans are actively cheering on.

sandworm1018• 10 months ago

And it is certainly also not the first.

eviks• 10 months ago

What was the first?

x1unix• 10 months ago

Apple removed a lot of apps from the store in order to stay present in Russia.

Just business

tempodox2• 10 months ago

Only goes to show how the U.S. are becoming more like Russia by the day.

Cthulhu_• 10 months ago

The big tech companies bent the knee (or, complied with local policies and laws) to Russia, China, Europe, etc already to do business over there, it's nothing particularly new but we are fully aware that Russia and China are not free countries, and Europe has stricter consumer / data protection laws (so it's less free for companies than the US).

dspillett• 10 months ago

Just business under an authoritarian regime. Things happening the way they happen in Russia is not exactly something I'd aspire to, or readily accept…

buellerbueller2• 10 months ago

Did anyone actually believe {MEGACORP} would prefer political alignment to money?

JuniperMesos6• 10 months ago

This wasn't the first one either.

Nervhq3• 10 months ago

Yep they reap what they sow

diego_moita• 10 months ago

And it won't affect their branding in any relevant way.

As "Amusing Ourselves to Death"[1] would explain, what almost all Apple consumers want is just FaceBook, WhatsApp, memes and games. Anything else is "boooring!".

We live in an Idiocracy[2]. Deal with it.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amusing_Ourselves_to_Death

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy

codyb2• 10 months ago

I've started buying refurb, and will be heavily considering my upcoming electronics purchases. I encourage others to reduce consumption from companies which kowtow to this dangerous administration's demands and rhetoric.

I've been boycotting Amazon as best I can for nearly a decade though since they had ambulances outside their warehouses and delivery workers pissing in gatorade bottles but reducing consumption of toxic brands can be done and is effective at sending messages when done en masse.

I also boycott all the social media companies, Disney, Google as much as possible.

Sadly, there's not a ton of options in this space (computer electronics).

I've also e-mailed tim.cook@apple.com and expressed my opinions in a polite manner. Maybe someone read it. Who knows.

Stand up, fight back!

slackfan• 10 months ago

It's by no means the first if you've been outside of the US. Glad to see we're moving in the direction of China, Russia, Europe, etc.

imglorp2• 10 months ago

Who thinks it will stop at app removals?

Remember CSAM and how it got withdrawn? https://www.apple.com/child-safety/pdf/CSAM_Detection_Techni...

What if the government asks for sentiment analysis? Thoughtcrime detection? Always-on audio collection? Always-on location logging?

All the things we were afraid of are simple technically and the only thing stopping it is a few executives of a trillion dollar company who must report earnings to shareholders.

yubblegum3• 10 months ago

All that you said coupled with (snooping) edge AI is the future.

snvzz• 10 months ago

It was an illegal app designed to aid in illegal interference with law enforcement.

It is unsurprising for it to get removed, as companies must follow the law.

dragonwriter• 10 months ago

It is not illegal to notice actions of government agents in public or to report them to others; it was a legal app designed to facility activity protected by the First Amendemnt.

cooperq• 10 months ago

it is actually not illegal at all to report on the locations of law enforcement. This is, in fact, protected speech.

idiotsecant2• 10 months ago

A) it's not illegal, as evidenced by the fact that not a single person has been prosecuted. There is no law being broken, just the feel-feels of the surveillance state getting hurt.

B) Even if there was a law, its the duty of every American to disobey unjust laws. The government serves at the pleasure of the people, not the other way around. There are a lot of people getting awfully comfortable with weak men ordering other jack booted weak men to systematically tear down what actually makes America great. I thought we settled this last time, but maybe we need to revisit the issue.

Dig1t• 10 months ago

The left did this in the previous admin with Parler. This has been going on for a long time and Apple will not face any repercussions because it is abused by both sides of the political aisle.

jaykru• 10 months ago

another day, another example of why we must all vigorously reject the campaign to stop users from installing software on their computers. stallman was right!

JKCalhoun2• 10 months ago

Not to refute your point, but a trivial enough thing to create as a web site. I'm guessing that will come next (if one doesn't already exist).

xp84• 10 months ago

Indeed, not sure why it wasn’t a website already!

lenkite3• 10 months ago

I guess the developers will need to learn HTML+CSS and self host this app on a Russian server. Will be good to showcase the freedom of the web!

I am going to use this news to hit every lemming in the face - those who claim corpo-controlled walled gardens are good for you and grandma.

jajuuka2• 10 months ago

Not surprising. The media hyped up the app and the admin hyper focused on it. Was bound to happen eventually since Apple wants to play nice with the government. Nice thing is it isn't the only one and others are multiplatform instead of iOS only. I'm doubtful we'll be seeing ICEblock show up in the iOS side load community.

sherry-sherry5• 10 months ago

I'd love for all tech reviewers at future product launches to go: "Yeah cool new iPads thanks... why did you guys block and remove an app that wasn't illegal? One that helped people know if armed forces that could search them and tear apart their homes were in the area?".

Just refuse to report on or post about new product launches without mentioning it.

Press is an large thing for Apple. Multiple times now they've only sprung into action when the press got on their arse about something (faulty HDD cables/video cards in Macbook Pros, faulty keyboards, etc). Press getting on them could push them to take an actual stance, or at least explain why (bowing to the dictator in this case).

01HNNWZ0MV43FF2• 10 months ago

Yeah but the press has to make money. They don't want to lose access, ultimately most of them want to be PR contractors for big companies

Getting people off of for-profit news would be great, though I admit it's a blue sky proposal

sleight425• 10 months ago

Capital does what serves it best. Values are little more than a fig leaf in capitalism. After all, how many of us sacrifice our income for our values? A very few, indeed.

sleight425• 10 months ago

Of course this gets downvoted. HN is after all first about capital. Startups.

saurik8• 10 months ago

FWIW, everyone who claims that Apple fundamentally needs the centralized ability to control apps on their platforms "for everyone's safety" -- despite how that obviously and repeatedly makes them become patsies for governments all over the world to enforce their censorship regimes -- are complicit in this stuff (in addition, of course, to the people who build it at Apple...).

ipnon• 10 months ago

What exactly do you mean by “complicit” in “this stuff”? What are you accusing?

rockskon• 10 months ago

Quite clearly accusing them of reducing public pressure against Apple putting itself in a position where it's doing exactly what it's doing right now.

no_wizard2• 10 months ago

It’s a shame too, because Apple has the money and brand wherewithal to fight the government. See the FBI vs Apple stuff that happened years ago. That actually won them some real converts.

