Forced iAds Coming To OS X?
mario_grgic writes "Apple insider brings a story about expansion and renewal of a current 'Advertisement in Operating System' patent that Apple's Steve Jobs and other contributors have. The patent describes in detail (with OS X screen shots) how the forced ads would work (they would disable some OS functionality until the ad is viewed), but apparently it also applies to any device with a UI, including phones, TVs, set top boxes, etc. With Apple's recent entry into the mobile ad business, and its ambition to own half of all the mobile ads served during the second half of this year, it certainly makes one wonder if Apple would dare and put something like this in its desktop OS. I wonder if this would push more people to open source alternatives?"
With recent Apple entry into mobile ad business, and ambition to own half of all the mobile ads served in second half of this year, it certainly makes one wonder if Apple would dare and put something like this in its desktop OS. I wonder if this would push more people to open source alternatives?
I see what you did there. You made an unlikely assumption about how this patent would be used and then you turned it into an advertisement for open source. Well done. I hate Apple and Steve Jobs (smug bastard) vehemently but even I recognized that to be a highly contrived scenario and illogical statement.
But when I read the article, it seemed to make other assumptions about how this patent would be used. Assumptions that frankly make a whole hell of a lot more sense than asking users who have already paid a premium for an Apple desktop to watch iAds to further increase your profits. From the article:
Such a system could be used on computers placed in public places, allowing free access to the Internet on a terminal without paying a fee. Users could also choose to pay the fee and avoid the advertisements if they wish.
Huh. Imagine that. You know, when I walk through an airport I see people sitting around watching LCDs. And in between these CNN content sections are advertisements. That everyone seems to tolerate. I would wager that if you put in terminals with ads for internet access at airports, there would be an unending line to use them. Given that I only got free internet at an airport when Google felt generous last holiday season, I'd gladly use it and gladly watch ads.
... even a different carrier.
Furthermore I pay $75+ per month for a smartphone with a data plan. This is the cheapest option and it includes a 20% off employer discount. If you could cut this in half with this sort of ad crap in the OS, you just might convince me to hop off of my Android operating system and on to crApple
Like you, I am adverse to ad watching when I have already paid for something under the assumption I will be given unmitigated access to it. Like anyone else who has watched TV over the airwaves, I am interested in how you can reduce my financial liabilities via nominal time goblin advertisements and, while I'm certainly no economist, I believe that advertisements are very healthy for the economy. The market adjusts if they become too invasive or unhealthy (people revolt against the products using such tactics) but it results in more cash in my pocket to make more purchases with and entices me to make more purchases. Google's basically been minting money with them and has maintained a (for the most part) positive relationship with its consumers--despite those "consumers" being the very product they sell to other companies!
While I'm not a big fan of Design Patents (which I think this is), I think Apple could pull this off and generate some interest in yet further proliferation of ads. We all complain when we pay for something like a video game only to get DLC ads but I think if you popped a free ad laden iDevice into someone's hands they'd quit complaining fairly quickly.
My work here is dung.
I don't think this would be something implemented system wide, more than likely it could be iAds framework that developers could use when releasing free Mac Apps. Apple spends considerable time looking into user experience so something that would drive people away in droves is not likely to make it into OS X. Could also be a misleading patent that's really for iOS for Apple TV (which makes more sense to me). Something like free Movie/Music/Otherwise Paid content delivered via iTunes on Apple TV with need to watch the ads in order to keep viewing it, or pay up to download and have full access to that content. The same concept could apply to iTunes Store on Mac OS X.
.... ... }
int main (void) {
I wouldn't see this as a bad thing. It lets Apple improve their OS. If you have played World of Warcraft, you know Blizzard uses the subscription income to constantly create new content and features.
Besides, who can't take a 30 second break from computer every once in a while? Knowing Apple, the ads will be good and interesting to the viewer. This is really a non-issue. You will get to see interesting software or services (most likely tailored for you) and Apple can keep developing their OS.
Sign me up!
Wow. Way to spread the FUD.
It's magical, amazing, innovative, revolutionary! Sign me up! Glittering iGeneralities make me swoon!
