Elessar

@bortzmeyer@mastodon.gougere.fr Ah c'est pour ça que de sites administratifs bloquent les visites de l'étranger ! J'en ai fait l'expérience alors que je voulais demander un acte d'état civil à la mairie de Lyon. Le site semblait HS mais en relayant par mon serveur perso (ssh -D roxxorz) ça marchait tout de suite vachement mieux.

@zbrando@social.vivaldi.net @neatchee@urusai.social @rustyshelf@mastodon.social I think there is also a ballot screen obligation, to provide the user with an option for their search engine, web browser and software source. But this is not too hard to code, event Microsoft managed to do it a decade ago I think.

@neatchee@urusai.social @zbrando@social.vivaldi.net @rustyshelf@mastodon.social Do you remember Apple switching their phone models to USB-C, starting with iPhone 15, worldwide? If you believe that was their own decision, for the sake of their customers, you are wrong. They we forced into doing so, by EU's teeth. If they did not obey, all their phone would have become illegal to sell in the EU. Maybe you think that was just bluff, but Apple did not, which is all that matters.

@neatchee@urusai.social @zbrando@social.vivaldi.net @rustyshelf@mastodon.social Where do you read that EU will enforce the presence of some piece of software? And which software by the way?

@neatchee@urusai.social How exactly do you get that “allowing alternate software sources” implies “dictating that a given piece of software must be present”? Do you know that in many countries, the tenant of an apartment is allowed to choose his ISP and that the landlord is not allowed to restrict that choice? Do you really think this these countries are dictating what provider must be chosen? 🤪

@neatchee@urusai.social Okay, I get it. Well here, the good news is it will not require much code from Apple. The big part of it is the alternate software sources, and they are not for Apple to code. In fact, they are already available, but they required the user to crack a restriction developed by Apple to prevent that. This operation is called “jailbreaking”. All they have to do to comply, that it's, with regard to the software source part of the DMA, is to provide an official option to, well, jailbreak. Of course they can do something more specific, more refined or whatever, but basically, this is about removing an anti-feature, not adding a feature.

@neatchee@urusai.social Then you surely know that the fact you cannot use an alternate software source on iOS is not because Apple did not do something, but because they actually did implement a locking mechanism. They are simply required to provide an option to remove that.

@neatchee@urusai.social The point is that EU is not telling Apple to do something, such as installing some mandatory software on the phones they sell. They are telling them to stop doing something, that is, preventing people from installing and using alternate software sources. Not : “Hey Apple, now you will pre-install Cydia” Rather: “From now on, you will stop preventing people from installing and using Cydia (among others)”

@neatchee@urusai.social @zbrando@social.vivaldi.net @rustyshelf@mastodon.social Does that mean an American company is legally supposed to violate other countries' laws when they know it would lead to more profit? This seems doubtful. In this case, let is suppose, for the sake of argument, that not complying with the DSA would lead to more profit than complying (which is probably really not the case, considering the fines at stake). Do you mean that, in such a case, the US law requires that they violate the DSA? If so, this is frightening, when applied to oil companies operating in third world countries for instance.