So technically they could restrict every device then even if you bought it.
Yeah, but of course they are not going to do that on MY device, so its obviously ok.
Interesting they are saying this outloud…its almost like they are trying a strategy of determinism.
They can go F themselves, they need to be reminded of what happens to when authority tries conformity
Funny u bring this ad, wasn’t Apple who also used this as well?
They produced it…offering their product as a solution to the conformity being imposed. They are now. who they warned us against
“Die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain” really aught to apply to corporations more than people.
With the leadership at the helm, new ideals, new financial goals - it’s inevitable.
If you want to be a non-conformist, you need to dress just like us, and talk just like us, and listen to the same music we listen to…
They’ve always been able to
This seems like it would be a sizable target for ransomware. Why include an encryption program if you can have the OS do it?
All the ransomware needs to do is make iOS think it’s a payment provider.
The article is a week old. Apple has since announced a leasing program and told The Verge the restricted mode isn’t for it. They didn’t say what it is for though.
some trump type of truth 😅
deleted by creator
They are probably expecting a recession and people to mess up their credit but keep the phone.
They expect it to be a big enough issue to assign development resources to it.
I’m assuming American carriers demanded feature parity with Android where they install system apps that do exactly this.
Doubt it would fly in the US.
Cars get repod if you don’t pay. It would definitely fly.
Illegal here.
Duress profile code?
Perfectly fair, yet I’m expecting people in here will dislike it.
I think the discrepancy here is if leasing devices at which I is agree fair.
What I take umbridge with is the way ownership is being removed, for something that we know can be produced plentifully. And the push to give everything as a service or lease.
As a sociaty We are allowing tiered privileges.
Ownership isn’t being removed though, because you don’t own it when you’re leasing it. You can still just buy one if you want to, but leasing can be a good option.
I think you will find that systems of ownership and being reduced or removed and systems of leasing or renting are being pushed. So its becoming less of an option…surprising to the benefit of the rich…not the user paying
Faff around with the language and message all you like, but rent/lease/asa a service etc are all being touted against a ‘option’ at a time where we are seeing destruction of ownership. This is not good for the average person and I am always surprised by the amount of people who are happy to take this or bootlick on the matter.
Plus we’ve had contract phones for decades without the manufacturer putting yet more dead switches in our devices… Do we really want more of this shit?
The irony is no one even calls me anymore. I miss when it was a nokia and only used to speak to someone on the go.
Now I just use my phone to look at cat pics on Lemmy.
I used to get laid regularly when I talked on a Nokia.
What do you think happened if you didn’t pay your monthly phone contract payment?
I paid for the line…not the phone. I always buy second hand handsets.
Read the comment I replied to mate. Specifically talking about contracts that include phone repayments.
Buying is not any less of an option. They’re just adding other non-ownership options.
Agreed, but I don’t see anything to suggest that the leased phones are getting a special edition of iOS 27 that has the locks. I think what they’re saying is that every iPhone running iOS 27 will have the locks, and they will be able to be triggered by third parties. That is worrying.
If you own the device outright, it should not have kill switches. I absolutely understand the point of them on the leased phone. They should not be on the phone that is paid for outright.
I would assume they will have added a new set of settings or an app for lease providers that gives them the ability to perform these actions on registered phones.
There’s no reason to assume that just any old third party will be able to brick your phone that you bought outright, any more than there already was - which there wasn’t.
It’s just straight up fear mongering. It’s like saying that a work issued and managed laptop being able to be wiped remotely if lost means everyone should be scared that their personally bought laptops can be remotely wiped by anyone at any time.
We’ve seen how big tech bends the knee to Trump. What if he told Apple to disable every iPhone due to some made up bullshit state of emergency. This affects everyone’s iPhone not just the leased ones.
Ah so it’s just “orange man bad” in a topic that has absolutely nothing to do with trump 🙄
Seems like you don’t realize that workplaces already have the ability to remotely lock/wipe their employees phones and devices. This is just a way for lease providers to do so as well.
Orange man IS bad.
And has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
The potential for misuse is absolutely on topic. I merely gave one example. There are many.
You gave a hypothetical that has never happened, and the ability to do things like this has existed on hundreds of millions of devices for decades.
deleted by creator
