Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

Post by duskwuff » Tue, Dec 15, 2020, 8:06 PM UTC

closeparen wrote: post #297

ogre_codes wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fraud prevention for example will get an order of magnitude harder, First Ad Fraud != Fraud. It is low grade hacking. Second. Trading the privacy of every iPhone user so that advertisers can prop up a sketchy/ poor industry is a terrible trade.

This completely changes the game on all kinds of fraud, not just ad fraud. Currently when you get caught, the service you’re abusing bans your device. To keep trying you need new hardware; attacks have a real monetary cost for the attacker. When your iPhone can present itself as infinitely many iPhones, this is neutered, and services will need different (probably more invasive) techniques to keep banned users away.

Post by rekoil » Tue, Dec 15, 2020, 8:21 PM UTC

fbelzile wrote: post #296

pwinnski wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple revenue for the last year was $275 billion. So you've listed 3.5%, 7%, and probably-rounds-to-0% of their revenue, which doesn't seem like it actually counters the original point.

As you correctly point out, those are revenue figures, not profit. $10 billion from Google out of $60 billion in profit is significant. Apple saying they 'care' about privacy while making +15% of its profits from Google alone is hypocritical.

Post by kergonath » Tue, Dec 15, 2020, 8:40 PM UTC

_the_inflator wrote: post #331

endymi0n wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having been on both sides of the table, I would slightly disagree here. Fraud prevention for example will get an order of magnitude harder, plus this move will further skew the playing field towards FAANG who have the resources to puzzle the scraps back together for decent conversion tracking with the help of logins, IPs, SDKs with First Party IDs and a massive dose of machine learning.

I agree here. Apple's privacy changes might seem like a good idea from the outside, but essentially or paradoxically leads to higher entry barriers for new competitors and cement the role the actual players have. However, we do not have experience with so-called "big tech." It is relatively new, iPhone came to light in 2007. So I regard Apple's measurements as another experiment, and we will see how things further ev…

Post by airstrike » Tue, Dec 15, 2020, 8:51 PM UTC

damnyou wrote: post #317

airstrike wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no reason Facebook can't charge Brazilians 5 BRL instead of 5 USD.

Sure. We're not talking about Facebook here, they'll be fine. We're talking about random sites and apps. How many apps on the Play/App Store actually implement differential pricing by region? This cannot be an afterthought—it must be the central question all advertising skeptics must start with.

Post by rekoil » Tue, Dec 15, 2020, 8:57 PM UTC

zepto wrote: post #308

elliekelly wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should be given the choice to turn it on though. I understand Apple not wanting to deal with the annoying customer who forgets their password, loses everything, and blames Apple. I’ve seen enough forgotten password people while waiting at the Genius Bar to sympathize with Apple. But just because some of their customers can’t handle the responsibility doesn’t mean none of their customers should have the option. I en…

I entirely agree with this, and I expect this is what will happen over time. But, just like with FileVault, the roll out will most likely be relatively slow and progressive.