The federal government dropped its lawsuit to force Apple to break into its iPhone security system, so as to investigate the San Bernadino terrorists. The FBI was able to hack into the phone without Apple’s help. Which was arguably the way it should be! [Read more…]
The Justice Department and Apple Computer are locked in a bitter legal battle in the FBI’s desire to unlock the iPhone used by the San Bernadino terrorists, both of whom were killed after their attack. The FBI, understandably, wants to see who else might be in the terrorists’ network. Surely, in the name of fighting terrorism, Apple should simply unlock the phone–right? Well, it isn’t that easy.
My iPhone has a four-digit code that I have to enter every time the screen goes black. When I got the phone, the guy at Verizon sternly instructed me that a user has six tries to enter the correct code. If the wrong numbers are entered, eventually the phone is disabled and everything on it is erased. A pang of fear shoots through me every time my big fingers hit the wrong numbers.
So if the FBI tries to unlock the terrorists’ phone–since it can’t get the correct numbers from the users, who are dead–they will likely instead cause the phone to erase everything they want to know. So the government wants to coerce Apple into developing a way to get into the phone anyway. [Read more…]
Indignant complaints about Siri, the virtual personal assistant on the new iPhones, which will give you information about just about everything, but not where you can get an abortion:
If you ask Siri for an abortion clinic in New York City, it will tell you “Sorry, I couldn’t find any abortion clinics.” A simple Google web search—which Siri itself uses to find results—gives you seven to start with, some within walking distance of where I’m located.
• If you ask the same question in the city of Washington DC, Siri won’t direct you to a nearby clinic, but to one 26 miles away.
• A reader reported that when he asked “find a pregnancy termination clinic” Siri responded: “I found a number of medical centers fairly close to you.” Then “it showed me seven results and four of them were chiropractors, two were acupuncture specialists, and one was an emergency room.” Update: Indeed, after we tested this, it’s true.
Apparently, women across the country are having similar experiences.. To make matters worse, the iPhone 4S’ smart assistant will not direct you to a place where you can obtain emergency contraception if you ask for it. Instead, it gives you a definition.
It’s a classic parental scenario: the kid gets the parents’ credit card and buys stuff with it. But today, the “stuff” exists only in virtual world. Parents are up in arms about kiddy game iPhone apps that cost them real money:
Over the winter break from school, 8-year-old Madison worked to dress up her simple mushroom home on the iPhone game Smurfs’ Village. In doing so, she also amassed a $1,400 bill from Apple.
The Rockville second-grader didn’t realize the Smurfberries she was buying on the popular game by Capcom Interactive were real purchases, much like buying a pair of shoes from Zappos or movie tickets from Fandango. After all, lots of children’s games require virtual payments of pretend coins, treasure chests and gold to advance to levels.
But like a growing number of parents, Madison’s mom, Stephanie Kay, was shocked to find very real charges from iTunes show up in her e-mail box days later.
“I thought the app preyed on children,” she said. “Note that the Smurf app states it is for ages 4-plus.”
The games are part of a category of applications on Apple’s iTunes store that are free to download but let companies charge users for products and services when the application is launched. Following Apple, Google this week introduced these so-called “in-app purchases” for Android mobile phones and tablets, which experts say could create a new economy for newspapers, record labels and movie studios that have been struggling with ways to thrive online.
The in-app purchases have also catapulted children’s games such as Smurfs’ Village and Tap Zoo, by San Francisco-based Pocket Gems, into the ranks of the highest-grossing apps on iPods, iPhones and iPads.
But the practice is troubling parents and public interest groups, who say $99 for a wagon of Smurfberries or $19 for a bucket of snowflakes doesn’t have any business in a children’s game. Though a password is needed to make a purchase, critics say that the safeguards aren’t strong enough and that there are loopholes.
The article gives more horror stories. But it raises in my mind a host of questions.
First of all, an eight-year-old has an iPhone? And the apps are designed for children as young as four, and they have iPhones?
And a wagon of Smurfberries costs $99 and a bucket of snowflakes costs $19? Where do those show up on the consumer price index? Is the demand for those commodities so high that it is bidding up the cost? Is there any way we could give parents relief by working on the supply side, say, by manufacturing more of them? Are Smurfberries generated by a program in China?
Is there an economics model that accounts for the pricing of commodities that do not actually exist?