But that still has the same result, doesn't it? "Anti-theft" measure doesn't prevent the theft, only prevents third party repairs.
The average thief probably doesn't even distinguish between Apple and Android phones. A literal pickpocket is only going to have as information the outline of a phone-shaped thing in your pocket. If they lift it off of you and can't use it, they've still stolen it.
I can tell at a glance if someone's on an iPhone or not. I can't as similarly which generation they're on.
The FCC, at the very least, seems to find merit in the deterrence value of such measures [1]. (From a purely-retributive standpoint, I find some satisfaction in knowing someone stole a brick that needs to be parted out, versus getting a working device.)
> I can tell at a glance if someone's on an iPhone or not.
How? Most people have a phone case and then all you can see is the case. Pretty much all modern phones are the same shape.
> The FCC, at the very least, seems to find merit in the deterrence value of such measures
People don't like it when someone steals their phone, so they demand the government Do Something, so the government proposes to Do Something, regardless of whether the something is effective. Classic politician's syllogism.
> From a purely-retributive standpoint, I find some satisfaction in knowing someone stole a brick that needs to be parted out, versus getting a working device.
The modern world isn't any fun. "I willingly compromised my own ability to repair my phone so a hypothetical thief might be put out."
People should be carrying around decoy phones that are full of sticky glitter and skunk scent, boobytrapped with blasting caps. If you're going to take revenge then do it well.
The average thief probably doesn't even distinguish between Apple and Android phones. A literal pickpocket is only going to have as information the outline of a phone-shaped thing in your pocket. If they lift it off of you and can't use it, they've still stolen it.