Are you kidding? Apple users would take about 3 minutes to reboot their brains and then be all over the internet proclaiming how insanely brilliant this move would be. How the ads were fantastic and innovative proving (once again!) how far ahead of everyone else Steve Jobs is......and anyone who disagrees is just an Apple-hater.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
... its probably nothing that kill -9 couldn't solve.
I suspect it'll be some background daemon that kicks off some process every now and then and disables
some portion of the GUI while its at it.
My DVD player disables certain functions while it is playing advertisements.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
Wait a minute - if Apple has the patent on in-OS advertizing, does this mean that Microsoft will be unable to follow suit because Steve Jobs has ensured no one else but him gets to do it?
Phrase not found
Are your serious?
Stop harassing sopssa. You should be IP banned.
I can see that being exploited.
Advertising feeds are not generally considered high security. With a stop your OS type interrupt they are going to have to become very secure.
I think the other CEO Steve would happily sell you an OS without adware pre-installed. He usually leaves that up to the OEM or the stupid end-user!
"Be prepared, son. That's my motto. Be prepared." --Joe Hallenbeck
gut if it is, good buy Apple Mac.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I doubt Apple would do forced ads in OS X itself... but I could see iWork and iLife being free, albeit ad supported and perhaps other apps like Aperture or Logic Studio... sort of free with ads or pay for the full version. I could see the same thing in their movie trailers...
OSX & iOS users are not it. Frankly, pushed ads on those platforms would be suicidal - remember that Opera STILL has the millstone of ads around it's neck years after they went away. (Aside: I prefer Opera to every other browser - I still think it's faster then Chrome to boot). I think there is no way it would happen on their core cash cow machines.
That being said, as another poster put it above, TV & Video is where the next market is, and that's where these will come into play. That's why there's the fights over Flash & H264. I would put some good money on Apple building a 'custom' TV package for everyone. It would run under the iTunes banner and would basically be you pony up X dollars a month and get unlimited streaming video and audio. Meanwhile there will be ads before movies and TV shows begin, which have been targetted to you based on your show and movie preferences. Welcome to the world of "iTV: TV for me".
I call it 'The Aristocrats'
Not sure how it'd hurt apple to offer a free version of their operating system that is ad supported. I bet schools would even jump on this to start saving some money. Hell maybe Apple would cut them in on some fo the revenue for advertising to their captive teen audience.
I could imagine having the normal version of OS-X that you buy, and a "free" ad-supported version. Maybe even one that runs (legally) on non-apple hardware. It would be a great way to entice Windows users to try it out - and buy the full version if they like it.
...implying you'll still have root privileges on ad-OSes.
oh iAds... a dyslexic moment lead me to believe it was forced aids! forced aids would suck..
I've been seeing this garbage since Windows 95 SP2 was going to push ads to Active Desktop. Recycled news sucks.
To read this funny and insightful comment you must be signed in or view a series of advertisements:
- Click here to sign up for a premium account now (9.95 a month)!
- Click here for some other confusing options!
- Click here to view a long series of advertisements first in a useless attempt to see the comment.
- Click here to go back to Google and find some other site that has the same damn thing for free
Interesting how people are quick to jump on Apple for this, when Android and Chrome are created by an advertising company.
I don't know what kind of crack I was on, but I suspect it was decaf.
Steve Jobs' cancer is in remission. He interprets that at evidence he hasn't abused you enough.
I actually like this idea. It's an alternative for small application developers to make money on their hard work.
Same goes for the iPhone iADs - it's not going to pop up ads in mail or calendar - it simply provides an API for developers to write in ad serving space on their free applications. This is an alternative to actually charging people money for the software.
Way to incite a flamewar and bring out the fan boys...
I could see this being a big part of a new, updated Apple TV. Ad drive OS to dramatically reduce the cost of the set-top box to a price point where consumers won't mind paying for it (compared to the free set top box they probably get from their cable provider). Now, while watching tv, the viewer is "forced" to watch ads served up by Apple. Not that much different from the current situation but now with the added functionality that Apple will provide.
Maybe this is a way to subsidize MacOS X on non-Apple hardware? Like download a MacOS X 10.6 for Dell, and you get the crappy forced Ads.
