This is the common misunderstanding with both RCS in general and Apple's
update in particular. RCS is not end-to-end encrypted.

Yet, for conversations between Google Messages users, end-to-end encryption
is now enabled on your Android phone by default.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2024/03/30/new-apple-iphone-16-pro-max-and-ios-18-leak-googles-imessage-warning/

So unlike iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between
Android users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and Android
users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level of security.

This is critical because it's the issue the DOJ highlighted in its lawsuit:
"Apple is willing to make the iPhone less secure and less private... Text
messages sent from iPhones to Android phones are unencrypted as a result of
Apple's conduct. If Apple wanted to, Apple could allow iPhone users to send
encrypted messages to Android users while still using iMessage on their
iPhone, which would instantly improve the privacy and security of iPhone
and other smartphone users."

On 2024-04-01 00:55:13 +0000, Tamborino said:
>
> This is the common misunderstanding with both RCS in general and Apple's
> update in particular. RCS is not end-to-end encrypted.
>
> Yet, for conversations between Google Messages users, end-to-end encryption
> is now enabled on your Android phone by default.
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2024/03/30/new-apple-iphone-16-pro-max-and-ios-18-leak-googles-imessage-warning/
>
>
> So unlike iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between
> Android users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and Android
> users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level of security.
>
> This is critical because it's the issue the DOJ highlighted in its lawsuit:
> "Apple is willing to make the iPhone less secure and less private... Text
> messages sent from iPhones to Android phones are unencrypted as a result of
> Apple's conduct. If Apple wanted to, Apple could allow iPhone users to send
> encrypted messages to Android users while still using iMessage on their
> iPhone, which would instantly improve the privacy and security of iPhone
> and other smartphone users."

Yet more proof that the US DOJ has no clue what they're talking about. :-\

A. Apple doesn't even use RCS ... yet! It is rumoured to be coming in
later this year ("in the fall" if you believe a Google post)

B. Apple messages are end-to-end encrypted, at least between Apple
devices using Apple's messaging app (for other apps it is up to
their developers, not Apple):

"Your iMessage and FaceTime conversations are encrypted end-to-end,
so they can't be read while they're sent between devices."

On this Mon, 1 Apr 2024 18:56:22 +1300, Your Name wrote:

> Yet more proof that the US DOJ has no clue what they're talking about. :-\
>
> A. Apple doesn't even use RCS ... yet! It is rumoured to be coming in
> later this year ("in the fall" if you believe a Google post)
>
> B. Apple messages are end-to-end encrypted, at least between Apple
> devices using Apple's messaging app (for other apps it is up to
> their developers, not Apple):
>
> "Your iMessage and FaceTime conversations are encrypted end-to-end,
> so they can't be read while they're sent between devices."

I think the DOJ's 88-page point of view is that Apple knows very well how
trivially easy it would be for Apple to give iOS & Android users privacy
when its own users are communicating between iOS & Android users via RCS.

The DOJ's point of view seems to be Apple expressly wants NOBODY to have
privacy (not even Apple users!) when they communicate between platforms.

Apple doesn't care that even its own users won't have that privacy.
All Apple cares about is screwing its own customers to make more money.

Your Name <YourName@yourisp.com> wrote:
> On 2024-04-01 00:55:13 +0000, Tamborino said:
> >
> > This is the common misunderstanding with both RCS in general and Apple's
> > update in particular. RCS is not end-to-end encrypted.
> >
> > Yet, for conversations between Google Messages users, end-to-end encryption
> > is now enabled on your Android phone by default.
> > https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2024/03/30/new-apple-iphone-16-pro-max-and-ios-18-leak-googles-imessage-warning/
> >
> >
> > So unlike iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between
> > Android users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and Android
> > users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level of security.
> >
> > This is critical because it's the issue the DOJ highlighted in its lawsuit:
> > "Apple is willing to make the iPhone less secure and less private... Text
> > messages sent from iPhones to Android phones are unencrypted as a result of
> > Apple's conduct. If Apple wanted to, Apple could allow iPhone users to send
> > encrypted messages to Android users while still using iMessage on their
> > iPhone, which would instantly improve the privacy and security of iPhone
> > and other smartphone users."
>
> Yet more proof that the US DOJ has no clue what they're talking about. :-\
>
> A. Apple doesn't even use RCS ... yet! It is rumoured to be coming in
> later this year ("in the fall" if you believe a Google post)

Exactly which part of "will" in "will not" didn't you understand?