Capitulating over this is Apple showing their supposed core values have significantly hollowed

PokestarFan• 10 months ago

It was obvious Apple was going to bend the knee with that gold plaque.

covercash• 10 months ago

I wish Steve was still around for these battles. Tim Cook is such a pussy.

stingraycharles2• 10 months ago

Isn’t Apple mostly interested in making more money, though, instead of spending money?

The way I see it of all the top tech giants, Apple has the most to lose with all the tariff shenanigans, so it’s in their [shareholders] interest to stay friends with the current administration.

Apple has never had moral values other than earning money by making great products.

And I say this as someone who is deeply embedded in the Apple ecosystem.

spaceguillotine• 10 months ago

the only time apple fights the government is when they want to keep illegally firing people and then the NLRB just goes, well sorry they just have too much money to stop them. They use bribe money for everything else.

scarface_745• 10 months ago

Why would you expect Apple to fight the same administration that it has been prostrating itself for both this term and the last term?

Apple hasn’t had any values aside from its bottom line since Cook took over.

rekttrader2• 10 months ago

When’s your next court date against Apple? Let’s hope the California government can stand against this type of federal overreach.

beeflet10• 10 months ago

I have no hope that the solution can be solved through lawfare. The ability of one company to control what the vast majority of people can do with their phones is unacceptable, regardless of what happens with this one app.

saurik8• 10 months ago

I lost--not on the facts, or even on the relevant law, and not even in the district court where we were being heard, but in appeals on a narrow technicality of statute of limitations that we bet our case on (I am explicit about this as Apple didn't "win", so much as "we failed"; I even feel like our case just wasn't argued very well once we got to that level, which hurts)--over a year and a half ago... so, never :(.

andsoitis6• 10 months ago

are complicit in this stuff

I don’t know that that is fair.

This framing is designed to shame people into feeling guilty for their point of view, rather than their actions.

Being complicit means to be knowingly involved in or facilitating an illegal or wrongdoing act. In my books, it requires a level of participation that I don’t think your characterization meets.

beeflet10• 10 months ago

The wrongdoing is supporting this company's dominance, which enables this level of censorship.

g-b-r3• 10 months ago

Their action is supporting and promoting the model to other people, if they do that

themafia• 10 months ago

This framing is designed to shame people into feeling guilty for their point of view, rather than their actions.

Having a point of view and then using that point of view to make public claims, often counter-claims in face of precisely this type of criticism, is an action. Examples are easily found on this forum.

or wrongdoing act

Which includes simple dishonesty.

handsclean• 10 months ago

It’s happened many times before, and people heard about it and aren’t that stupid or forgetful. They just want to believe something incompatible, so they permit themselves a little internal dishonesty: maybe it’s a separate issue that somebody else will surely figure out, or there’s a better solution (that we won’t pursue), or everybody always exaggerates (but we won’t verify that), or they find a way to hate and dismiss everybody who talks about it. Declaring your own shamelessness is more of the same: you’re reframing the problem from the consequences of your actions to your feelings about those consequences, then addressing only your feelings. It’s the same sort of behavior as heroin addicts, who find a route to happiness that doesn’t push them through the good things that the pursuit of happiness was meant to.

scheeseman486• 10 months ago

They knowingly created the systems they built around having centralized control, everyone told them the consequences of doing that, they did it anyway, this is the result, they are responsible.

goku126• 10 months ago

You're dismissing the parent argument merely based on a narrow interpretation of the word complicity. The way they use it is common and correct in English language. All it needs is to aid the wrongdoing in some manner. That's exactly what you do when you choose to support and lend credence to Apple's flawed arguments on safety and thus blunt the opposition to their hostile practices. This is significant because Apple has been forced on occasions to backtrack on bad decisions in the face of public backlash. (Anybody remember their plan to scan all photos in the phone for CSAM?)

Now even if you want to go the pedantic or legal route, the meaning of complicity changes according to jurisdictions. Many legal jurisdictions consider interference in the opposition to a crime or even silence in the face of a crime to be complicity if you had sufficient knowledge about wrongdoer's intent. In this particular case, people had been warning for decades of this exact outcome, down to the details of the headline.

You could argue that this is policing of thought and opinion. Obviously, we're talking about moral responsibility here, which is just another opinion too as far as consequences are considered. (Except in cases of astroturfing and sock puppeting where the complicity is more direct. But we will ignore that possibility for now.)

heavyset_go5• 10 months ago

There's a difference between having a view and spreading apologia for public consumption.

For example, surely anti-abolitionists' apologia made them more complicit in the continued institution of slavery than those who chose not to make excuses for it did, even if they themselves did not own or facilitate the sale of people.

We don't seem to have a problem with assigning some responsibility for abolition with abolitionists' own apologia, some of it still read in schools today.

thisisit• 10 months ago

Here's a simple thought experiment.

Would have Apple done the same if it was any another country?

Probably not. They would have courts and the democratic processes to help them resist.

But in face of authoritarian government who can hurt Apple's sales the company always bows. Be it actions in China or now action in US. The motive is simply profit.

The company cannot have a centralized control to make it "safer" and then give that way if the profits are under threat. Companies should be shamed for that.

godelski4• 10 months ago

  > rather than their actions.

OP's comments are about action

  >> everyone who claims that Apple fundamentally needs the centralized ability to control apps on their platforms "for everyone's safety"

This is an action. If you go around defending Apple or advocating for their position then yes, you are complicit. You are not just a bystander, you are actively participating in their propaganda. This is especially true on HN where we expect the average user to be fairly technically literate. Everyone here should know how phones are not unique computers that need extra central authority control to make them safe when compared to your desktops and laptops.

Sure, Apple probably wants to have control over that too, but are we really going to let them destroy the very thing that made these systems magic? Computers are "magic" because we can program them. Because they are environments. You cannot make a product for everybody. But you can make an environment in which everyone can adapt to their individual needs and use cases. That's what makes the computer magical and so special. A smart phone is nothing without its apps.

So yes, complicit.

b_e_n_t_o_n3• 10 months ago

The problem isn't the centralized control, it's the power the governments have.

g-b-r3• 10 months ago

I guess that iphones will be alright when no government in the world will have that power anymore, then

rurp• 10 months ago

It's both. Apple very intentionaly designs their phones so that they can immediately cut off their user's access to various apps with the flip of a switch and no recourse. It's obvious that this has and will continue to be abused.

At the same time the government of an ostensibly free country that values free speech should absolutely not be making these demands.

At this point I expect such behavior from this administration, they aren't pretending to be anything other than incompetent and corrupt.

Shame on Apple for helping these scumbags, now and in the future.

jjav4• 10 months ago

The problem isn't the centralized control, it's the power the governments have.

The governments will always have the power, that's pretty much built into the definition of government.

So, technology needs to be built with this reality in mind. Thus, avoid all centralization.

JumpCrisscross5• 10 months ago

Any clue how Apple is justifying this? What rules did these apps allegedly break?

Is it blocked globally, or only for U.S. app store phones? Are downloads blocked, or is the app being removed from phones it's already on?

FranzFerdiNaN2• 10 months ago

The rule it breaks is Trump doesn’t like it. So Tim Cook bends the knee as the spineless little man he is.

imoverclocked5• 10 months ago

I think that Apple is a company that has to obey the rule of law. Maybe the problem here isn’t Apple but the rules they are being forced to abide by?

JumpCrisscross5• 10 months ago

Apple is a company that has to obey the rule of law

Damn right.

Where is the court order? Pursuant to what law?

jjav4• 10 months ago

I think that Apple is a company that has to obey the rule of law.

Right, so the fundamental problem is having a device where the software that runs on it is controlled by a single company. It creates the attractive nuisance of being able to choke off anything the government doesn't like because, as you said, that single point of contact can't avoid obeying the government.

Computing needs to be open and controlled only by each individual owner of each device, so anyone can run whatever they like sourced from wherever they like.

thayne• 10 months ago

The point is that if you could install the app by side loading it, or from a third party app store, then a Government order to remove an app doesn't make it impossible to use that app. But Apples actions, ostensibly to protect its users, but in reality to protect its profits, has put it in a situation where it is a much more effective tool for government censorship.

ajross3• 10 months ago

Apple [...] has to obey the rule of law.

No, Apple has to obey the law.

The idea of "rule of law" is a shorthand for the set of norms and practices understood by everyone under a single regime, including both specific laws and authorities and more general principles. One of those, notably, is "the government shouldn't force private companies to censor their app stores".[1]

The rule of law is indeed being violated here, but in the other direction.

[1] Or "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech", if you swing that way.

jayd16• 10 months ago

There's no rule that says they need to block other app stores. That's a choice they made. The consequences are also a choice they made.

windexh8er• 10 months ago

Rule of law? Is that like the token of appreciation Tim Cook presented?

There are laws. Rule of law is a slippery slope.

There is no law or precedent set that would concern Apple with these apps. Apple is bending the knee. The exact same way they do with China.

ksec• 10 months ago

May be not complicit, but I think people need to be reminded that the context that Apple claims privacy is a fundamental human right and they are the defender of it. Both PR and in court.

And this centralised censorship regimes isn't new. It is exactly the same during Hong Kong protest in 2019.

Vegenoid2• 10 months ago

Apple claims privacy is a fundamental human right

And what is “privacy”? An iPhone user is not entitled to keep the apps that they run on their phone private.

heavyset_go5• 10 months ago

Genuinely hope you're successful with your suit, if that's still ongoing.

saurik8• 10 months ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45458944 (a quick update in another thread fork)

sandworm1018• 10 months ago

This is the problem with the modern "app" way of doing things. This sort of thing would be best handled as a website so that users need not run specific software on thier phones. Reports can come in as basic emails parsed for a lat/long or grid. Then a kml file can be pushed as needed to a basic web-facing map. The bandwidth would be minimal and very resistant to shutdown. Heck, share the kml files via torrents or put the map server in tor if necessary. No apps required.

sidewndr46• 10 months ago

The DOJ would just have the website host, the ISP, or the domain registrar revoke and terminate everything

tdeck• 10 months ago

In practice this seems much more difficult to do than going after the app in the app store, particularly if you choose your registrar and hosting provider carefully.

sandworm1018• 10 months ago

Ya, the pirate bay is still online, so too innumerable similar sites once targeted by various agencies. A smallish map running on a RP plugged into tor would be very resiliant. But there is a bittorent protocol that allows for rolling updates to a torrent. That would be the best way to distribute kml files imho.

cryptonym• 10 months ago

Website can't provide notification on iOS. You may find workaround but that would be either expensive or under Apple's control. This use-case without notifications is quite useless.

general1465• 10 months ago

It can just fine

https://www.mobiloud.com/blog/pwa-push-notifications

mrinterweb3• 10 months ago

Google is making it so sideloading APKs on Android is no longer possible. This is one of many great reasons why that should not happen.

layer84• 10 months ago

Google disputes that: https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/09/lets-talk-...

VladVladikoff3• 10 months ago

Verified developers will have the same freedom to distribute their apps directly to users through sideloading or through any app store they prefer.

So it’s the same then. Google can just “unverify” a developer who has published an app the kings don’t approve of.

papercrane• 10 months ago

For clarity, they're requiring apps to be signed by a verified developer on certified Android devices. You can still side load, but the verification is still required for the side loaded apps.

instagib• 10 months ago

Unverified developers can still use adb to install whatever they choose per the link:

“How does developer verification impact my use of Android Studio?

We are working to ensure these changes don’t have an impact on your day-to-day workflow so you can continue building your apps as smoothly as possible. Participating in developer verification will not affect your experience in Android Studio, the official IDE for Android app development. You will continue to be able to build and run an app even if your identity is not verified. Android Studio is unaffected because deployments performed with adb, which Android Studio uses behind the scenes to push builds to devices, is unaffected. You can continue to develop, debug, and test your app locally by deploying to both emulators and physical devices, just as you do now.”

fearless1ron4• 10 months ago

I agree with you, but can we stop calling installing software on the hardware you own "sideloading"?

VladVladikoff3• 10 months ago

Yeah, we should just ironically lean into it even harder and call it “backdooring”.

Jokes aside, when has pandering to people to change the status quo of colloquial word use ever worked?

burnt-resistor• 10 months ago

Offline installation.

danielinoa• 10 months ago

It's called "sideloading" because you're sneakily installing software without the manufacturer's consent. Remember it's never your device, you just have permission to use it.

kood• 10 months ago

I think "sideloading" is a completely ok term. it says what it is,, you load an app, not with the intended method (appstores) but from an alternative source, aside the official store. not a native English speaker, so I might not fully understand the possible connotations with this particular word, but I do not personally see anything wrong with it.

