I try not to leap to conclusions about ethically questionable behavior. Sometimes, there's a perfectly simple, perfectly reasonable, explanation for something that looks like (for example) collusion.
It's just that I can't think of one, off the top of my head.
According to a Brian X. Chen article in today's New York Times, New York's attorney general is investigating why a "kill switch" hasn't been incorporated into smartphones.
Apparently, the major carriers (the AG is asking for "assistance" from AT&T, Verizon Wireless, Sprint, T-Mobile US, and US Cellular) have been reluctant to add the feature that Samsung has developed for its phones, which "would have allowed users to 'brick' their phones, or disable the devices remotely, to discourage criminals from stealing them."
Smartphone and tablet thefts have become increasingly popular, accounting for more than 14% of all crimes reported in New York last year.
Back at the dawn of time, a.k.a. the '80s and '90s, when I worked in the automotive industry, stealing high-end car radios was the popular crime of opportunity. Automakers and their sound-system suppliers developed removable radios that would be "bricked" (we didn't use the term, but that was the effect) if the correct code was not entered when the radio was powered up. And, surprise: radio thefts declined dramatically.
So why would wireless companies be reluctant to see this security feature added?
A Sprint representative said that the company was "working with" vendors to come up with a solution, and Verizon Wireless said that "it would support an antitheft tool for Android phones if and when a manufacturer came up with a solution." Hmmm.....
Meanwhile, San Francisco's district attorney said that he had reviewed emails between a Samsung executive and a software developer, which "implied that the carriers were concerned that the software would eat
into the profit they made from the insurance programs that many
consumers buy to cover lost or stolen phones."
Doesn't that look like a little flame in all that smoke?
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment