So does yours! (Assuming you count using a computer as a hobby.) If nobody used computers there would be no software piracy.
If nobody drove cars, there would be no-one killed by drink driving.
I'm a developer, and I'm very anti piracy. But I wish Apple could find a way to stop piracy without also stopping jailbreaking.
Amorya
It's hard to change minds around here. Stubbornness gets in the way of common sense.
Obviously jailbreaking an iphone doesn't point to intent to pirate. It's Apple who tries to say this, so it's complacent Apple fanboys who back up this misguided notion.
Apple doesn't want you jailbreaking the iphone because it means they have less control over what you do with it, which makes no sense since you BOUGHT the device and it's YOURS. Why can I throw the phone down a flight of stairs and run the risk of breaking it, but not jailbreak it while running the same risk? It's risk I'm willing to take, and it's none of Apple's business.
This reminds me when Apple said that jailbroken iphones could be used for terrorism and all the fanboys just sat there goin "Yeah, uh huh, that makes sense!"
This is more like someone stealing the doors, just don't complain if the bank shuts down.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster
In order to rob a bank YOU MUST WALK THROUGH THE DOOR! Lock all doors and you'll never have a bank robbery
Buy a Droid, do what you want, iPhone OS software IP isn't your property, you have a licence to use it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster
Piracy = bad
Being able to do what you want with your property = good
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster
Punishing all for the negative actions of a few = a fact of life.
So are you denying the existence of pirated Apps?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster
It's hard to change minds around here. Stubbornness gets in the way of common sense.
Obviously jailbreaking an iphone doesn't point to intent to pirate. It's Apple who tries to say this, so it's complacent Apple fanboys who back up this misguided notion.
No but without it, it's impossible to pirate Apps.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster
Apple doesn't want you jailbreaking the iphone because it means they have less control over what you do with it, which makes no sense since you BOUGHT the device and it's YOURS. Why can I throw the phone down a flight of stairs and run the risk of breaking it, but not jailbreak it while running the same risk? It's risk I'm willing to take, and it's none of Apple's business.
Apple set up a successful business model with the App store, they have every right to protect that and the IP of developers who use it.
Apple are also seeking to break into the Enterprise market, jailbreaking affects that by giving prospective customers the message that the iPhone is not a secure platform.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster
This reminds me when Apple said that jailbroken iphones could be used for terrorism and all the fanboys just sat there goin "Yeah, uh huh, that makes sense!"
Link please.
btw nowhere have I said all jailbreakers are pirates what I said was all pirates of iPhone OS Apps are jailbreakers, which is undeniably true.
Pirating an app is illegal. Jailbreaking your phone is not.
To take the bank analogy, robbing a bank is illegal, regardless of whether they have a 2" thick reinforced steel door or if the door is open.
CDs are legal. iTunes is legal. Ripping your CD collection is legal. Ripping your friend's CD collection or giving a copy of your ripped collection to your friend is not.
Get it? The crime is not the instrument of the crime.
Just because many pirates use BitTorrent doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of people using it for perfectly legal uses.
Bottom line, if Apple/AT&T don't want jailbreaking, all they have to do is stop treating iPhone customers like an ATM and make them pay three times over for features they give away on other phones (tethering, unlocking, backgrounding, 3G video...)
Until then, I will gladly jailbreak my iPhone and purchase all the apps I want from the iTunes store AND from Rock. Not one pirated app on my phone, and jailbreaking won't make a difference.
Buy a Droid, do what you want, iPhone OS software IP isn't your property, you have a licence to use it.
Yes, and no. The hardware itself is our property. The debate is that we can't modify our physical property as we see fit. If I wanted to boot Linux or Android or any other operating system onto it, I should be able to. Apple's lockdown of the bootrom prohibits that.
I can't imagine anyone allowing Dell or HP or Apple prohibiting someone from booting their computers/laptops into a different OS or modifying the software on their computers. The iPhone is a computer, whether you want to acknowledge that or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster
This reminds me when Apple said that jailbroken iphones could be used for terrorism and all the fanboys just sat there goin "Yeah, uh huh, that makes sense!"
Link please.
Here's a link to the Google search that will show hundreds of sites that reported on Apple's DMCA related filing with the government arguing that jailbreaking should be illegal because it was akin to terrorism. This was BIG news on all the blogs back in July...where were you?
Here's a link to the Google search that will show hundreds of sites that reported on Apple's DMCA related filing with the government arguing that jailbreaking should be illegal because it was akin to terrorism. This was BIG news on all the blogs back in July...where were you?
Did you play the “phone game” as a kid. The game where one person whispers a sentence into another person’s ear, who passes it on until the last person who speaks it aloud and everybody has a big laugh at how distorted it had become? Well that is what I’m thinking right now.
