Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google-backed groups criticize Apple's new warnings on user tracking

uk.reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 229 posts

Re: Google-backed groups criticize Apple's new warnings on user tracking

#101

Post by scarface74 »

rubber_duck wrote: post #97
scarface74 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is merely a “strategy credit”. Apple makes almost all of its money by people giving them money directly and them giving you stuff. They can afford to be privacy focused. If you’re okay with cheap, unpolished products where you are constantly being tracked and getting advertised to, buy a Google product. If you want products where you give the company money and they give you stuff - buy Apple.

>Apple makes almost all of its money by people giving them money directly and them giving you stuff. The story used to be "they are making money on hardware", then when that peaked it became "they are making money on services", once they peak in that market it's going to be "they are monitizing the content delivered through the ecosystem to provide a curated and safe experience" - it's all about showing growth an kee…

They have been making money off of curated content that you use with their hardware since 2003 when they introduced the iTunes Music Store. I’m still using my same Apple ID to purchase content from Apple that I used 17 years ago.

But that still doesn’t change the equation.

I give Apple money == they give me stuff.

Re: Google-backed groups criticize Apple's new warnings on user tracking

#103

Post by Gigablah »

jjcon wrote: post #69
izacus wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There’s also ad agencies not backed by Facebook or Google, but they’re not in the title either. Yes, and this is why the reporting is dishonest - it's feels like it's there to smear one company in the title instead of actually disclosing to us who the people are.

I don’t think it is dishonest - it is more interesting that Google is anti-privacy, everyone already knows this about facebook. Additionally Google is nearly 2x the size of facebook so it takes precedence. You can’t disclose everything in a headline so you lead with what you can.

Since when did the HN crowd start being apologists for clickbait and purposeful omission?

Re: Google-backed groups criticize Apple's new warnings on user tracking

#104

Post by gumby »

floatrock wrote: post #77
sudhirj wrote: post #3

> The group of European marketing firms said the pop-up warning and the limited ability to customize it still carries “a high risk of user refusal.” If you’re doing something and you know users are going to refuse to let you do it if they have the choice, don’t do it. Apple will give them a choice soon enough.

> Apple will give them a choice soon enough. And hopefully one not reliant on so many dark patterns. The OneTrust opt-outs are the worst (and don't even work! which must be against the california consumer privacy act). On my iphone in safari: say I'm cooking dinner and go to epicurious.com. Greeted with the now-standard opt-out banner at the bottom. 1. Click the "Do not sell my advertising" 2. Greeted with a giant Co…

That toggle does operate on non-mobile safari. Note that I said “operate” not “work”: you can flip the toggle, but the two choices are not labeled.

Since I pressed “do not sell my information” and then got the Condé Nast opt outs page, does that mean the state of the toggle is already “don’t share”? It’s deliberately impossible to tell.

Re: Google-backed groups criticize Apple's new warnings on user tracking

#105

Post by CyberDildonics »

kodablah wrote: post #100
CyberDildonics wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you misunderstood what they were saying. How can someone refuse if they don't have choice?

Exactly, the focus should be on avoiding what the user doesn't like, not just avoiding what the user doesn't like if there's a choice involved. If the Apple-made tool referenced in the article were subject to the same choice dialog, what might the result be? The simple presentation of the choice is what picks the winners, not the users' preferences.

That's exactly what he was saying. If users having a choice would result in them never wanting a certain behavior, it shouldn't be in there.

Re: Google-backed groups criticize Apple's new warnings on user tracking

#106

Post by oh_sigh »

koluna wrote: post #2

“Increase the chance of user refusal” - imagine that applied to literally any other context, such as bank accounts, credit cards, buying cars, etc. to see how ridiculous that statement is.

It can be relevant if the text is chosen which overly dramatic for what is happening. I'm sure I could write something about cookies which scares away most people from accepting them.

Re: Google-backed groups criticize Apple's new warnings on user tracking

#107

Post by oh_sigh »

banads wrote: post #26
koluna wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100%. And I love the fact that with Apple that agency slowly moves back to me - the ad industry can disappear overnight, and I don’t think life would get worse without it.

>the ad industry can disappear overnight, and I don’t think life would get worse without it If you're concerned about extreme materialism and the effect it has on the environment and mental health, then it seems life would not get worse, it would get better.

Have there been any studies showing that people buy fewer things when exposed to less advertising?

Re: Google-backed groups criticize Apple's new warnings on user tracking

#108

Post by fauigerzigerk »

papeda wrote: post #65
csmattryder wrote: post #11

It's cool to conciously see the death of an industry and watch as marketing firms fail to migrate away from traditional ads. You can whinge and whine, but progress stops for nobody. It's also great to see Apple building this into iOS, definitely a highlight of WWDC, for me. I often see the location indicator come on and wonder what else I'm not seeing.

There seem to be two conflicting lines of thought about the future of advertising. 1) Companies are learning that non-online advertising is not very worthwhile and so are reducing the resources allocated to, say, network TV ads. This has already happened to a large extent to print and radio advertising. This suggests that the future of online advertising is bright. 2) Companies are learning that online advertising is…

>Are companies just going to spend less on ads in general?

That's unlikely. Spending on advertising doesn't appear to change much as a share of GDP:

https://www.galbithink.org/ad-spending.htm

Re: Google-backed groups criticize Apple's new warnings on user tracking

#109

Post by frostwhale »

kergonath wrote: post #6

“Foxes complain about Apple improving hen house security”. As a user, Google and their advertiser puppets can go whistle.

The only caveat i'll add is Apple is providing ad software that doesn't trigger the double verification. This can be seen either as a push to force people to respect privacy(as their software does), or a push to control a larger share of the ad market (as the foxes here i'm sure believe)

Re: Google-backed groups criticize Apple's new warnings on user tracking

#110

Post by acdha »

bcrosby95 wrote: post #71
spacedcowboy wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference being agency. You intend to open a bank account, buy a car, etc. “you“ [for the majority definition of ‘you’] had no idea that you were being secretly tracked, and (clutches pearls) you might even object to that. This is lifting the stone that’s been lying in the grass for the last decade or so, and watching all the creepy-crawlers scurry away out of the light, desperate to find somewhere to hide thems…

Yes, by now everyone knows they are being "secretly" tracked since it's been in the news for the last decade. And yet privacy isn't a strong selling point for most people. It sounds like they have spoken and they don't give a damn about it.

In your bubble, people may be very aware of this but most people do not follow tech news very closely. There’s also a big gap in understanding what this means: I would bet that far more people know that Google or Facebook track everything you do on their sites than appreciate all of the tracking across the web, bulk credit card or email mining, and the many forms of smartphone-based tracking.

Finally, if the apologists are right and most people really don’t care, this wouldn’t be an issue because people wouldn’t opt out when given the chance.

Post reply on HN