> B. Apple messages are end-to-end encrypted, at least between Apple
> devices using Apple's messaging app (for other apps it is up to
> their developers, not Apple):
>
> "Your iMessage and FaceTime conversations are encrypted end-to-end,
> so they can't be read while they're sent between devices."

Exactly which part of "unlike in "unlike iMessaging" didn't you
understand?

Your Name wrote:

>On 2024-04-01 00:55:13 +0000, Tamborino said:
>>
>>This is the common misunderstanding with both RCS in general and
>>Apple's update in particular. RCS is not end-to-end encrypted.
>>
>>Yet, for conversations between Google Messages users, end-to-end
>>encryption is now enabled on your Android phone by default.
>>https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2024/03/30/new-apple-iphone-
>>16-pro-max-and-ios-18-leak-googles-imessage-warning/ So unlike
>>iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between Android
>>users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and Android
>>users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level of
>>security.
>>
>>This is critical because it's the issue the DOJ highlighted in its
>>lawsuit: "Apple is willing to make the iPhone less secure and less
>>private... Text messages sent from iPhones to Android phones are
>>unencrypted as a result of Apple's conduct. If Apple wanted to,
>>Apple could allow iPhone users to send encrypted messages to
>>Android users while still using iMessage on their iPhone, which
>>would instantly improve the privacy and security of iPhone and
>>other smartphone users."
>
>Yet more proof that the US DOJ has no clue what they're talking
>about. :-\
>
>A. Apple doesn't even use RCS ... yet! It is rumoured to be coming in
> later this year ("in the fall" if you believe a Google post)
>
>B. Apple messages are end-to-end encrypted, at least between Apple
> devices using Apple's messaging app (for other apps it is up to
> their developers, not Apple):
>
> "Your iMessage and FaceTime conversations are encrypted end-to-end,
> so they can't be read while they're sent between devices."

This is the relevant part of the article. There will not be encryption
between Android and iOS users. The DOJ says Apple can make it happen
but are unwilling to. If this is true then it looks like Apple is
being the petulant child stamping their feet and saying "no, no, no..."

"So unlike iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between
Android users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and
Android users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level
of security."

"If Apple wanted to, Apple could allow iPhone users to send encrypted
messages to Android users while still using iMessage on their iPhone..."

--
"Progress might have been all right once, but it has gone on too long."
~ Ogden Nash

On 4/1/2024 7:57 AM, badgolferman wrote:

<snip>

> "If Apple wanted to, Apple could allow iPhone users to send encrypted
> messages to Android users while still using iMessage on their iPhone..."

If they allowed encryption between iPhone users and Android users it
would eliminate a key advantage of an organization being 100% iPhone. My
wife's company is 100% iPhone, for multiple reasons (they could actually
use Android since they use Cortext for secure messaging since it's HIPAA
compliant, while iMessage is not HIPAA compliant) mainly for the remote
management (MDM) capability, and the inability for employees to install
any apps. So she carries two phones, her personal Android and her
corporate iPhone.

On 1/4/2024, sms wrote:

>> "If Apple wanted to, Apple could allow iPhone users to send encrypted
>> messages to Android users while still using iMessage on their iPhone..."
>
> If they allowed encryption between iPhone users and Android users it
> would eliminate a key advantage of an organization being 100% iPhone.

Apple execs are on record from the Epic deposition for never wanting the
iPhone messaging to interface well with Android, which is part of the DOJ
case since it's a matter of public record that Apple can't possibly deny.

> My wife's company is 100% iPhone, for multiple reasons

I feel sorry for anyone stuck with having to create an account for Apple
just to use a phone that shouldn't need to create that tracking account.