I knew about this filing with the copyright office, but the explanation you gave had me confused. I said to myself, “How could jailbroken iPhones be used for terrorism in ways that other phones couldn’t and why was Apple even argue such a case?” The original filing, in the link below, never once mentions terror, terrorism, pterodactyl, 9/11, Al-Qaeda or Rudy Giuliani.
It does state…
Quote:
For example, a local or international hacker could potentially initiate commands (such as a denial of service attack) that could crash the tower software, rendering the tower entirely inoperable to process calls or transmit data.
Did you play the “phone game” as a kid. The game where one person whispers a sentence into another person’s ear, who passes it on until the last person who speaks it aloud and everybody has a big laugh at how distorted it had become? Well that is what I’m thinking right now.
I knew about this filing with the copyright office, but the explanation you gave had me confused. I said to myself, “How could jailbroken iPhones be used for terrorism in ways that other phones couldn’t and why was Apple even argue such a case?” The original filing, in the link below, never once mentions terror, terrorism, pterodactyl, 9/11, Al-Qaeda or Rudy Giuliani.
I'm not the one you originally in that particular back and forth, I just happened to chime in because I disagreed with the assertion that we don't own our iPhone OS, just have a license to use it. I don't disagree with that, but as I stated, I disagree with Apple's ability to lockdown the BootRom and prevent us from loading alternate software on the device we own, and by extension, modifying the software that is on it. We do own the hardware.
I'll share the chuckle with you over the phone game analogy (as well as the Rudy joke), and that's the risk we all run we get our news from blogs that have allegedly read what they're blogging about, but I really think you're splitting hairs here.
If you read the entire paragraph that you started a quote of, despite the actual word terrorist not appearing in it, it's easy to make the very small step from the image described of an
Quote:
international hacker could potentially initiate commands (such as a denial of service attack) that could crash the tower software
into the international hacker being a terrorist. It just depends on how loose your definition of terrorist is. \
At any rate, it's a bit of a stretch and nothing more than scare tactics to imply that jailbreaking turns the iPhone into such a hacker threat any more so than any other cellphone; the phone's been jailbreakable for two years or more now, and we don't see towers being taken over and crashed because of it. It's nothing more than sensationalism on Apple's behalf.
ISP sor cable companies could use the same argument against allowing user-modifiable computers on their networks as well. Kind of silly.
Didn't stand out more, but was certainly much more funny. I actually did a real-world Laugh Out Loud when I read that. I'd be bitching about a ruined keyboard if I'd happened to have been drinking something at the time. ;-)
At any rate, it's a bit of a stretch and nothing more than scare tactics to imply that jailbreaking turns the iPhone into such a hacker threat any more so than any other cellphone; the phone's been jailbreakable for two years or more now, and we don't see towers being taken over and crashed because of it. It's nothing more than sensationalism on Apple's behalf.
ISP sor cable companies could use the same argument against allowing user-modifiable computers on their networks as well. Kind of silly.
Oh, and I missed a very good point that the EFF made...why is jailbreaking the iPhone to make it an "open" device any more of a threat to cell networks than the Android phones now hitting the market:
Quote:
According to Fred Von Lohmann, the EFF attorney who made the request, Apple?s statement is ?preposterous,? stating, ?As far as I know, nothing like that has ever happened.? He went on to say that since the Android G1 from Google on T-Mobile is open-sourced, it could potentially be another threat to society.
In fact, if you think it through, then the same arguments would apply to the "jailbreaking-enables-piracy" arguments as well. Since Android is already "jailbroken" (able to run non-closed-garden software), and not all Android apps are/will-be free/open-source, any one who gets an Android phone must be doing so to pirate software and hack into the cell towers.
Same with WinMo phones, and Palm OS phones. There's a ton of OS hacks and pirated software for both those platforms out there, just hit a torrent site or google to check.
So, let's call all non-iPhone smarter-phone owners thieves, pirates, terrorists, and whiners, and while we're at it, let's wish for their hardware to turn to bricks because they aren't getting all their apps off the Apple AppStore.
If you Jailbreak you need to change your SSH password.
Congratulations Jailbreakers, if this hits the mainstream media your hobby could cost Apple millions, especially as they are just breaking into enterprise markets.
Lets hope they lock it down harder next time to stop you clowns pulling stunts like this.
The Jailbreakers f%@^ed up, if they are going to open SSH access to people's iPhone's the least they could have done is IMPOSED A BETTER SECURITY POLICY on jailbroken iPhone users, not some half-assed default user and default password (alpine) which doesn't require changing on first use.
Comments
So does yours! (Assuming you count using a computer as a hobby.) If nobody used computers there would be no software piracy.
