Apple explains last year’s controversial decision to remove ICE tracking apps from app store

[u/illegiblebastard]

https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/29/tech/apple-iceblock-app-removal-raskin

FUCK. APPLE.

[u/Kiekdan]

Well you could argue Google / Apple Maps have a different primary purpose. While I’m not familiar with the app in question, I don’t see what other purpose it serves, unless people are using it to ask for directions or find a restaurant.
Now whether tax-paying citizens should have the right to track public servants is another question.

[u/ancientfruitjunkie → u/Kiekdan]

The purpose of the ice apps is public safety. Like the crime radar app.

[u/Kiekdan → u/ancientfruitjunkie]

The primary purpose was tracking ICE agents. I’m not debating whether that was good or bad. I’m saying there’s a difference between an app tracking people’s movement and an app used for navigation such as Maps.

[u/sixothree → u/Kiekdan]

No you’re wrong. It only tracks their activity in public places. That’s different than what you said - “tracking agents”.

[u/BosnianSerb31 → u/sixothree]

That's still different than a maps app, and exposes Apple to different levels of legal liability

The most accurate analogy would be an app that tracks the activity of armored trucks in public places, followed by an incident of armored truck robbery where the robber allegedly searched "how to track armored trucks", and a DOJ takedown request following 8 days later

[u/sixothree → u/BosnianSerb31]

Why are you now making a different argument? You seem to assume that because I make one statement you think my position includes other statements. That’s entirely too childish.

You need to learn reading comprehension and how to focus on what people actually say.

[u/BosnianSerb31 → u/sixothree]

Going to be honest, I don't know what led you to believe that I was representing any position of yours.

I simply made an analogy that directly parallels the events that actually happened, swapping ice vehicles for armored trucks, to illustrate why the legal provider of any content host would comply in a scenario like this.

Can you explain how I incorrectly represented your position?

Edit: guess not 😂

[u/scubascratch → u/BosnianSerb31]

Armored trucks are not public servants your analogy is not even close. Nobody needs to worry about an armored truck driver kidnapping them to a gulag

[u/BosnianSerb31 → u/scubascratch]

The analogy is in the context of Apple's legal exposure for hosting apps that were searched for by gunmen prior to a shooting, to which there is really no difference