>(they could actually
> use Android since they use Cortext for secure messaging since it's HIPAA
> compliant, while iMessage is not HIPAA compliant) mainly for the remote
> management (MDM) capability,

Does this HIPAA compliant "Cortext" app functionality run on iOS?

> and the inability for employees to install any apps.

Most people who only know iPhones have no idea how limited they are, which
is kind of like kids up until about fifth grade still believe in the Easter
Bunny but after about fifth grade, even kids begin to see the limitations.

> So she carries two phones, her personal Android and her
> corporate iPhone.

My wife is also forced to use an iPhone but she can't stand it and cheats
as much as she can by using the Android phone whenever she needs to get
something done.

On 2024-04-01 14:57:08 +0000, badgolferman said:
> Your Name wrote:
>> On 2024-04-01 00:55:13 +0000, Tamborino said:
>>>
>>> This is the common misunderstanding with both RCS in general and
>>> Apple's update in particular. RCS is not end-to-end encrypted.
>>>
>>> Yet, for conversations between Google Messages users, end-to-end
>>> encryption is now enabled on your Android phone by default.
>>> https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2024/03/30/new-apple-iphone-
>>> 16-pro-max-and-ios-18-leak-googles-imessage-warning/ So unlike
>>> iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between Android
>>> users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and Android
>>> users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level of
>>> security.
>>>
>>> This is critical because it's the issue the DOJ highlighted in its
>>> lawsuit: "Apple is willing to make the iPhone less secure and less
>>> private... Text messages sent from iPhones to Android phones are
>>> unencrypted as a result of Apple's conduct. If Apple wanted to,
>>> Apple could allow iPhone users to send encrypted messages to
>>> Android users while still using iMessage on their iPhone, which
>>> would instantly improve the privacy and security of iPhone and
>>> other smartphone users."
>>
>> Yet more proof that the US DOJ has no clue what they're talking
>> about. :-\
>>
>> A. Apple doesn't even use RCS ... yet! It is rumoured to be coming in
>> later this year ("in the fall" if you believe a Google post)
>>
>> B. Apple messages are end-to-end encrypted, at least between Apple
>> devices using Apple's messaging app (for other apps it is up to
>> their developers, not Apple):
>>
>> "Your iMessage and FaceTime conversations are encrypted end-to-end,
>> so they can't be read while they're sent between devices."
>
> This is the relevant part of the article. There will not be encryption
> between Android and iOS users. The DOJ says Apple can make it happen
> but are unwilling to.

More know-nothing bollocks from the US DOJ. Just read note A. above,
Apple is already planning to support RCS, in some form.

> If this is true then it looks like Apple is being the petulant child
> stamping their feet and saying "no, no, no..."
>
> "So unlike iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between
> Android users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and
> Android users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level
> of security."

Wrong ...

"Apple stated it will not use any type of proprietary
end-to-end encryption – presumably referring to Google's
approach — but did say it would work to make end-to-end
encryption part of the RCS standard."

Apple wants RCS to have a proper standard for encryption and not rely
on Google's version, which for any one who knows Google (or Microsoft's
attempts to cripple HTML) knows is obviously a good thing. Just in
today's news is that Google's Chrome browser still collects data for
Google even when in the supposedly private 'Incognito' mode - Google
simply cannot be trusted, which is yet another good reason to avoid
Android OS.
<https://www.wired.com/story/google-chrome-incognito-mode-data-deletion-settlement/>

> "If Apple wanted to, Apple could allow iPhone users to send encrypted
> messages to Android users while still using iMessage on their iPhone..."

As above.

On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 11:08:28 +1300, Your Name wrote:

>> This is the relevant part of the article. There will not be encryption
>> between Android and iOS users. The DOJ says Apple can make it happen
>> but are unwilling to.
>
> More know-nothing bollocks from the US DOJ. Just read note A. above,
> Apple is already planning to support RCS, in some form.

Apple has no plans to fully support RCS end-to-end encryption.
That's what the DOJ suit is partially about.

