<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>thefz</author><text>Apple uses the excuse of security to hold a monopoly.&lt;p&gt;You are shown that this is by no means as secure as they want you to believe.&lt;p&gt;Then you argue that &amp;quot;of course, with a market that big!&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;So basically you are proving that Apple uses the excuse of security to hold a monopoly.</text><parent_chain><item><author>jerbear4328</author><text>That one virus on the App Store was one of, if not the biggest known instance of a virus on the App Store, and your article gives a number four times smaller than half a billion. From your [1]:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; But now, thanks to emails published as part of Apple&amp;#x27;s trial against Epic Games, we finally know how many iPhone users were impacted: 128 million in total, of which 18 million were in the US.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; &amp;quot;In total, 128M customers have downloaded the 2500+ apps that were affected LTD. Those customers drove 203M downloads of the 2500+ affected apps LTD,&amp;quot; Dale Bagwell, who was Apple&amp;#x27;s manager of iTunes customer experience at the time, wrote in one of the emails.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; Apple also disclosed the apps that included the malicious code, some incredibly popular such as WeChat and the Chinese version of Angry Birds 2.&lt;p&gt;Still a huge deal, particularly in China, but considering all the virus really did was collect some device info (less information than most ad networks) (and maybe it was able to open URLs and popups on command)[1] and it was the biggest virus on the App Store ever (that I can find), maybe not as awful as you suggest.&lt;p&gt;The scams on the App Store, yeah that&amp;#x27;s pretty bad. Though, can you point me at a marketplace as big as the App Store without loads of scams?&lt;p&gt;[1]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.lookout.com&amp;#x2F;blog&amp;#x2F;xcodeghost#what-does-it-do&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.lookout.com&amp;#x2F;blog&amp;#x2F;xcodeghost#what-does-it-do&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>heavyset_go</author><text>&amp;gt; &lt;i&gt;Yes, it&amp;#x27;s been Apple&amp;#x27;s modus operandi with the App Store from the start: trick consumers into thinking the App Store being a monopoly is the only thing that can protect them against malware, illicit and questionable app content, pirated software, scams, and fraud.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Which is ironic, considering that the App Store is likely one of the largest malware distribution vectors on the planet.&lt;p&gt;Looking at one virus alone, the App Store distributed half of a billion copies of it to iPhones and iPads[1]. Similarly, there are multimillion dollar scams on the App Store, as well[2].&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.vice.com&amp;#x2F;en&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;n7bbmz&amp;#x2F;the-fortnite-trial-is-exposing-details-about-the-biggest-iphone-hack-of-all-time&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.vice.com&amp;#x2F;en&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;n7bbmz&amp;#x2F;the-fortnite-trial-is...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;[2] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.theverge.com&amp;#x2F;2021&amp;#x2F;2&amp;#x2F;8&amp;#x2F;22272849&amp;#x2F;apple-app-store-scams-ios-fraud-reviews-ratings-flicktype&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.theverge.com&amp;#x2F;2021&amp;#x2F;2&amp;#x2F;8&amp;#x2F;22272849&amp;#x2F;apple-app-store-s...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>mil22</author><text>Yes, it&amp;#x27;s been Apple&amp;#x27;s modus operandi with the App Store from the start: trick consumers into thinking the App Store being a monopoly is the only thing that can protect them against malware, illicit and questionable app content, pirated software, scams, and fraud.&lt;p&gt;Most consumers understand those concepts and fear those things. Most understand nothing about the economic impact of monopolies and anti-competitive business behavior and the harms they cause consumers in the form of higher prices, lack of innovation, reduced choice, and poorer quality products and services.&lt;p&gt;So Apple plays off those fears by using language consumers understand, making them actually want the very monopoly that is being forced on them and actually harming them while making billions for Apple.