ChrisArchitect2• 10 months ago

https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/09/lets-talk-...

mrinterweb3• 10 months ago

A government probably wouldn't have to push very hard for Google to revoke a dev's signing key, blocking apps signed with that key. So I don't see a difference. Technically sideloading will be possible, but Google will still have control of what apps can run on devices.

mdhb3• 10 months ago

This is why you should be developing for the web and not the App Store in the first place.

pjmlp• 10 months ago

Only works if everyone stops helping Google to turn the Web into ChromeOS Platform.

cherryteastain• 10 months ago

Conversely, this and EU Chat Control are precisely why the powers that be will ensure it will happen.

The importance of FOSS mobile OSes is greater than ever now.

permo-w2• 10 months ago

if we're talking about the EU, for a provider the size of Google, not allowing third party application installs is illegal in the EU under the Digital Markets Act

illiac7862• 10 months ago

Still waiting to see chatcontrol happen. Maybe I’m naive, but I don’t believe it will happen.

bamboozled3• 10 months ago

What a coincidence ?

ge962• 10 months ago

man... things like this is why I was seeking another mobile OS at one point eg. wanting Pine64 to take off but alas... it needs more money

to clarify I get it's Mobian or Postmarket etc... which you could put on an Android phone but yeah

edit: the other thing was built in ads especially on cheaper phones like what you'd get at say Boost Mobile which I imagine is one of those subsidized costs thing phone is cheap because it's riddled with ads.

mrinterweb3• 10 months ago

Shocking no one, Google pulls the app too. https://www.404media.co/google-calls-ice-agents-a-vulnerable...

archon8102• 10 months ago

This is just flat out false. They're requiring developer registration. Sideloading is still possible if the developer key is registered.

worik4• 10 months ago

Sideloading is still possible if the developer key is registered

To all intents and purposes it is not allowed, then. Google becomes the gate keeper by controlling registration

"Trust us"

rpdillon• 10 months ago

As soon as incentives start to diverge, centralized app stores look less benevolent.

komali23• 10 months ago

Which is why people going back and forth about incentives has always driven me nuts. Attempting to make assurances based on this handle we crank called "human incentive" that may map to human behavior in the expected direction, the opposite direction, or no direction at all, is madness! We don't know. Humans are unsolved.

Give me guarantees, or the closest approximation. Federation, distribution, dispersion of authority, interoperability.

andsoitis6• 10 months ago

Give me guarantees,

What’s the incentive?

Zak3• 10 months ago

This is exactly what's wrong with Apple's app store exclusivity. It's also what's wrong with mandatory notarization where regulations forbid that, and Google's plan to require developer verification.

notyourwork• 10 months ago

Websites don’t need an App Store.

Retr0id• 10 months ago

The brightest minds are working on this problem as we speak

_aavaa_• 10 months ago

For how long?

The software on our primary machines used to not need blessing, but that too changed.

clumsysmurf• 10 months ago

Did we forget about WEI already? I'm sure Google is waiting for the right time to try it again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Environment_Integrity

jeroenhd5• 10 months ago

Most people don't know they can "install" a website on their phone, let alone that it allows that website to act like an app.

Discoverability of PWAs is quite bad. I'd love them to become more popular, but attempted solutions range from "user manually needs to hit the install button in a menu" to banners capable of saying "install freewhatsappupdate.xyz for exclusive whatsapp deals"/"click install to verify you're human".

Microsoft actually tried to bring more attention to web apps by adding them to their app store, but nobody uses the MS app store.

JeremyNT• 10 months ago

Precisely. They could simply say "not our problem" and move along if they didn't have this capability.

But since it exists, it can be abused.

I keep hoping enough people inside Google still give a shit to push back on their plan, but I'm not banking on it.

The idea of a world where users have no control over their own devices is just too attractive for the oligarchs.

zoklet-enjoyer• 10 months ago

What's next, Waze?

nsxwolf• 10 months ago

The analogy here is porn apps vs Safari.

yieldcrv• 10 months ago

Authorities said the suspect, Joshua Jahn, searched his phone for tracking apps, including ICEBlock, before opening fire on the facility from a rooftop.

Thats weird because you dont need iceblock to know that ICE is at an ICE facility

Its for when they’re spotted in neighborhoods

dumb rationale, dumb response

aerostable_slug2• 10 months ago

Jahn wasn't a big thinker. He used an iron-sighted old surplus rifle to shoot at vans that were filled with detainees rather than employees.

pupppet• 10 months ago

Why would they make you do that, Tim? You gave them a trophy and everything.

layer84• 10 months ago

The trophy was just a down payment.

sleight425• 10 months ago

Something somethjng leopards are my face.

buellerbueller2• 10 months ago

I saw it incomment on some other HN post, but:

The acquiescence of megacorps is essential for fascism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_collaboration_with_Na...

JUST SAY NO!

rekttrader2• 10 months ago

So let’s level set… ICE can buy data from data brokers, and has active contracts with Cellubrite and Pegasus… but an organized opposition can only use rocks and spears. This isn’t a fascist regime at all.

kranke155• 10 months ago

Fascism comes later.

and until it happens and even after it happens people will be saying “it’s not so bad”

bitpush• 10 months ago

Ah, yes. Apple - the "standing up to the government" company

Apple did the whole show with FBI because it was convenient for them. They bend the knee faster than anyone when things get a little uncomfortable.

jeroenhd5• 10 months ago

Apple has always stood up to the government when there was money to be made. Claiming privacy protections sells iPhones.

The people in China see nothing of the "standing up to the government" reputation and never really have. At least Google decided to pull out when the government started demanding they hand over data and apply censorship, Apple just complied and started storing data where the CCP can get to it.

wstrange• 10 months ago

Reading the comments on that Fox site is depressing. A lot of hate for Apple, but for the wrong reasons (as in, completely missing the danger of centralized app stores..).

toomuchtodo2• 10 months ago

The median age for a Fox News viewer is 69, according to Nielsen.

squigz• 10 months ago

I wouldn't make the mistake of thinking comments on a Fox article are indicative of... anything, really.

EasyMark• 10 months ago

Most smell of foreign propaganda bots or unhinged political obsessives that I've seen

bigyabai4• 10 months ago

I think this website overestimates the halo effect Apple garners with the commonfolk.

mariodiana• 10 months ago

Back in 2011, Apple removed apps that crowdsourced warnings about DUI checkpoints. It remains Apple's policy today.

According to Grok, "In March 2011, four Democratic senators—Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Harry Reid (D-Nev.), Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), and Tom Udall (D-N.M.)—sent letters to Apple, Google, and Research in Motion (BlackBerry's parent company) urging the removal of such apps […]"

So, we have precedent where four Democratic senators pressured Apple to remove an app that allowed people to evade law enforcement.