I wonder if this would push more people to open source alternatives
Ads will not on their own push people to alternatives. You need two things before Joe User will switch:
Until then it doesn't matter. If OS X delivered electric shocks to its users at random intervals, they still wouldn't switch to something else if they didn't know there was a something else, or if they couldn't run their applications on that something else in exactly the same way they run it on OS X (and ditto for Windows).
In other words, in case you didn't get the memo, emulation options are not good enough for most users. As an example, most users would try Wine once (at most) and then never want to use it again because it isn't exactly the same as what they are used to.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
For all the Apple is great! bs that you read, their market share in the os area is still stuck at 5% +/- a tiny bit depending on the metric used. So really what you should be asking is 'will apple fanboys be offended by ads on their lap/desktops enough to go back to windows?' These are users which treasure ease of use and they aren't going to get that in any linux or BSD alternative.
in order for them to grab more OS marketshare... could the be using this patent to create a possible free MAC OS to distribute to the masses?
Good thing their motto is "don't be evil", so they won't abuse this capability.
whoops, that's them other guys.... awwww fuuuuuuuu
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Am I the only one that read that as forced iAids?
Did anyone else read the title as "Forced Aids Coming To OS X?".
While I'm no Apple fan, I was starting to think they were dirtier than I had previously thought.
Keep in mind that Apple has, in the past, crippled the ability of users to debug certain processes in Mac OS X -- processes like iTunes -- presumably because they had a vested interest in thwarting those users. What makes you think that they would allow you to run kill on a process that makes them money?
Personally, I want to say that this is just FUD. Much as I disagree with Apple's tactics, I do not think they would bother shoving iAds in Mac OS X; I think it is more likely that they will just shove iOS (with iAds) onto more product lines, and reserve OS X for their most expensive workstations.
Palm trees and 8
First line in the linked article (and it is even in bold):
Apple could be creating an operating system supported by advertisements, allowing users to obtain the software at a reduced price, or for free, in exchange for being required to view ads.
Subby's summary:
Forced iAds Coming To OS X?
Sure, forced ads for those that bought the subsidized copy of the OS. You get what you pay for.
"they would disable some OS functionality until the ad is viewed"
Were something like this to happen on my system, I wouldn't be mad.
I'd be livid! As in "get a gun, drive to Cupertino and kill everyone responsible for this".
MY machine.
My screen.
You don't simply turn off parts of my OS as a goad to make me do what you want me to.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
... its probably nothing that kill -9 couldn't solve.
. . . he smugly thinks until he hears the words "I can't let you do that, Dave."
I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
in 5 years most of the country will have a multicore computer with 4g wireless in their pocket
I disagree that this will become the case unless the price for a data plan starts dropping through the floor between now and then. I have a phone through Virgin Mobile USA on a $7 per month plan; I can wait for the Internet until I get home rather than paying $1,440 extra for two years of smartphone service.
I would gladly pay for not using Apple altogether (along Windows), instead of paying to skip ads
ads must NOT interfere with what I am doing, or the source of the ads will disappear in my area.
period.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Cool. The exploits should be interesting.
Anyone else read "forced AIDS"?
... guess so... it's on the tags .
Comcast had this crap on set top box for years apple is late. Come on add's on each page of the small 4:3 on screen guide that looks real bad on a HD as well.
http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/08/why_no_intel_in.html
If Apple won't put an "Intel Inside" sticker on a Mac forgoing millions of co-marketing dollars what makes anyone think they would integrate ads with the OS?
...implying you'll still have root privileges on ad-OSes.
OS X is still BSD-like under the bonnet (or hood, if you're a Merkin), so there's no reason why you can't set up a suitable shell script to deal with this. OS X still comes with a good range of shells by default: bash, csh, ksh, sh, tcsh and my favourite zsh.
Well sure, but not in our OSs. Only on TV and radio, and in magazines, and movies, and at ball games... and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts, and bananas and written on the sky. But not in OSs, no siree.
The illustrations and scenarios are probably bogus to make people think this will apply to Mac OS X and for a completely different purpose. Read the patent carefully (patent #20090265214), and you'll see it applies directly to iAds.