If nobody drove cars, there would be no-one killed by drink driving.
I'm a developer, and I'm very anti piracy. But I wish Apple could find a way to stop piracy without also stopping jailbreaking.
Amorya
It's hard to change minds around here. Stubbornness gets in the way of common sense.
Obviously jailbreaking an iphone doesn't point to intent to pirate. It's Apple who tries to say this, so it's complacent Apple fanboys who back up this misguided notion.
Apple doesn't want you jailbreaking the iphone because it means they have less control over what you do with it, which makes no sense since you BOUGHT the device and it's YOURS. Why can I throw the phone down a flight of stairs and run the risk of breaking it, but not jailbreak it while running the same risk? It's risk I'm willing to take, and it's none of Apple's business.
This reminds me when Apple said that jailbroken iphones could be used for terrorism and all the fanboys just sat there goin "Yeah, uh huh, that makes sense!"
In order to rob a bank YOU MUST WALK THROUGH THE DOOR! Lock all doors and you'll never have a bank robbery
Buy a Droid, do what you want, iPhone OS software IP isn't your property, you have a licence to use it.
Piracy = bad
Being able to do what you want with your property = good
Punishing all for the negative actions of a few = a fact of life.
So are you denying the existence of pirated Apps?
It's hard to change minds around here. Stubbornness gets in the way of common sense.
Obviously jailbreaking an iphone doesn't point to intent to pirate. It's Apple who tries to say this, so it's complacent Apple fanboys who back up this misguided notion.
No but without it, it's impossible to pirate Apps.
Apple doesn't want you jailbreaking the iphone because it means they have less control over what you do with it, which makes no sense since you BOUGHT the device and it's YOURS. Why can I throw the phone down a flight of stairs and run the risk of breaking it, but not jailbreak it while running the same risk? It's risk I'm willing to take, and it's none of Apple's business.
Apple set up a successful business model with the App store, they have every right to protect that and the IP of developers who use it.
Apple are also seeking to break into the Enterprise market, jailbreaking affects that by giving prospective customers the message that the iPhone is not a secure platform.
This reminds me when Apple said that jailbroken iphones could be used for terrorism and all the fanboys just sat there goin "Yeah, uh huh, that makes sense!"
Link please.
btw nowhere have I said all jailbreakers are pirates what I said was all pirates of iPhone OS Apps are jailbreakers, which is undeniably true.
To take the bank analogy, robbing a bank is illegal, regardless of whether they have a 2" thick reinforced steel door or if the door is open.
CDs are legal. iTunes is legal. Ripping your CD collection is legal. Ripping your friend's CD collection or giving a copy of your ripped collection to your friend is not.
Get it? The crime is not the instrument of the crime.
Just because many pirates use BitTorrent doesn't mean that there aren't plenty of people using it for perfectly legal uses.
Bottom line, if Apple/AT&T don't want jailbreaking, all they have to do is stop treating iPhone customers like an ATM and make them pay three times over for features they give away on other phones (tethering, unlocking, backgrounding, 3G video...)
Until then, I will gladly jailbreak my iPhone and purchase all the apps I want from the iTunes store AND from Rock. Not one pirated app on my phone, and jailbreaking won't make a difference.
Buy a Droid, do what you want, iPhone OS software IP isn't your property, you have a licence to use it.
Yes, and no. The hardware itself is our property. The debate is that we can't modify our physical property as we see fit. If I wanted to boot Linux or Android or any other operating system onto it, I should be able to. Apple's lockdown of the bootrom prohibits that.
I can't imagine anyone allowing Dell or HP or Apple prohibiting someone from booting their computers/laptops into a different OS or modifying the software on their computers. The iPhone is a computer, whether you want to acknowledge that or not.
This reminds me when Apple said that jailbroken iphones could be used for terrorism and all the fanboys just sat there goin "Yeah, uh huh, that makes sense!"
Link please.
Here's a link to the Google search that will show hundreds of sites that reported on Apple's DMCA related filing with the government arguing that jailbreaking should be illegal because it was akin to terrorism. This was BIG news on all the blogs back in July...where were you?
http://bit.ly/2bHfDH
Here's a link to the Google search that will show hundreds of sites that reported on Apple's DMCA related filing with the government arguing that jailbreaking should be illegal because it was akin to terrorism. This was BIG news on all the blogs back in July...where were you?
http://bit.ly/2bHfDH
Did you play the “phone game” as a kid. The game where one person whispers a sentence into another person’s ear, who passes it on until the last person who speaks it aloud and everybody has a big laugh at how distorted it had become? Well that is what I’m thinking right now.