Spivak• 10 months ago

And it was wrong then too. Preventing people from sharing publicly available, literally visible from the street, information has got to be the brightest line violation of 1A. I'm really over how much the supreme court—not just this supreme court—has let the government end run around the constitution using tricks like this. Especially with the tax and spend power. If the government couldn't pass a law doing X then the government shouldn't be allowed to achieve X by any means.

Congressional dysfunction isn't an excuse to allow the creation of a shadow government orchestrated by the executive but here we are.

Nervhq3• 10 months ago

Just side load it apple user! Surely the great apple would never lock you in to a walled garden?

magicalist4• 10 months ago

to remove an app that allowed people to evade law enforcement.

No, they continued to allow police location apps (Google maps will even tell you where they are).

The language they added to the app store rules were very specific: "Apps may only display DUI checkpoints that are published by law enforcement agencies, and should never encourage drunk driving or other reckless behavior such as excessive speed."

Whether or not that was a good idea at the time (it wasn't), you can't claim this is covered by the same guidelines.

koolba• 10 months ago

What purpose outside abetting in avoiding a DUI is there for publishing a live map of DUI checkpoints?

I’m not questioning whether you should be able to do it. I’m really curious.

unethical_ban2• 10 months ago

Why is Waze allowed since it let's you report speed traps?

Probably because it doesn't technically advertise it as such, just "hey something requiring police presence is around".

ICEBlock should rebrand as a generic "police activity" app and have a category "other" that everyone understands is ICE but isn't labelled as such.

closewith• 10 months ago

Why is Waze allowed since it let's you report speed traps?

Nominally the purpose of speed enforcement is to reduce vehicle speeds, which Waze notifications achieve.

Waze - at least in my country - did remove COVID checkpoints during lockdowns, so they don't allow all reports.

ThrowawayTestr• 10 months ago

Why is Waze allowed since it let's you report speed traps?

Because the right to share police locations is protected by the 1st amendment

dghlsakjg• 10 months ago

The exact verbiage is this: "Apps may only display DUI checkpoints that are published by law enforcement agencies, and should never encourage drunk driving or other reckless behavior such as excessive speed."

intermerda3• 10 months ago

It remains Apple's policy today.

What is that policy?

According to Grok

Why did you ask an LLM which is manipulated by a single person when he doesn't like facts?

So, we have precedent where four Democratic senators pressured Apple to remove an app that allowed people to evade law enforcement.

Yes, senators sent letters to several companies. Apple listened. What would have happened if it didn't? What would happen to Apple if they don't listen now?

Do you sincerely believe that both situations are comparable?

tpmoney4• 10 months ago

Do you sincerely believe that both situations are comparable?

How are they not? In both cases US government officials applied pressure and implied legal action to force private companies to act in ways that enabled law enforcement to act with less resistance. It’s why we should always push back against government overreach and bullying. Because the “slippery slope” might be a logical fallacy, but that doesn’t stop it from also being the most likely outcome of the government pushing the boundaries.

SkiFire13• 10 months ago

Source? Not even your quoted Grok output is claiming that Apple removed the apps, just that the senators asked them to.

At least one source I found says that "Apple and Google did not give in" https://reason.com/2011/05/23/no-app-for-that/

I don't think a situation like this is impossible, quite the opposite, but let's try to not invent facts please.

dmix2• 10 months ago

Ctrl-f DUI https://developer.apple.com/app-store/review/guidelines/

bjacobel• 10 months ago

According to Grok

Do you have any sources that aren't prone to hallucination and fits of partisan, racially-charged, conspiratorial hysteria?

dmix2• 10 months ago

https://www.autoblog.com/news/apple-to-reject-apps-that-incl...

Pxtl• 10 months ago

While it's still bad, you can see how it's worse when it's coming directly from a regulator top-down from the president, right?

Senators gave no individual direct control over regulation. They can influence appointments or influence legislation, which is still power backing the implied threat, but that's a much more roundabout threat than a single person with direct power to destroy your business.

softwaredoug2• 10 months ago

Can the same functionality be accomplished with mobile web?

moelf3• 10 months ago

can they do push notification (e.g. when ICE agents show up near your zipcode)

VladVladikoff3• 10 months ago

Yes push notifications are possible on mobile web.

zb32• 10 months ago

Apple is working hard to make sure the answer is no (by not implementing advanced PWA APIs in WebKit and by not allowing other browser engines on iOS).

JustExAWS3• 10 months ago

so now you are going to list the unavailable features that would make a web app impossible…

duxup• 10 months ago

“It’s ok when our guy does it!”

-SCOTUS majority, American GOP.

bamboozled3• 10 months ago

He is just joking...

Artoooooor• 10 months ago

Does it have to be an application? Why not just a website?

layer84• 10 months ago

Those can be requested to be taken down as well...

fearless1ron4• 10 months ago

Host it in a country with free speech then

moelf3• 10 months ago

can website do push notification? (e.g. when ICE agents show up near your zipcode)

JumpCrisscross5• 10 months ago

can website do push notification?

Text or e-mail.

JustExAWS3• 10 months ago

Yes

amazingamazing• 10 months ago

Why are people so obsessed about apps. could be a website that couldn’t easily be taken down.

beeflet10• 10 months ago

PWAs are limited in functionality, and websites on the clearnet are easily taken down or blocked.

zb32• 10 months ago

PWAs are limited in functionality

By Apple, because it's Apple that a) refuses to implement advanced PWA features in WebKit and b) refuses to allow apps to use other browser engines.

latexr6• 10 months ago

websites on the clearnet are easily taken down or blocked.

As are apps, as this submission demonstrates. Websites at least have quick methods of recovery by changing domains or servers.

pacomerh• 10 months ago

Well, native apps are more popular among non tech savvy people because they’re easier to find and install. I was talking to the guy who works on our backyard and they don't even know what a browser is on their phone.

latexr6• 10 months ago

they don't even know what a browser is on their phone.

Why should they? There’s no app called “web browser” on the phone. But there may be “Safari” or “Google Chrome”. Do they know what those are?

If you told them “go to <some web address>”, could they do it?

moelf3• 10 months ago

what if you want a push notification when ICE agents appear in your work area?