>> If this is true then it looks like Apple is being the petulant child
>> stamping their feet and saying "no, no, no..."
>>
>> "So unlike iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between
>> Android users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and
>> Android users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level
>> of security."
>
> Wrong ...

Only the nut cases think Apple actually cares about them or their privacy.

> "Apple stated it will not use any type of proprietary
> end-to-end encryption – presumably referring to Google's
> approach — but did say it would work to make end-to-end
> encryption part of the RCS standard."

Apple does not want anyone, not even their own customers, to have the
privacy of RCS end-to-end encryption between Apple and Android users.

As such, Apple has always been glaringly anti-consumer for the sake of
profit - always to the detriment of even their own customers' privacy.

> Apple wants RCS to have a proper standard for encryption and not rely
> on Google's version, which for any one who knows Google (or Microsoft's
> attempts to cripple HTML) knows is obviously a good thing. Just in
> today's news is that Google's Chrome browser still collects data for
> Google even when in the supposedly private 'Incognito' mode - Google
> simply cannot be trusted, which is yet another good reason to avoid
> Android OS.
> <https://www.wired.com/story/google-chrome-incognito-mode-data-deletion-settlement/>
>
>> "If Apple wanted to, Apple could allow iPhone users to send encrypted
>> messages to Android users while still using iMessage on their iPhone..."
>
> As above.

It's clear to the DOJ and to anyone who read the Epic deposition where
Apple had to openly admit the last thing Apple wants is anyone having any
privacy when messaging between the two platforms, iOS and Android.

Apple is so anti privacy that they don't even want their own customers to
have that end-to-end encryption privacy - which is proved in the DOJ case.

On 2024-04-01 4:01 p.m., Wolf Greenblatt wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 11:08:28 +1300, Your Name wrote:
>
>>> This is the relevant part of the article. There will not be encryption
>>> between Android and iOS users. The DOJ says Apple can make it happen
>>> but are unwilling to.
>>
>> More know-nothing bollocks from the US DOJ. Just read note A. above,
>> Apple is already planning to support RCS, in some form.
>
> Apple has no plans to fully support RCS end-to-end encryption.
> That's what the DOJ suit is partially about.

Well that's just false.

>
>>> If this is true then it looks like Apple is being the petulant child
>>> stamping their feet and saying "no, no, no..."
>>>
>>> "So unlike iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between
>>> Android users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and
>>> Android users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level
>>> of security."
>>
>> Wrong ...
>
> Only the nut cases think Apple actually cares about them or their privacy.
>
>> "Apple stated it will not use any type of proprietary
>> end-to-end encryption – presumably referring to Google's
>> approach — but did say it would work to make end-to-end
>> encryption part of the RCS standard."
>
> Apple does not want anyone, not even their own customers, to have the
> privacy of RCS end-to-end encryption between Apple and Android users.

You've literally just quoted them saying they would allow it.

On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 16:39:58 -0700, Alan wrote:

> You've literally just quoted them saying they would allow it.

Read the reference a few thousand time and maybe you'll yet understand.

On 2024-03-31 17:55, Tamborino wrote:
> This is the common misunderstanding with both RCS in general and Apple's
> update in particular. RCS is not end-to-end encrypted.
>
> Yet, for conversations between Google Messages users, end-to-end encryption
> is now enabled on your Android phone by default.
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2024/03/30/new-apple-iphone-16-pro-max-and-ios-18-leak-googles-imessage-warning/
>
> So unlike iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between
> Android users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and Android
> users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level of security.
>
> This is critical because it's the issue the DOJ highlighted in its lawsuit:
> "Apple is willing to make the iPhone less secure and less private... Text
> messages sent from iPhones to Android phones are unencrypted as a result of
> Apple's conduct. If Apple wanted to, Apple could allow iPhone users to send
> encrypted messages to Android users while still using iMessage on their
> iPhone, which would instantly improve the privacy and security of iPhone
> and other smartphone users."

Apple is unwilling to use Google's PROPRIETARY encryption, dimwit.