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s unethical behavior, no more defensible than Sam Bankman-Fried&amp;#x27;s effective altruism, a.k.a. &amp;quot;mostly a front.&amp;quot; This is all right out of Apple&amp;#x27;s standard playbook.</text></item><item><author>mmaunder</author><text>Apple is going full frontal attack and saying the DMA creates security risks in the headline, and then repeating that messaging throughout the article. Hard to believe the ECJ is going to stand by and watch Apple convince millions that the EU is working to harm their constituents security but that Apple is here to save them.</text></item><item><author>mil22</author><text>Luckily, the EU included substantial anti-circumvention provisions in the DMA. I&amp;#x27;m not a lawyer, but based on the excerpts from the regulations below, it seems likely the EU would have grounds to open legal proceedings against Apple&amp;#x27;s new rules.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;eur-lex.europa.eu&amp;#x2F;legal-content&amp;#x2F;EN&amp;#x2F;TXT&amp;#x2F;PDF&amp;#x2F;?uri=CELEX:32022R1925&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;eur-lex.europa.eu&amp;#x2F;legal-content&amp;#x2F;EN&amp;#x2F;TXT&amp;#x2F;PDF&amp;#x2F;?uri=CELE...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Article 13: Anti-circumvention&lt;p&gt;4. The gatekeeper shall not engage in any behaviour that undermines effective compliance with the obligations of
Articles 5, 6 and 7 regardless of whether that behaviour is of a contractual, commercial or technical nature, or of any other
nature, or consists in the use of behavioural techniques or interface design.&lt;p&gt;7. Where the gatekeeper circumvents or attempts to circumvent any of the obligations in Article 5, 6, or 7 in a manner
described in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of this Article, the Commission may open proceedings pursuant to Article 20 and adopt
an implementing act referred to in Article 8(2) in order to specify the measures that the gatekeeper is to implement.&amp;quot;</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Apple announces changes to iOS, Safari, and the App Store in the European Union</title><url>https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/01/apple-announces-changes-to-ios-safari-and-the-app-store-in-the-european-union/</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>pjerem</author><text>&amp;gt; all the virus really did was collect some device info (less information than most ad networks)&lt;p&gt;Nah, that would mean that what really protects iOS users from malwares is just a good sandboxing mechanism and not the &amp;quot;human&amp;quot; control of the App Store. That would also mean that bypassing the App Store shouldn’t be a real security issue.</text><parent_chain><item><author>jerbear4328</author><text>That one virus on the App Store was one of, if not the biggest known instance of a virus on the App Store, and your article gives a number four times smaller than half a billion. From your [1]:&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; But now, thanks to emails published as part of Apple&amp;#x27;s trial against Epic Games, we finally know how many iPhone users were impacted: 128 million in total, of which 18 million were in the US.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; &amp;quot;In total, 128M customers have downloaded the 2500+ apps that were affected LTD. Those customers drove 203M downloads of the 2500+ affected apps LTD,&amp;quot; Dale Bagwell, who was Apple&amp;#x27;s manager of iTunes customer experience at the time, wrote in one of the emails.&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; Apple also disclosed the apps that included the malicious code, some incredibly popular such as WeChat and the Chinese version of Angry Birds 2.&lt;p&gt;Still a huge deal, particularly in China, but considering all the virus really did was collect some device info (less information than most ad networks) (and maybe it was able to open URLs and popups on command)[1] and it was the biggest virus on the App Store ever (that I can find), maybe not as awful as you suggest.&lt;p&gt;The scams on the App Store, yeah that&amp;#x27;s pretty bad. Though, can you point me at a marketplace as big as the App Store without loads of scams?&lt;p&gt;[1]: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.lookout.com&amp;#x2F;blog&amp;#x2F;xcodeghost#what-does-it-do&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.lookout.com&amp;#x2F;blog&amp;#x2F;xcodeghost#what-does-it-do&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>heavyset_go</author><text>&amp;gt; &lt;i&gt;Yes, it&amp;#x27;s been Apple&amp;#x27;s modus operandi with the App Store from the start: trick consumers into thinking the App Store being a monopoly is the only thing that can protect them against malware, illicit and questionable app content, pirated software, scams, and fraud.