CharlesW• 10 months ago

https://web.dev/articles/push-notifications-web-push-protoco...

softwaredoug2• 10 months ago

Maybe an SMS based approach would be preferred over an app notification.

ursaspark• 10 months ago

this is what I dont understand. so many apps are almost website-like in functionality, and you can save a shortcut to the desktop / main screen and it will launch / look like an app. complete with notifications (if enabled). What's the barrier? (another poster mentioned not knnowing anything outside of the appstore, but then "Share -> Add to Home screen" is a pretty damn simple flow.

adam_hn2• 10 months ago

You would be surprised, I have never seen anyone who doesn't work in tech in my life who even knows that this is an option.

gkbrk• 10 months ago

Hmm, would be a shame if a major mobile operating system provider also ran a website-blocking service used by the largest web browser (Chrome) and the largest open-source web browser (Firefox).

They could even call it something like Google Safe Browsing to make it sound good to people.

sschueller3• 10 months ago

You can't send a push notification without a certificate that apple controls from a website. Push notifications seem to be key here so that you don't have the constantly open the app/webpage.

barbazoo• 10 months ago

They could send a message instead (sms, email, etc) which then can be configured to pop up as a notification.

standardUser• 10 months ago

Most people's technical acumen (and access) maxes out at using an iPhone. Often an old one.

bigfatkitten• 10 months ago

Thankfully, there is no reason why any of these apps need to be native apps.

WrongOnInternet• 10 months ago

IMHO, this is just another example of something that would be better off as a website/webapp than a native app. If anything, having an app that tracks ICE agents installed on your device seems more like a liability than an asset.

floatin• 10 months ago

Will teach some friends how to side load this and tell them to each teach 2-3 friends.

scarface_745• 10 months ago

Why does this need to be an app?

toukale• 10 months ago

Why are we asking for profits companies to fight our fights? I am reading lots of comments from keyboard warriors. For profits companies are not there to fight citizens fights. You don't want this kind of stuff to happen, then people need to fight their governments and demand better and stop relying on for profits entities to do so.

JumpCrisscross5• 10 months ago

Why are we asking for profits companies to fight our fights?

Why not? If you can pressure someone into fighting your fight for you, you do it.

jkestner• 10 months ago

That profit is an effective lever. I don’t have a lever in elections because of the electoral college.

mac-attack• 10 months ago

For-Profit companies have an outsized impact on our day-to-day and have the ear of the current administration. Citizens United allows their voice to be heard politically (where they again have an outsized impact). I'm curious why they can lobby to impact the lives we live and our access to information, and their CEO can donate a million to the inauguration but suddenly they deserve the right to fade into the background and stay out of it all?

sherry-sherry5• 10 months ago

Apple makes huge claims about their involvement in advancing things like inclusion and diversity, workers rights, privacy rights, equity and justice. They literally sell pride merch which they make a profit from.

Apple market themselves as being an ethical choice of companies regarding human rights, when they throw that out the window with shit like this, people get pissed.

kashunstva• 10 months ago

Why are we asking for profits companies to fight our fights?

Maybe we're not asking them to fight our fights, but to stop tipping the scales one way or the other. There's a difference between asking them to aid progressive or regressive causes vs. actually staying neutral. If it's too big a moral burden on Apple or Google, then allow us to run whatever we want on our devices.

exabrial• 10 months ago

Monopolies are bad ideas for so many reasons. The government has recently learned they actually like them

snickerbockers• 10 months ago

I don't want to fall into the fallacy of implying that this is somehow justified because of something "the left" did a few years ago but I would like to highlight the hypocrisy of how many people were totally okay with this sort of executive censorship when Biden was in charge.

"We reached out to Apple today demanding they remove the ICEBlock app from their App Store — and Apple did so," Bondi said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

I don't think this is something that trump or biden should be allowed to do, but the classic argument that your constitutional right to free speech ends when the president "politely" asks a software company to censor you on his behalf and they acquiesce is equally [in]valid in both situations.

daveidol• 10 months ago

Absolutely. The Biden administration was censoring posts (even memes) on Meta platforms during COVID, according to Zuckerberg.

JuniperMesos6• 10 months ago

I have never voluntarily owned an Apple smartphone or tablet, and a huge reason why is because I care a lot about being able to run software on it that Apple doesn't approve of for whatever reason.

waltbosz2• 10 months ago

Are people using non app work arounds ? Could the app be replaced with a SMS tree https://notbau.com/how-to-create-and-manage-a-manual-call-tr...

mdhb3• 10 months ago

It could be replaced with a fucking web app if they built it properly the first time around.

jeroenhd5• 10 months ago

Do you know a good way to do geofencing on PWAs? I'm not saying you can't, but I don't know of any API that can accomplish that (without constantly running GPS location updates in the browser, which no standard phone will allow).

specialist2• 10 months ago

Like TXTMOB, the precursor to Twitter.

ChrisArchitect2• 10 months ago

17 years on from the App Store we're still trying to get people to wrap their heads around just using websites. And to think probably all of the users of the app are finding out about it via a LINK in a message or social post.

davidw• 10 months ago

"Do what we say or you get the tariffs". Straight up corrupt mob boss shit.

pmdulaney• 10 months ago

I'm not a lawyer and I have no insider information, but I wouldn't be surprised if Apple is concerned that if anything happened to an ICE agent, they could be criminally and civilly liable if it could be shown that the attacker became aware of the location of the agent through use of the app.

richardatlarge• 10 months ago

Absolutely not the case, imagine the implications if so

akmarinov2• 10 months ago

Exhibit A on why sideloading must be allowed and why Europe is right on this

bpye2• 10 months ago

Yet even there Apple still require apps be notarised, and presumably that signature could be revoked.

akmarinov2• 10 months ago

Yep that needs to go as well

simianparrot2• 10 months ago

ICE tracking apps put ICE agents in danger, and the same kind of app for, say, tracking Meta employees or “people who wear Team Blue T-shirts” or any other group would obviously be a danger as well. How on earth do people find this controversial..?

mock-possum• 10 months ago

Is turnabout no longer fair play, then?

sherry-sherry5• 10 months ago

ICE puts people in danger and disregards their due process.

When a group is performing unconstitutional activities they should be tracked and stopped where possible.

simianparrot2• 10 months ago

There's individual cases of unconstitutional behaviour, but ICE itself isn't unconstitutional. It was unconstitutional to effectively lock people in their homes during covid, but it was done anyway.

josefresco• 10 months ago

Are masked Meta employees kidnapping people at gunpoint and deporting them to foreign gulags?

sschueller3• 10 months ago

There you have it. The thing everyone has been warning about regarding Apple's walled garden 10 years ago and now you have Google working on implementing the same walled garden.

If it can be abused, it will be abused.

sschueller3• 10 months ago

Wouldn't it technically be possible to setup a website instead and use PWA push[1]? You would still need a certificate from Apple which I guess they can terminate as well...