Apple has explicitly stated that they'll work with the mobile phone
group that created RCS to build encryption into it.

On 2024-04-01 07:57, badgolferman wrote:
> Your Name wrote:
>
>> On 2024-04-01 00:55:13 +0000, Tamborino said:
>>>
>>> This is the common misunderstanding with both RCS in general and
>>> Apple's update in particular. RCS is not end-to-end encrypted.
>>>
>>> Yet, for conversations between Google Messages users, end-to-end
>>> encryption is now enabled on your Android phone by default.
>>> https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2024/03/30/new-apple-iphone-
>>> 16-pro-max-and-ios-18-leak-googles-imessage-warning/ So unlike
>>> iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between Android
>>> users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and Android
>>> users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level of
>>> security.
>>>
>>> This is critical because it's the issue the DOJ highlighted in its
>>> lawsuit: "Apple is willing to make the iPhone less secure and less
>>> private... Text messages sent from iPhones to Android phones are
>>> unencrypted as a result of Apple's conduct. If Apple wanted to,
>>> Apple could allow iPhone users to send encrypted messages to
>>> Android users while still using iMessage on their iPhone, which
>>> would instantly improve the privacy and security of iPhone and
>>> other smartphone users."
>>
>> Yet more proof that the US DOJ has no clue what they're talking
>> about. :-\
>>
>> A. Apple doesn't even use RCS ... yet! It is rumoured to be coming in
>> later this year ("in the fall" if you believe a Google post)
>>
>> B. Apple messages are end-to-end encrypted, at least between Apple
>> devices using Apple's messaging app (for other apps it is up to
>> their developers, not Apple):
>>
>> "Your iMessage and FaceTime conversations are encrypted end-to-end,
>> so they can't be read while they're sent between devices."
>
> This is the relevant part of the article. There will not be encryption
> between Android and iOS users. The DOJ says Apple can make it happen
> but are unwilling to. If this is true then it looks like Apple is
> being the petulant child stamping their feet and saying "no, no, no..."

So you can predict the future, can you?

>
>
> "So unlike iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between
> Android users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and
> Android users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level
> of security."
>
> "If Apple wanted to, Apple could allow iPhone users to send encrypted
> messages to Android users while still using iMessage on their iPhone..."

On 2024-04-01 21:05, Wolf Greenblatt wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 16:39:58 -0700, Alan wrote:
>
>> You've literally just quoted them saying they would allow it.
>
> Read the reference a few thousand time and maybe you'll yet understand.

Why don't you just explain why you think I don't?

Your Name wrote:
> On 2024-04-01 00:55:13 +0000, Tamborino said:
>>
>> This is the common misunderstanding with both RCS in general and Apple's
>> update in particular. RCS is not end-to-end encrypted.
>>
>> Yet, for conversations between Google Messages users, end-to-end encryption
>> is now enabled on your Android phone by default.
>> https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2024/03/30/new-apple-iphone-16-pro-max-and-ios-18-leak-googles-imessage-warning/
>>
>>
>> So unlike iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between
>> Android users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and Android
>> users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level of security.
>>
>> This is critical because it's the issue the DOJ highlighted in its lawsuit:
>> "Apple is willing to make the iPhone less secure and less private... Text
>> messages sent from iPhones to Android phones are unencrypted as a result of
>> Apple's conduct. If Apple wanted to, Apple could allow iPhone users to send
>> encrypted messages to Android users while still using iMessage on their
>> iPhone, which would instantly improve the privacy and security of iPhone
>> and other smartphone users."
>
> Yet more proof that the US DOJ has no clue what they're talking about.  :-\
>
> A. Apple doesn't even use RCS ... yet! It is rumoured to be coming in
>   later this year ("in the fall" if you believe a Google post)
>
> B. Apple messages are end-to-end encrypted, at least between Apple
>   devices using Apple's messaging app (for other apps it is up to
>   their developers, not Apple):
>
>   "Your iMessage and FaceTime conversations are encrypted end-to-end,
>    so they can't be read while they're sent between devices."
>

Doj is picking on Poor apple.