Claim 1. A computer-implemented method for operating a device, the method comprising: disabling a function of an operating system in a device; presenting an advertisement in the device while the function is disabled; and enabling the function in response to the advertisement ending.
When you view iAds, the functions of the OS are "disabled" (that is, until you dismiss the iAd). The OS is reenabled once the iAd is dismissed.
Claim 5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising selecting the function among a plurality of functions before each advertisement presentation.
Sounds like iAds.
Claim 12. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising presenting in the device a user-selectable control that when activated triggers at least one selected from the group consisting of: causing presentation of a page from an advertiser associated with the advertisement; recording a user rating of the advertisement; again presenting the advertisement; sharing the advertisement with another user; initiating a transaction for user purchase of a product that eliminates the presentation of advertisements on the device; postponing presentation of the advertisement; causing the advertisement to be presented ahead of schedule; causing a previous advertisement to be presented; causing a preview of a subsequent advertisement to be presented; causing an overview of all available advertisements to be presented; and initiating a transaction for user purchase of a product or service to which the advertisement relates.
Yup, iAds.
If you've never applied for a patent, you don't understand this weird world.
Of course, there is the case that Apple will never use this patent. Most patents applied for are never used
I can say that if they were to implement that patent in this fashion they can kiss me good bye for good. But, like others here, i think that the poster is misinterpreting where this is headed.
Only time will tell of course.
As a side note i detect some hypocrisy here as i remember when the rumor was that Linux laptops/desktops would be coming out that would be subsidized with ads everyone applauded. ( well not everyone.. i for one didn't )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
In 20 years you will receive an implanted lens (iLens)at birth showing you commercials each time you blink ;-)
Reminds me of Ghost in the Shell's "Stand alone complex" where in our case the "adds industry" has gotten a life of it's own. Commercials for the sake of itsself.
I am more inclined NOT to get the product if i stumble across an add. If you need the add to sel it, there is something wrong with your product.
Message from god, Please logoff, rebooting the Universe
Forced Ads. ...of course I'm talking about AOL. ...what did you think I was talking about?
Content controlled by the vendor.
Clicks tracked and used to direct market to me.
And I paid for the privilege by the byte.
Yes, and how is that working out for you in your iPhone?
JailBreaking is something different, as it requires basically patching the kernel after a buffer-overrun attack.
-dZ.
Carol vs. Ghost
i keep an reading aIds..... cant avoid it
Yes, and how is that working out for you in your iPhone?
What iPhone? I'm talking about computers, not media consumption boxes encumbered with crippleware.
All cows will have bells. Bells will ring from sea to shining sea. - Smiling Ad Guy.
The point is that the same "BSD-Based" OS is in those devices as in the current Mac computers, so its lineage has little to do with how the hardware is adapted to support a version of the OS where ads are forced.
-dZ.
Carol vs. Ghost
"Click here to go back to Google and find some other site that has the same damn thing for free" ...back to google?!? Might as well just view the long series of advertisements then.
Unfortunately, even on a Mac you still get the "MS office 30 day nag trial".
"I reject your reality and substitue my own." ~ Adam Savage, Mythbuster extraordinaire.
Finally, a patent that I want the claimant to hold, so that others do not try to reproduce it.
My exception safety is -fno-exceptions.
I can't imagine this that would be so bad. People would defiantly be build an OS ad blocker. This would defiantly turn users off users to the Mac that's like asking for problems.
http://www.thetechnologygeek.org
for the Apple patented Liquid-Cooled Laptop, you know, the one with the Apple patented chameleon computer case, and the Apple patented Rotary Mouse hooked up to it?
If this comes to pass, where do I turn in my fanboy card?
Anon@work boss reads /.
Just don't use it. No need to go on a rampage; vote with your dollars.
so yeah, why not sell malware to people - and why not build it into the damm os...?
to be perfectly honest nothing would surprise me about what apple gets away with - their customers are the most perfectly evolved and trained idiots you could hope (not) to find.
the seriously-sad cock-sucking apple fans that habitually post comments on this site are extreme examples, but they're certainly indicative.
