Thread

1. post_break · 1790971042 · focus · HN ↗

   One update away to revoking Full Disk Access in the future. This commercial has come full circle: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=VuqZ8AqmLPY" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.youtube.com&#x2F;watch?v=VuqZ8AqmLPY

   1. steve-atx-7600 · 1790973266 · focus · HN ↗

      Need some Vaseline for your slope?
   2. jeremyjh · 1790973442 · focus · HN ↗

      You could say that about anything, in any OS. Windows is one update away from insulting the user whenever they login. MacOS is one update away from mining crypto for Apple. Android is one update away from sending spam to all your contacts.

      1. DaiPlusPlus · 1790990702 · focus · HN ↗

         I think it’s the threshold of them getting-away-with-it without too many people wielding pitchforks.
      2. rpdillon · 1791021794 · focus · HN ↗

         The point is about trajectory. Apple continually removes rights from developers, and then users, but grants all those rights to themselves. This has been going on for a while. I left the Apple ecosystem in 2011 because I was concerned about the direction, and in the intervening 15 years, I have not regretted it. The amount of random breakage I get on Mac is annoying enough that I&#x27;m happy to get back on Linux.
   3. cung · 1790973571 · focus · HN ↗

      Hah! I had forgotten this ad. Using a mac nowadays is definitely just like Windows Vista in this ad.
   4. etatester · 1790973581 · focus · HN ↗

      Please do. Too many applications have too much access. Why do people not realize they installed literal Trojan horses that visit websites and execute commands found on them (prompt injection)?

      1. troupo · 1790999427 · focus · HN ↗

         Because that&#x27;s how computers have worked and should work forever? Without a corporate unerlord randomly restricting access to useful functionality and without inane permission popups for every action?

         Edit yes, you&#x27;d want proper sandboxes for software. Yet Apple&#x27;s approach is &quot;pay us 100 dollars a year for software signing and sandboxing&quot; which is not what we want

      2. spaqin · 1791009398 · focus · HN ↗

         Accessing any website is basically Remote Code Execution, but for some reason starting up a browser isn&#x27;t a CVE.

         1. etatester · 1791013324 · focus · HN ↗

            Good example because all that code is indeed run sandboxed, which is exactly what we need in native apps as well. &quot;Any website&quot; cannot access anything on my computer without explicit and often temporary permission.
   5. nozzlegear · 1790983502 · focus · HN ↗

      Inshallah
   6. Hobadee · 1791047589 · focus · HN ↗

      I came across this the other day and immediately thought of modern Mac. EVERYTHING is a permission prompt!

      I get that it&#x27;s the safe way to do things, but even as a power user who is concerned with that type of stuff, it&#x27;s overwhelming!

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.