Apple is just a small, old fashioned country telephone maker. They have
never deliberately committed crimes or fraud, or screwed their customers.

Sure, they've made mistakes, but all honest. This is all biden's fault. He
hates apple.

On 2024-04-03 22:54:04 +0000, Hank Rogers said:
> Your Name wrote:
>> On 2024-04-01 00:55:13 +0000, Tamborino said:
>>>
>>> This is the common misunderstanding with both RCS in general and Apple's
>>> update in particular. RCS is not end-to-end encrypted.
>>>
>>> Yet, for conversations between Google Messages users, end-to-end
>>> encryption is now enabled on your Android phone by default.
>>> https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2024/03/30/new-apple-iphone-16-pro-max-and-ios-18-leak-googles-imessage-warning/
>>>
>>>
>>> So unlike iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between
>>> Android users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and Android
>>> users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level of security.
>>>
>>> This is critical because it's the issue the DOJ highlighted in its
>>> lawsuit: "Apple is willing to make the iPhone less secure and less
>>> private... Text messages sent from iPhones to Android phones are
>>> unencrypted as a result of Apple's conduct. If Apple wanted to, Apple
>>> could allow iPhone users to send encrypted messages to Android users
>>> while still using iMessage on their iPhone, which would instantly
>>> improve the privacy and security of iPhone and other smartphone users."
>>
>> Yet more proof that the US DOJ has no clue what they're talking about.  :-\
>>
>> A. Apple doesn't even use RCS ... yet! It is rumoured to be coming in
>>   later this year ("in the fall" if you believe a Google post)
>>
>> B. Apple messages are end-to-end encrypted, at least between Apple
>>   devices using Apple's messaging app (for other apps it is up to
>>   their developers, not Apple):
>>
>>   "Your iMessage and FaceTime conversations are encrypted end-to-end,
>>    so they can't be read while they're sent between devices."
>
> Doj is picking on Poor apple.
>
> Apple is just a small, old fashioned country telephone maker. They have
> never deliberately committed crimes or fraud, or screwed their
> customers.
>
> Sure, they've made mistakes, but all honest. This is all biden's fault.
> He hates apple.

The glacial pace that government departments work at, it's far more
likely Trump the Chump's fault and yet another reason for every sane
American to bin the lunatic at their next election. :-p

Your Name wrote:
> On 2024-04-03 22:54:04 +0000, Hank Rogers said:
>> Your Name wrote:
>>> On 2024-04-01 00:55:13 +0000, Tamborino said:
>>>>
>>>> This is the common misunderstanding with both RCS in general and Apple's
>>>> update in particular. RCS is not end-to-end encrypted.
>>>>
>>>> Yet, for conversations between Google Messages users, end-to-end
>>>> encryption is now enabled on your Android phone by default.
>>>> https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2024/03/30/new-apple-iphone-16-pro-max-and-ios-18-leak-googles-imessage-warning/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So unlike iMessaging between iPhone users or Google Messaging between
>>>> Android users, or more importantly WhatsApping between iPhone and Android
>>>> users, RCS between iPhone and Android will not have that level of
>>>> security.
>>>>
>>>> This is critical because it's the issue the DOJ highlighted in its
>>>> lawsuit: "Apple is willing to make the iPhone less secure and less
>>>> private... Text messages sent from iPhones to Android phones are
>>>> unencrypted as a result of Apple's conduct. If Apple wanted to, Apple
>>>> could allow iPhone users to send encrypted messages to Android users
>>>> while still using iMessage on their iPhone, which would instantly
>>>> improve the privacy and security of iPhone and other smartphone users."
>>>
>>> Yet more proof that the US DOJ has no clue what they're talking about.  :-\
>>>
>>> A. Apple doesn't even use RCS ... yet! It is rumoured to be coming in
>>>   later this year ("in the fall" if you believe a Google post)
>>>
>>> B. Apple messages are end-to-end encrypted, at least between Apple
>>>   devices using Apple's messaging app (for other apps it is up to
>>>   their developers, not Apple):
>>>
>>>   "Your iMessage and FaceTime conversations are encrypted end-to-end,
>>>    so they can't be read while they're sent between devices."
>>
>> Doj is picking on Poor apple.
>>
>> Apple is just a small, old fashioned country telephone maker. They have
>> never deliberately committed crimes or fraud, or screwed their customers.
>>
>> Sure, they've made mistakes, but all honest. This is all biden's fault.
>> He hates apple.
>
> The glacial pace that government departments work at, it's far more likely
> Trump the Chump's fault and yet another reason for every sane American to
> bin the lunatic at their next election.   :-p
>

