Now you're making a pedantic point about a technicality instead of what's happening in real life.
> Any software that I run that I didn't write myself is subject to the license of the people who wrote it defined it to be. Even the MIT License places requirements on you for you to be allowed to use the software. Exceptions to these copyright protections have been made which extends to jailbreaking iOS devices, which requires modifying copyrighted code.
The MIT license doesn't require you to allow anyone else to scan your private data and doesn't allow the licensor to change the terms after you've already started using the software.
> All hardware is paperweight without software.
If you buy a Dell and you don't like the Dell crapware, you can remove it and the device still works just as well (if not better). If it came with Microsoft Windows and you don't like the Windows license, you can install Linux or OpenBSD. The hardware is still useful even if you don't like the license for the software it came with.
If you don't like Apple's software licensing terms, your iPhone is a paperweight.
> Now you're making a pedantic point about a technicality instead of what's happening in real life.
In real life people are looking for escalation of privilege exploits that enable them to exploit iOS to allow for installation of arbitrary software on it. This is what jailbreaking is.
> The MIT license doesn't require you to allow anyone else to scan your private data and doesn't allow the licensor to change the terms after you've already started using the software.
At what point did I ever state any of this or even imply this? I am simply stating that licenses affect all the software we run and places restrictions from the creators of said software on the users of it. This has nothing to do with Apple surveilling its users with its new tech.
> If you buy a Dell and you don't like the Dell crapware, you can remove it and the device still works just as well (if not better). If it came with Microsoft Windows and you don't like the Windows license, you can install Linux or OpenBSD. The hardware is still useful even if you don't like the license for the software it came with.
Hypothetically it is possible to run whatever software you want on an iPhone, including installing another OS. In reality this translates to people are jailbreaking devices. As has been mentioned, people are allowed to hack their own iPhones and it's protected by DMCA exemptions.
But if you're going to accuse me of being pedantic about technicalities instead of real life, how about this: In real life almost no one gives a shit about running arbitrary code on their devices and just use it to get access to the applications that are readily available in official app stores.
> If you don't like Apple's software licensing terms, your iPhone is a paperweight.
You can dislike their software licensing terms and still use your iPhone. I dislike the things that Apple is proposing with regards to CSAM detection but that doesn't mean I can't use my phone.
> In real life people are looking for escalation of privilege exploits that enable them to exploit iOS to allow for installation of arbitrary software on it. This is what jailbreaking is.
"Unjust imprisonment is fine because you can hire a black ops team to break you out."
So you jailbreak your iPhone. Then an iOS update comes out patching a security vulnerability. If you install it, it removes your jailbreak (or bricks your phone). If you don't, your device has an unpatched security vulnerability.
And at any given time there may not be a jailbreak for the current version of iOS.
This is not a reasonable state of affairs.
> At what point did I ever state any of this or even imply this? I am simply stating that licenses affect all the software we run and places restrictions from the creators of said software on the users of it. This has nothing to do with Apple surveilling its users with its new tech.
The problem is that Apple is imposing license restrictions you don't want. Your response was that all licenses impose restrictions. That ignores the important distinction between restrictions you actually care about and restrictions that don't really affect you.
> Hypothetically it is possible to run whatever software you want on an iPhone, including installing another OS.
Hypothetically you can make your own iPhone out of sand and crude oil. In practice no third party operating systems for iPhones exist because Apple doesn't document their hardware and so there are no drivers for third party operating systems.
> In real life almost no one gives a shit about running arbitrary code on their devices and just use it to get access to the applications that are readily available in official app stores.
In real life most people unjustly imprisoned by a government don't have the wherewithal to break out of prison. That doesn't mean they like being in incarcerated, or having Apple scan their devices.
What it means is that they're structurally bound into a position where their true preferences can't be expressed. Which is the problem.
> You can dislike their software licensing terms and still use your iPhone.
Yes, exactly. But you can't refuse to accept their software licensing terms and still use your iPhone, which means that your choice is between having something imposed on you that you dislike, or your iPhone is a brick because you can't in practice use it under any other terms.
Now you're making a pedantic point about a technicality instead of what's happening in real life.
> Any software that I run that I didn't write myself is subject to the license of the people who wrote it defined it to be. Even the MIT License places requirements on you for you to be allowed to use the software. Exceptions to these copyright protections have been made which extends to jailbreaking iOS devices, which requires modifying copyrighted code.
The MIT license doesn't require you to allow anyone else to scan your private data and doesn't allow the licensor to change the terms after you've already started using the software.
> All hardware is paperweight without software.
If you buy a Dell and you don't like the Dell crapware, you can remove it and the device still works just as well (if not better). If it came with Microsoft Windows and you don't like the Windows license, you can install Linux or OpenBSD. The hardware is still useful even if you don't like the license for the software it came with.
If you don't like Apple's software licensing terms, your iPhone is a paperweight.