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Which is ironic, considering that the App Store is likely one of the largest malware distribution vectors on the planet.&lt;p&gt;Looking at one virus alone, the App Store distributed half of a billion copies of it to iPhones and iPads[1]. Similarly, there are multimillion dollar scams on the App Store, as well[2].&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.vice.com&amp;#x2F;en&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;n7bbmz&amp;#x2F;the-fortnite-trial-is-exposing-details-about-the-biggest-iphone-hack-of-all-time&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.vice.com&amp;#x2F;en&amp;#x2F;article&amp;#x2F;n7bbmz&amp;#x2F;the-fortnite-trial-is...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;[2] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.theverge.com&amp;#x2F;2021&amp;#x2F;2&amp;#x2F;8&amp;#x2F;22272849&amp;#x2F;apple-app-store-scams-ios-fraud-reviews-ratings-flicktype&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.theverge.com&amp;#x2F;2021&amp;#x2F;2&amp;#x2F;8&amp;#x2F;22272849&amp;#x2F;apple-app-store-s...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>mil22</author><text>Yes, it&amp;#x27;s been Apple&amp;#x27;s modus operandi with the App Store from the start: trick consumers into thinking the App Store being a monopoly is the only thing that can protect them against malware, illicit and questionable app content, pirated software, scams, and fraud.&lt;p&gt;Most consumers understand those concepts and fear those things. Most understand nothing about the economic impact of monopolies and anti-competitive business behavior and the harms they cause consumers in the form of higher prices, lack of innovation, reduced choice, and poorer quality products and services.&lt;p&gt;So Apple plays off those fears by using language consumers understand, making them actually want the very monopoly that is being forced on them and actually harming them while making billions for Apple.&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s unethical behavior, no more defensible than Sam Bankman-Fried&amp;#x27;s effective altruism, a.k.a. &amp;quot;mostly a front.&amp;quot; This is all right out of Apple&amp;#x27;s standard playbook.</text></item><item><author>mmaunder</author><text>Apple is going full frontal attack and saying the DMA creates security risks in the headline, and then repeating that messaging throughout the article. Hard to believe the ECJ is going to stand by and watch Apple convince millions that the EU is working to harm their constituents security but that Apple is here to save them.</text></item><item><author>mil22</author><text>Luckily, the EU included substantial anti-circumvention provisions in the DMA. I&amp;#x27;m not a lawyer, but based on the excerpts from the regulations below, it seems likely the EU would have grounds to open legal proceedings against Apple&amp;#x27;s new rules.&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;eur-lex.europa.eu&amp;#x2F;legal-content&amp;#x2F;EN&amp;#x2F;TXT&amp;#x2F;PDF&amp;#x2F;?uri=CELEX:32022R1925&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;eur-lex.europa.eu&amp;#x2F;legal-content&amp;#x2F;EN&amp;#x2F;TXT&amp;#x2F;PDF&amp;#x2F;?uri=CELE...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;&amp;quot;Article 13: Anti-circumvention&lt;p&gt;4. The gatekeeper shall not engage in any behaviour that undermines effective compliance with the obligations of
Articles 5, 6 and 7 regardless of whether that behaviour is of a contractual, commercial or technical nature, or of any other
nature, or consists in the use of behavioural techniques or interface design.&lt;p&gt;7. Where the gatekeeper circumvents or attempts to circumvent any of the obligations in Article 5, 6, or 7 in a manner
described in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of this Article, the Commission may open proceedings pursuant to Article 20 and adopt
an implementing act referred to in Article 8(2) in order to specify the measures that the gatekeeper is to implement.&amp;quot;</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Apple announces changes to iOS, Safari, and the App Store in the European Union</title><url>https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2024/01/apple-announces-changes-to-ios-safari-and-the-app-store-in-the-european-union/</url></story>