I knew about this filing with the copyright office, but the explanation you gave had me confused. I said to myself, “How could jailbroken iPhones be used for terrorism in ways that other phones couldn’t and why was Apple even argue such a case?” The original filing, in the link below, never once mentions terror, terrorism, pterodactyl, 9/11, Al-Qaeda or Rudy Giuliani.
It does state…
For example, a local or international hacker could potentially initiate commands (such as a denial of service attack) that could crash the tower software, rendering the tower entirely inoperable to process calls or transmit data.
Did you play the “phone game” as a kid. The game where one person whispers a sentence into another person’s ear, who passes it on until the last person who speaks it aloud and everybody has a big laugh at how distorted it had become? Well that is what I’m thinking right now.
I knew about this filing with the copyright office, but the explanation you gave had me confused. I said to myself, “How could jailbroken iPhones be used for terrorism in ways that other phones couldn’t and why was Apple even argue such a case?” The original filing, in the link below, never once mentions terror, terrorism, pterodactyl, 9/11, Al-Qaeda or Rudy Giuliani.
It does state…
I'm not the one you originally in that particular back and forth, I just happened to chime in because I disagreed with the assertion that we don't own our iPhone OS, just have a license to use it. I don't disagree with that, but as I stated, I disagree with Apple's ability to lockdown the BootRom and prevent us from loading alternate software on the device we own, and by extension, modifying the software that is on it. We do own the hardware.
I'll share the chuckle with you over the phone game analogy (as well as the Rudy joke), and that's the risk we all run we get our news from blogs that have allegedly read what they're blogging about, but I really think you're splitting hairs here.
If you read the entire paragraph that you started a quote of, despite the actual word terrorist not appearing in it, it's easy to make the very small step from the image described of an
international hacker could potentially initiate commands (such as a denial of service attack) that could crash the tower software
into the international hacker being a terrorist. It just depends on how loose your definition of terrorist is.
At any rate, it's a bit of a stretch and nothing more than scare tactics to imply that jailbreaking turns the iPhone into such a hacker threat any more so than any other cellphone; the phone's been jailbreakable for two years or more now, and we don't see towers being taken over and crashed because of it. It's nothing more than sensationalism on Apple's behalf.
ISP sor cable companies could use the same argument against allowing user-modifiable computers on their networks as well. Kind of silly.
Point taken.
PS: Rudy stood out more than pterodactyl?
PS: Rudy stood out more than pterodactyl?
Didn't stand out more, but was certainly much more funny. I actually did a real-world Laugh Out Loud when I read that. I'd be bitching about a ruined keyboard if I'd happened to have been drinking something at the time. ;-)
At any rate, it's a bit of a stretch and nothing more than scare tactics to imply that jailbreaking turns the iPhone into such a hacker threat any more so than any other cellphone; the phone's been jailbreakable for two years or more now, and we don't see towers being taken over and crashed because of it. It's nothing more than sensationalism on Apple's behalf.
ISP sor cable companies could use the same argument against allowing user-modifiable computers on their networks as well. Kind of silly.
Oh, and I missed a very good point that the EFF made...why is jailbreaking the iPhone to make it an "open" device any more of a threat to cell networks than the Android phones now hitting the market:
According to Fred Von Lohmann, the EFF attorney who made the request, Apple?s statement is ?preposterous,? stating, ?As far as I know, nothing like that has ever happened.? He went on to say that since the Android G1 from Google on T-Mobile is open-sourced, it could potentially be another threat to society.
In fact, if you think it through, then the same arguments would apply to the "jailbreaking-enables-piracy" arguments as well. Since Android is already "jailbroken" (able to run non-closed-garden software), and not all Android apps are/will-be free/open-source, any one who gets an Android phone must be doing so to pirate software and hack into the cell towers.
Same with WinMo phones, and Palm OS phones. There's a ton of OS hacks and pirated software for both those platforms out there, just hit a torrent site or google to check.
So, let's call all non-iPhone smarter-phone owners thieves, pirates, terrorists, and whiners, and while we're at it, let's wish for their hardware to turn to bricks because they aren't getting all their apps off the Apple AppStore.
Watch out you don't get Rick Roll'd.
http://www.theiphoneblog.com/2009/11...word-rickroll/
If you Jailbreak you need to change your SSH password.
Congratulations Jailbreakers, if this hits the mainstream media your hobby could cost Apple millions, especially as they are just breaking into enterprise markets.
Lets hope they lock it down harder next time to stop you clowns pulling stunts like this.
The Jailbreakers f%@^ed up, if they are going to open SSH access to people's iPhone's the least they could have done is IMPOSED A BETTER SECURITY POLICY on jailbroken iPhone users, not some half-assed default user and default password (alpine) which doesn't require changing on first use.