Then all the free Internet and free computer programs in the early 2000's. You had to watch ads in exchange for the free Internet access or free computer.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
I agree-- my first thought was that this OS would be a "free" competitor to Windows, and be geared to work on hardware that currently runs XP (netbooks too). This would cannibalize some MacBook sales, but it's got to be focused on those with no pending plans to purchase new hardware. A more user-friendly partitioning/dual-booting option (plug-and-play download?) would allow reluctant adopters to get the OSX experience without having to drop their current systems and purchase Apple hardware. Becoming familiar with and dependent on OSX would create a significant foothold in a market that Apple just can't crack with hardware sales alone, which is the first step on the path to expanding the hardware market. To clarify, the OSX market share is still 10%, and this would get people switching to Apple software in a big way, while also intimately advertising Apple hardware and perhaps another more robust version of OSX on the Mac to a wider market. From a business standpoint, I don't think there's any question that people who already own Apple hardware aren't the target market of the proposed ad-supported OS. If it is indeed the case, then *#(@!&$ YOU APPLE!!!
You're a fuckin' moron and a bigot to boot.
I know I will absolutely NOT tolerate having to view ads on a device that I have bought & paid for. To view content that someone has spent money developing..sure.. but if I've paid for the device, and I've paid for the O/S, ads will *NOT* be welcomed.. and it is something that would cause me to put Linux on my Macbook over.
If this ever happened to me, there wouldn't be much of a decision-making process. I'd either roll back the OS to a version that actually works (eg doesn't have the ad shit), disable the ad thing somehow (even if it means going crazy with the hosts file), or, failing all of that, just install Windows on my mini.
I did the same thing with tynt.com - That it's an ad/analytics thing is one thing. That the assholes break twenty-plus years of clipboard DWIM in the process, however.... unforgivable. Absolutely unforgivable. Fortunately, you can add tcr.tynt.com to your hosts file - problem solved.
So most people are talking about the OS. Apple is not so stupid to put the iAd platform into a computer operating system. What they are capable of is putting the iAd network into Apple TV. Correct me if I am wrong here, but Apple TV and the iPhone both run OSX of some sort. It is brilliant, and people should look at the possibilities here. All of the talk of Apple releasing a $99 Apple TV is great if they can get the content for the device. They have built a huge data farm, have been working with TV and Movie studios and now have a viable advertisement platform to support the TV and Movie content on the reduced cost Apple TV which can be subsidised through advertisement revenue.
Look at the long term here and don't just freak out about the possibility of something never happening. They put ads on a Macbook or a iMac, they stop selling computers. The idiots of the world will not even stand for that.
If you don't even know what WINE stands for and you're not aware of the subtleties of this kind of software, it doesn't look like you are qualified to publicly bad-mouth it.
Just blot out the ad servers at the router level. Unless of course they make the operation of the software conditional upon being able to connect to the ad server.
But there are ways around that too.
I could see this if the OS were free. However, if they're going to charge me $130 freakin' bucks, I better not see any ads!
Build up Apple until it becomes richer than god, force iAds on consumers while simultaneously he sells and shorts apple stock. Otherwise there would be no point.
I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
Hey great article and good guesswork about its purpose/implementation.
I'd just like to add that it may be more about the iPhone then anything else. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the only reason to 'force' ads onto consumers and have those consumers accept this... is if the consumer is saving money in some way.
To me this seems perfect for the iPhone... which can be expensive. To further increase potential consumer base, apple could offer a discount iPhone with the forced advertising built in. This could make things cheaper for the buyer which is willing to accept these ads in return for the savings.
Another usage could be for long distance calling. Where iPhone users could make calls for free or reduce their long distance usage bill by allowing ads to be 'forced' upon them.
Now maybe it has nothing to do with the iPhone, because really it is just a patent filing and means nothing to us now. ie: we are all guessing. And this patent may never be used or just held by apple as protection against others doing this to their O/S.
good for apple: keeping their options open and securing their ideas through patents.
For years OS X has been free of malware and viruses. They've been feeling left out. So this is how they got back at windows users.
See, they are running on iOS/OSX-iAds beta version already.