[1] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/usernotifications/...

Nervhq3• 10 months ago

No worries apple users! Just side load it.... Oh.. Wait...

perihelions2• 10 months ago

Related old thread,

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21210678 ("Apple Removes HKmap.live from the App Store" (2019); 893 comments)

latexr6• 10 months ago

It’s Hong Kong and HKMap.live all over again.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49995688

perihelions2• 10 months ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21210678 ("Apple Removes HKmap.live from the App Store" (2019); 893 comments)

sleight425• 10 months ago

Tyranny demands its control.

piokoch• 10 months ago

I keep wondering how all of this ICE stuff will eventually play out. Number of illegal emigrants in the USA is estimated to be between 11-20 millions. How much does it cost to send ICE team after a single emigrant? Then holding this emigrant in custody, then costs of deportation to the country of origin.

This looks like another enterprise like "war on terror" that costed trillions, hasn't given anything USA, but lack of money for infrastructure, healthcare, education and degradation of the middle class, which is in every democracy a stabilizing power - they have a lot of to lose, so they don't vote on extremists.

Current administration is very right about bringing back manufacturing back to USA, but they forget that without roads, railways, electricity lines and, the most important, workforce, they will not be able to do that.

immibis• 10 months ago

It doesn't matter whether it's effective. This is all about riling up emotions, propaganda, winning (or preventing) the next election. Actual effect is barely relevant. Brown-skinned people aren't the enemy team - they're the ball.

saubeidl3• 10 months ago

Immigration enforcement is just a pretense to create a squad of unaccountable goons, hiding their identity using masks.

The real purpose is to establish an unaccountable form of political violence and intimidation, similiar to the Sturmabteilung in 1920's Germany.

The famous "First they came for..." poem comes to mind.

vorpalhex• 10 months ago

Only about 20% of people deported have been rounded up by ICE, etc - the rest have chosen self deportation.

If I had to mind read the admin, I would imagine they intend ICE to go after the hardened criminals who, making a profit or being wanted, won't self deport under any circumstance.

Meanwhile most people who have just migrated illegally will generally self deport or do a really good job of blending in.

Obviously ICE is still going to sweep up anyone and everyone they can. The fed exists, and has always existed, to be a boot not a scalpel.

In theory local law enforcement is supposed to be the more targeted localized tool but because immigration enforcement has become partisan, they are either restricted from doing anything migration related or are going overboard to suck up to the fed.

Systems out of alignment grow more severe.

seydor• 10 months ago

Why is this even an app, it should obviously be a web app

yrro2• 10 months ago

Add Apple to the list of collaborators who need to be punished once the regime is overthrown.

dandanua3• 10 months ago

Overthrown by whom? Aliens? Power supports power, there is no way out of this black hole.

yrro2• 10 months ago

The neat thing about the US is that governments are overthrown regularly by automatic operation of law: 12pm on the 20th of January 2028, in the case of the 47th president. I'm sure you know this but I feel everyone needs to remind themselves of this immutable fact regularly until then.

AlexandrB• 10 months ago

Not just power, but ~50% of the voting public.

An "overthrow" would be highly undemocratic and it's very curious to hear the same people that claim Trump is literally Hitler talk about "overthrowing" their (democratically elected) political enemies and then "punishing collaborators". Is there no sense of self-awareness at all?

bamboozled3• 10 months ago

America, you really owned the libs.

I cannot believe it's really happening. Few months ago it was just jokes...

ratelimitsteve6• 10 months ago

it was never jokes. that's what we tried to tell everyone ten years ago.

ndkap2• 10 months ago

Isn't this the company that was commended for not bowing down to pressure from FBI?

geodel3• 10 months ago

So every issue in the world is same issue?

jmclnx• 10 months ago

I do not go to any fox sites, so here is a dup using a different news site for this:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45461951

No surprise here, all companies would do the same. But I was planning on moving to Apple once my current Android fails, not now.

I am hoping the Linux Phone I hear about advances to the point where my Cell Service supports it. Will see because I am pretty much done with Android and Apple.

resters• 10 months ago

Everything in the ICE tracking apps can be done as a web page. Good luck to MAGA trying to stop this, but the ugliness of ICE tactics will inspire a lot of people to build some very good technology to stop it.

patcon• 10 months ago

This creeping authoritarianism is why Google's play to force developer registration (before allowing a developers apps to be installed on android) is so irresponsible of Google: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45017028

It's like they don't understand what's possible to be coerced into from there. They cite "danger to users" as the rationale, but their imagination of danger is so damn limited

ActionHank2• 10 months ago

You're not considering that they were already coerced into forced dev registration.

richwater• 10 months ago

This creeping authoritarianism

Surely you must see the other side of this in that there is massive fraud taking place via Android phones?

OutOfHere• 10 months ago

There is even more massive fraud taking place within Google's ecosystem of approved apps on Android. Google does nothing at all about it for the simple reason that Google cashes in on a percentage of the loot. I myself have been scammed by two apps that claimed to offer specific services, but they didn't offer them.

Most privately installed apps are for open source degoogled software that doesn't want to bother with Google.

criddell• 10 months ago

their imagination of danger is so damn limited

I wouldn't pretend to understand the Android app ecosystem better than Google.

A charitable guess would be that Google understands that forcing developer registration will introduce more risk for some people, but overall the total risk over the entire population is reduced. It's a net benefit.

ge962• 10 months ago

makes me think of alternative ways to share apps like through QR codes but that's a potential honeypot too and also the extra knowledge to do that

really sucks ease of use is a 2 edge sword

FollowingTheDao• 10 months ago

Signal is next,

ActionHank2• 10 months ago

Unlikely, they're all using it.

tiahura• 10 months ago

I would take this as more confirmation that the administration will be taking action to counter the European shakedown of Apple. I would expect 50%+ tariffs on LVMH before the end of the year.

thejazzman• 10 months ago

i strongly disagree with the notion that apple is being shaken down and am thankful somebody is doing something to keep them (at least partially) in check..

ReptileMan• 10 months ago

They also removed app that tracked us drone strikes all over the world IIRC like 13 years ago. So probably nothing new under the sun. The joy of appstores and walled gardens.

05• 10 months ago

If Russian sanctioned banks regularly manage to get their updated apps through App Store “review”, surely ICEBlock devs can register a shell company and do the same, then text the install link to all current users..