Poor apple is just being picked on by the law. So is trump. They are much
alike and have never done anything wrong. Ever. Neither has ever committed
a crime or screwed a customer or business partner.

Both are forced to pay billion dollar fines for shit they didn't do.

Every true american feels sorry for both apple and trump. And most are
willing to give them money to help bail them out.

On 04/04/2024 01:58, Hank Rogers wrote:
>
> So is trump. They are
> much alike and have never done anything wrong. Ever. Neither has ever
> committed a crime or screwed a customer or business partner.

That is provably untrue, in that Trump has already lost two civil cases,
wherein one of which a jury found him to be a rapist - in most
civilised people's view, that is both committing a crime and screwing
someone. Further, he faces 91 further criminal charges in 4 separate
cases, in most of which his guilt seems to be beyond doubt, in that the
known facts or even his own statements prove his guilt, and potentially
he only has to be found guilty on *one* of those 91 charges to end up in
jail. Indeed, if he carries on threatening judges' families the way
that he now done *twice* already, most likely he will be adjudged to
have breached the terms of his bail, and go to jail to await trial
anyway. The only thing actually in doubt is whether the lumbering US
legal system can complete a case and thereby convict him before the
election, but the first trial starts this month, so probably they will,
despite his barrage of absurd claims of Presidential immunity, which, as
an appeal judge pointed out, would, if taken literally as claimed,
enable him to send the Seals to wipe out political opponents.

> Both are forced to pay billion dollar fines for shit they didn't do.

I'm not going to comment on Apple, but the whole point of the Trump
fines is that it's shit he *DID* do, as determined by independent juries
in two courts of law.

> Every true american feels sorry for both apple and trump. And most are
> willing to give them money to help bail them out.

Only the MAGA cult disciples feel 'sorry' for the Orange Juju, every one
else wants him safely in jail where he can't cause any more harm.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:

> Only the MAGA cult disciples feel 'sorry' for the Orange Juju, every one
> else wants him safely in jail where he can't cause any more harm.

While I'm impartial towards US politics as I regard both candidates
to be unspeakable, TINEOE.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator

My pet rock Gordon just is.

On 2024-04-04 01:45:02 +0000, Java Jive said:
> On 04/04/2024 01:58, Hank Rogers wrote:
>>
>> So is trump. They are much alike and have never done anything wrong.
>> Ever. Neither has ever committed a crime or screwed a customer or
>> business partner.
>
> That is provably untrue, in that Trump has already lost two civil
> cases, wherein one of which a jury found him to be a rapist - in most
> civilised people's view, that is both committing a crime and screwing
> someone. Further, he faces 91 further criminal charges in 4 separate
> cases, in most of which his guilt seems to be beyond doubt, in that the
> known facts or even his own statements prove his guilt, and potentially
> he only has to be found guilty on *one* of those 91 charges to end up
> in jail. Indeed, if he carries on threatening judges' families the way
> that he now done *twice* already, most likely he will be adjudged to
> have breached the terms of his bail, and go to jail to await trial
> anyway. The only thing actually in doubt is whether the lumbering US
> legal system can complete a case and thereby convict him before the
> election, but the first trial starts this month, so probably they will,
> despite his barrage of absurd claims of Presidential immunity, which,
> as an appeal judge pointed out, would, if taken literally as claimed,
> enable him to send the Seals to wipe out political opponents.
>
>> Both are forced to pay billion dollar fines for shit they didn't do.
>
> I'm not going to comment on Apple, but the whole point of the Trump
> fines is that it's shit he *DID* do, as determined by independent
> juries in two courts of law.
>
>> Every true american feels sorry for both apple and trump. And most are
>> willing to give them money to help bail them out.
>
> Only the MAGA cult disciples feel 'sorry' for the Orange Juju, every
> one else wants him safely in jail where he can't cause any more harm.