If I ever get dumb enough to waste the money on an Apple machine again(I'd only done it before because A) Mac Os 8 was a superior product to winblows 95, B) the G3 processor was vastly superior to the P1 and P2, and C) Apple had done the smartest thing they'd done since going into business and opened up their OS licensing to 3rd party hardware vendors, thus allowing Power Computing to bring in another 100,000+ Mac OS users into the fold), I will want to install an iAd-blocker! Why (in the age of the internet, where if you want "ANYTHING" you can go online and find someone to buy it from) should I have to put up with ads that entirely disrupt my system, just so Apple can have another revenue stream? With 10's of billions in liquid assets you'd think that ol megalomaniacal Jobs could say..."hmmm I think we have enough revenue coming in....But NO, got to stash a portal into the OS itself to FORCE people to watch more fucking commercials!!! If Apple is going to be like that, I'll just stick to building my own boxes and install Ubuntu!
-Oz
hum
If Apple ever did anything as blatantly stupid as disabling peoples computers until they viewed some ads, they would go out of business immediately!! I for one, would nuke OSX in a heartbeat! And promptly (and happily) install linux on my Macbook so fast it would makes Mr. Jobs head spin like the "pinwheel of doom".
The advertising is initiated by the applications not the OS. The OS only provides the service. Buy for proper applications instead off pseudo-free applications and you would be save.
The advertising is initiated by so called "free" applications you might install in addition to the device you payed for.
Because the slashdot summary is little more than a steaming pile of FUD AND people are spazzing out all over the place and making wild assumptions, accusations and blind pro/anti Apple statements, I read TFA.
Please note, despite my nickname, I'm no fan-boy, however, I do use a Mac and an iPhone and I like the clean, well engineered look and operation of them both, so I use them. If another company and product offered something better, then I'd use THEIR products.
I also use Linux and am fluent in even modern versions of Windows despite having abandoned it in personal use around Windows 98...
So, lets get this train wreck a goin'.
From the appearance of the patent, it's going to be much like the iAd framework that is already in iOS 4 and it's going to be used on and targeted toward application developers that will be written for the desktop.
The disabling of "features" seems to be referring to the application features, like the ability to advance to the next level, save, print, etc...
Not a big deal really, it's basically nagware but with a unified OS-level enforcement right?
Right.
So, why am I now saying that if Apple implements this that I WILL abandon Mac OS X and figure out a way to convert fully to Linux.
I'm already mostly there, it's just several applications I require that are pinning me to commercal OS's, like Adobe's Creative Suite, which can not run on linux, hence it's currently regulated to my laptop and it's well used there with my Mac desktop of course being my main "grunt" machine.
That said, I will not allow such an atrocity of a framework to infect my desktop. I hate advertising... No, hate is far too wishy washy of a word... I LOATH advertising, with every fiber of my being I despise it.
I can stomach it on my iPhone by ignoring the banner or (preferably) buying apps without ads, but if you, as a software developer, are going to use this "Apple Approved and Provided" cripple-ware bullshit and FORCE me to waste time watching ads in order to use parts of your badly coded piece of SHIT, then you are sadly mistaken AND you've lost a potential customer. Forever.
If this is definitely going to be implemented in a future version of Mac OS X, this long time Mac user will pre-emptively abandon that operation system and immediately begin discouraging people from using OS X instead of offering it to them as a potential alternative.
This is not an empty threat. I can and will abandon your operating system, Apple, and it'll be just as complete and effortless as when I dumped Windows.
This signature is lame.
I doubt they dare. They are not desperate for cash, and they would be stupid, fucked-up fools to pull a stunt like that. Even though I've become quite a Mac fan over the years since I switched (from Linux, btw) one single OS-enforced ad on my screen would be enough for me to ditch the entire platform right then and there.
Yes, I hate advertisement. The line between regular ads and spam is very thin if you think about it, and we all agree that the death penalty is too good for spammers, don't we? Ad people aren't much better. And the second they force you to view ads, they cross the line.
I won't be running a spam OS, no matter if it's Linux, Windows or OS X behind the ads.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Suppose that you have shell acces.
Here you are, on your bash shell:
macos:~$ pgrep -f "obnoxious_adware_prog"
7638
macos:~$ kill -9 7638
bash: kill: - Operation not permited
macos:~$ sudo kill -9 7638
Haha! You wish
macos:~$
Worst. Idea. Ever.
I am not devoid of humor.