SnuffBox• 10 months ago

I don't see the problem. It was an app specifically developed to help people evade American law and attack people who work for the government, how is it a shock that they took it down?

hyperhello• 10 months ago

Or was the takedown designed to help ICE evade American law?

nickthegreek2• 10 months ago

Apple maps tells you when you are near a cop on the highway in order to evade the law.

Miner49er• 10 months ago

As does Google maps

hk13372• 10 months ago

Those should be removed too then. I don’t think they were nearly as effective as the ice block app was though. Every time I saw an alert in Waze there was nothing or it’s where they park an empty police car.

Cabal• 10 months ago

Same. This app was specifically used to incite violence against law enforcement.

bigyabai4• 10 months ago

You need to be careful, the word "incite" does not mean what you think it does here.

Maybe the app enabled violence against law enforcement - but Waymo does that too by telling you where traffic cops are. Or Google Maps and Yellow Pages for documenting the location of police stations. Undercover officers, ICE or otherwise, aren't given any special exemptions to the law here.

saubeidl3• 10 months ago

ICE is not law enforcement.

docmars6• 10 months ago

"Apple takes down illegal app criminals used to circumvent law enforcement"

FTFY Fox :)

ratelimitsteve6• 10 months ago

what's illegal about talking to people about what you saw in public?

docmars6• 10 months ago

Give me a break, don't play word games.

If you created an app that essentially doxed police and schemed ways to circumvent their ability to enforce the law, I'd hope you would get in trouble for that, especially if it compromised the safety of those you care about, don't you agree?

kjsingh• 10 months ago

I guess all it will take is for all bird-watcher apps to add an option for ICE Agents? We do have those right?

rolph2• 10 months ago

install the "i saw waldo" app.

i dropped my tack on the map; i saw waldo about 100 feet to the north.

furyofantares• 10 months ago

I can't find any such app.

rolph2• 10 months ago

then we will have to build it, i assume you get the gist already?

ratelimitsteve6• 10 months ago

We're preemptively complying with the fascists. It's illegal to talk about what you see in public now.

jMyles• 10 months ago

Being able to instantly know the locations of our friends and of threats to them (whether in the form of other people, natural disasters, fires, anything!) is such an obvious benefit to public safety in the information age.

It's one of the things that will finally allow us to supplant the yoke of the state, by having our own decentralized emergency response systems.

When will we realize this benefit? Do we really have to wait for Apple to fall?

recursive2• 10 months ago

Apple falling will be insufficient, as another overlord will take over. Host your own is probably the only answer.

CodeCompost• 10 months ago

Well why do you need an app store for this? Can't you just ... I donnow ... create a webpage with OpenStreetMap integration?

poly2it• 10 months ago

I'm not saying it is the case, but considering other tactics employed by ICE, this sounds like something they could deploy as a honeypot to profile potential targets.

recursive2• 10 months ago

Is that a difference from publishing an app on the app store?

tredre3• 10 months ago

They could and they could even make it a PWA so it would be on the home screen and able to send notifications.

But they only want to support native iOS for whatever reason (they've listed their reasons: https://www.iceblock.app/android, I just don't personally believe them to be technically accurate/truthful).

Hikikomori2• 10 months ago

It is a webpage, they just had an app to view it.

nebula88042• 10 months ago

Answered by the developer here: https://youtu.be/Pm4tC2Mnabs?t=25358

rognjen• 10 months ago

Does not seem like a thought out answer.

It's harder to be anon with an app that with a web page because you have to cater for all the web things PLUS Android.

t1234s• 10 months ago

This was the correct move from apple. Tools like this used to crowdsource location data of law enforcement can be used for malicious purposes.

Hikikomori2• 10 months ago

"law enforcement" is charitable.

ajross3• 10 months ago

As gets pointed out, that justification is post hoc; the argument wasn't made when the app was introduced, only after the ban. It's also leaning hard on "can be" and just letting the reader infer what "malicious" means. Clearly the intent is that protestors can show up to disrupt enforcement actions. Is that what you mean? If so, you should say so.

But it's also just plain overbroad: the same logic applies to Waze flagging of speed traps, which are also "crowd sourced law enforcement location data".

Basically this is bunk. The app got banned because the government doesn't want its enforcement actions disrupted by protestors, and whined[1] to Apple to coerce them into a ban.

[1] Plausibly threatened. It's not alleged here but they did it to Disney and Paramount already.

pseudalopex2• 10 months ago

Clearly the intent is that protestors can show up to disrupt enforcement actions.

Was this your claim or your description of someone else's claim?

You and the ICEBlock developer compared it to Waze. People use Waze to avoid speed traps. Not protest them.

penultimatename• 10 months ago

That same justification can be applied to block web browsers, any social media platform, and any navigation app that allows user alert inputs.

The entire thing reeks of the same Biden-era pressures on companies that had pandemic misinformation that Republicans were so vehemently opposed to. Somehow harming law enforcement is a better justification than harming random citizens.

cyanydeez• 10 months ago

Definitely a job for PWA.

Checkout quasar.dev

puppycodes• 10 months ago

Theres so much technology out there that reports a location with an alert you would figure you could literally make this app with an ios shortcut

akagusu• 10 months ago

Why this was flagged?

jay_kyburz• 10 months ago

Yeah, I think there is a legitimate discussion here about walled gardens, tech, and the role it will play it will play in troubled times.

Legal is not always moral, and Apple has shown they will side with those in power, _not_ with those who own the tech.

If Apple is prepared to do this, what else are they prepared to snitch on your for.

bambax• 10 months ago

We don't need to respect those companies or the people inside it. They will gladly suck up to any government if it earns them a dollar more. They're trash.

specialist2• 10 months ago

Need to get crafty.

Make ICE spotting a plausibly deniable covert subtext via an otherwise popular medium.

Like (probably apocryphal) Jesus fish.

Both Pokemon and Polytopia have ice themed combatants, right?

Whenever you see some masked thugs staging for another round of terror, start a match as one of those tribes, trainers, or whatever. Build a certain kind of (creature) deck recognizable by anyone "in the know". Use some kind of slang. Like WWII's code talkers.

I don't actually know how Pokemon and the multiplayer Polytopia work. But y'all get the idea.

I keep thinking of the "slug bug" game bored kids play in the back seat. See a VW Beetle, yell "slug bug" first, and then punch your sibling. I think "Eye Spy" is the nice version.

Do mobile games like that exist? Surely someone's done it. A Foursquare for kids. Or something.

Again, y'all get the idea.

insane_dreamer• 10 months ago

Good thing we still have web apps.

Apple takes down ICE tracking apps after pressure from DOJ

Related Stories