61–70 of 169 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if Apple is protecting its customers from everyone except Apple. I really can't trust any closed-source OS, and very few closed-source applications.
A lot of macOS is open source. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15251891 https://developer.apple.com/opensource/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if Apple is protecting its customers from everyone except Apple. I really can't trust any closed-source OS, and very few closed-source applications.
That sounds like irrational threat-modeling based on paranoia: you're so focused on one concern (abuse by a closed-source vendor) that you're accepting routine abuse by other vendors to avoid the theoretical abuse. Your concern seems like a security negative. Also, Apple has demonstrated a great deal of care in the statistics we know they collect, eg by making it impossible to determine your actual input while collec…
Who? Who do you think I accept abuse from?
Were there a publicly-traded company that manufactures small violins (preferably the one that makes "world's smallest"), I'd go long on their stock right now. I mean, who do they expect to persuade with this? Is there anyone not tied to the adtech industry shouting, "Damn you, Apple, and your assault on open web standards!" 'cuz me, I'm thinking, "without even reading the article, if the ad industry is upset about it…
Is there any reasonable response to this besides, "yeah, go fuck yourself"?
This is bullies crying that their victim didn't show up by the flagpole at 3pm for his beating.
I sincerely hope they go out of business -- these companies are toxic and canerous. But that's a rant long enough to fill a book.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That sounds like irrational threat-modeling based on paranoia: you're so focused on one concern (abuse by a closed-source vendor) that you're accepting routine abuse by other vendors to avoid the theoretical abuse. Your concern seems like a security negative. Also, Apple has demonstrated a great deal of care in the statistics we know they collect, eg by making it impossible to determine your actual input while collec…
That sounds like irrational threat-modeling based on paranoia: you're so focused on one concern (abuse by a closed-source vendor) that you're accepting routine abuse by other vendors Who? Who do you think I accept abuse from?
Or the terribleness of Android (-- I certainly wouldn't pick it over iOS for security reasons).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Privacy is important, but breaking the functionality of cookies is the wrong way to address it. Not all cookies are used for tracking. Be prepared to start losing your settings in web apps or being logged out after 24 hours if you use Safari. What's more, the claim that Apple is doing this for the sake of user trust is a lie. The real reason they're breaking the functionality of cookies is the same reason they refuse…
... what the hell did I just read. Let me correct the record so those that end up here don't actually buy into this. > Not all cookies are used for tracking. No, but third-party cookies are basically used for tracking. A legitimate site does not depend on a third-party cookie to handle features or login. At all, full stop no ifs, ands, or buts. > Be prepared to start losing your settings in web apps or being logged o…
I'd point out that in the case of DocuSign signing sessions powered by iframes that without being able to set this third party cookie prevents the session from loading. Probably the only use case of a third party cookie being useful that I can think of.
I have never seen such a group so spoiled as marketing peeps. These guys and gals demand blood from stones to justify their "spend", and have been single-handedly responsible for so much of the web's dark patterns and annoyances.
Anything to cast these louts back to the stone age is a good innovation. Once advertising goes back to products selling you on themselves, and not this emotional "lifestyle" BS, we can throw the marketeers a bone. Until then, piss off!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of macOS is open source. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15251891 https://developer.apple.com/opensource/
Unless I can build and install a completely custom version, it isn't open enough to be safe.
You can't win. Make compromises that are reasonable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Privacy is important, but breaking the functionality of cookies is the wrong way to address it. Not all cookies are used for tracking. Be prepared to start losing your settings in web apps or being logged out after 24 hours if you use Safari. What's more, the claim that Apple is doing this for the sake of user trust is a lie. The real reason they're breaking the functionality of cookies is the same reason they refuse…
... what the hell did I just read. Let me correct the record so those that end up here don't actually buy into this. > Not all cookies are used for tracking. No, but third-party cookies are basically used for tracking. A legitimate site does not depend on a third-party cookie to handle features or login. At all, full stop no ifs, ands, or buts. > Be prepared to start losing your settings in web apps or being logged o…
Sites which use Disqus, or similar, for comments.
I hate Disqus with a passion and wish horrible flaming death upon it, and am actually quite pleased that this will break it. But nonetheless it's a "legit" use of third-party cookies to provide a feature (remembering login on an embedded commenting engine).