Another difference is that most of New York doesn't want Trump the
Chump in their city. :-)

Java Jive wrote:
> On 04/04/2024 01:58, Hank Rogers wrote:
>>
>> So is trump. They are much alike and have never done anything wrong. Ever.
>> Neither has ever committed a crime or screwed a customer or business partner.
>
> That is provably untrue, in that Trump has already lost two civil cases,
> wherein one of which a jury found him to be a rapist - in most civilised
> people's view, that is both committing a crime and screwing someone.

Losing a civil case is not the same as a criminal conviction.

> Further, he faces 91 further criminal charges in 4 separate cases,

All politically-motivated persecutions.

All that proves is that he should have crossed the Rubicon after the
massive election theft of 2020 and started having lots of Democrats
put up against the wall and shot.

On 2024-04-03 18:51, Sn!pe wrote:
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Only the MAGA cult disciples feel 'sorry' for the Orange Juju, every one
>> else wants him safely in jail where he can't cause any more harm.
>
> While I'm impartial towards US politics as I regard both candidates
> to be unspeakable, TINEOE.
>

Why?

On 2024-04-03 21:49, Anonymous wrote:
> Java Jive wrote:
> > On 04/04/2024 01:58, Hank Rogers wrote:
> >>
> >> So is trump. They are much alike and have never done anything wrong.
> Ever.
> >> Neither has ever committed a crime or screwed a customer or business
> partner.
> >
> > That is provably untrue, in that Trump has already lost two civil cases,
> > wherein one of which a jury found him to be a rapist  -  in most
> civilised
> > people's view, that is both committing a crime and screwing someone.
>
> Losing a civil case is not the same as a criminal conviction.

A jury of his peers ruled.

>
> > Further, he faces 91 further criminal charges in 4 separate cases,
>
> All politically-motivated persecutions.

Nope. Motivated by his actions.

>
> All that proves is that he should have crossed the Rubicon after the
> massive election theft of 2020 and started having lots of Democrats
> put up against the wall and shot.

Listen to yourself.

On 4/4/24 9:10 AM, Alan wrote:
> On 2024-04-03 18:51, Sn!pe wrote:
>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Only the MAGA cult disciples feel 'sorry' for the Orange Juju, every one
>>> else wants him safely in jail where he can't cause any more harm.
>>
>> While I'm impartial towards US politics as I regard both candidates
>> to be unspeakable, TINEOE.

This Is Not End Of Everything? Best I could come up with.

> Why?

Trump is better than Biden. Period. You vote against the greater evil.
Besides, did Trump actually hurt you when he was in?

--
Cheers, Bev
(On going to war over religion:) "You're basically killing each other
to see who's got the better imaginary friend." -- Rich Jeni

On 2024-04-04 09:44, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 4/4/24 9:10 AM, Alan wrote:
>> On 2024-04-03 18:51, Sn!pe wrote:
>>> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Only the MAGA cult disciples feel 'sorry' for the Orange Juju, every
>>>> one
>>>> else wants him safely in jail where he can't cause any more harm.
>>>
>>> While I'm impartial towards US politics as I regard both candidates
>>> to be unspeakable, TINEOE.
>
> This Is Not End Of Everything?  Best I could come up with.
>
>> Why?
>
> Trump is better than Biden.  Period.  You vote against the greater evil.
>  Besides, did Trump actually hurt you when he was in?

Trump is a lying, cheating, defrauding conman who is severely
compromised by Putin.

What did Biden do that actually hurt you?

Was it the falling unemployment?

The GPD growth.. ...the record stock market... ...what?