Hacker News Reader

Comment by jefft255 | Hacker News Reader

Unless Apple really screws up, that malware would have to be downloaded and installed by me. If I "flip a switch" and enable that option, that's on me. PCs have always been like this and no one bats an eye. I'd be willing to accept that risk; hey, Apple could make flipping that switch really freaking difficult if they wanted too, I wouldn't mind. Just as long as I have the option.

View on HN

My girlfriend has an iPhone and an android phone. She is 29, she has accidentally installed malware from the play store, multiple times.

Anecdote yes, but the fact it happened in my house and more than once opened my eyes significantly to the problem.

My grandparents have no chance if my girlfriend gets got.

You and I live in a microcosm, most people on this site have a very finely tuned bullshit filter. Don’t assume everyone does, even the young.

even so, there's no reason a filtering of software for anti-malware purposes must be conflated with the private entity also arbitrarily deciding what software is and isn't allowed. they could do one without the other

What you said makes no sense whatsoever.

A platform that filters will remove things, unless your speaking from the pulpit of “the algorithm”.

yes but filtering malicious code and filtering by arbitrary criteria are not the same thing.

There are many tech illiterate people in this world, and many who would be easy prey to someone pulling a scam, getting them to flip that switch.

Life has risks - you could fall off a ladder and injure yourself, but we dont outlaw them because as a society we recognize that they are also useful tools.

> Life has risks - you could fall off a ladder and injure yourself

Great analogy actually. Ladders are dangerous, yes - but we don’t make them necessary to daily life and they’re certainly not something most people interact with

My answer to that is: what about PCs? Of course you're right, and I'm right too (I'd like to think ahah). This is freedom at the cost of security; this trade-off, as in real life, has no simple solution. I certainly don't pretend to have the answer here.

> Unless Apple really screws up, that malware would have to be downloaded and installed by me. If I "flip a switch" and enable that option, that's on me.

The fact that Apple does not have this attitude is why their products are better for customers than alternatives that do have this attitude. A customer isn't any happier with a malware-ridden device if it got that way because they were tricked into clicking a fake software update button.

> PCs have always been like this and no one bats an eye.

Yes, lots of people bat eyes. As a very on-the-nose examples, lots of people buy Macs, for instance, because of their reputation for having less malware (that might be outdated now, but was certainly true for a large portion of the last 20 years). Malware has been a major problem for customers on PCs and Android phones for a long time. The fact that the problem has existed for a long time doesn't mean it's not a big problem.

The fact that Apple does not have this attitude is why their products are better for customers than alternatives that do have this attitude.

Macs allow you to install software from anywhere. Which is bad and Apple should disallow it, right?

There is a long tradition of Mac customers expecting that ability, and Apple has explicitly said they recognize that desire in the market and is not removing the ability. That said, they have added some extra warnings and confirmation steps in order to run unsigned software, and some people have even complained about that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com