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

Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

foundation.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 403 posts

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#371

Post by pabs3 »

jefftk wrote: post #275
thesuitonym wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but if you had headless browsers loading the ads on your site no one would be able to tell that those views were not from real users. There is literally nothing in the world I care about less than this.

Of course you don't care about it directly, but it is part of a chain that funds things you probably do care about? Advertisers pay publishers to show their ads to real users. Publishers run their sites because they receive money from advertisers. We visit the sites because they're diverting/informative/useful/etc. If the advertisers can't tell whether their ads are instead shown to robots, the whole thing falls apar…

Shouldn't advertisers instead care about the acquisition cost per customer and revenue per customer? Do publishers not offer pricing based on these things?

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#372

Post by wyattpeak »

forrestthewoods wrote: post #370
wyattpeak wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The 10 billion they get from Google constitutes 16% of their annual profit. You're playing funny buggers with figures there. According to your standard the sales of physical devices constitutes over 350% of their annual profit.

Yes, gross revenue is larger than net income. Particularly when manufacturing is involved. The $10B Google money is basically pure profit. It costs Apple nothing. Maybe a few million in lawyer time to negotiate the fee each year. Hardware sales generates enormous revenue and also very large profit. I believe more than half of Apple’s profit is still hardware sales. But they’re working very hard to increase their serv…

> The $10B Google money is basically pure profit. It costs Apple nothing.

If they didn't spend all that money on producing the phones they'd have nothing to sell to Google. You can't meaningfully divorce the two, all profit centres of a business rely on the cost centres.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#373

Post by fomine3 »

briandear wrote: post #283
rndgermandude wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could be microtransactions/in-app purchases-as-a-microtransaction, it could be subscription based models, it could be "media flat rates" (cross publication subscriptions), or something else entirely. A lot of content, especially newspaper/magazine articles, at least here in Germany, already are paid-only, either through subscriptions or both subscriptions and alternatively microtransactions (mostly more in-depth r…

But there there are people that intentionally bypass paywalls. Almost every article posted on HN behind a paywall has a user “neonate” who posts a paywall circumventing link. Then we collectively complain about advertising and paywalls. There is a large number of people that seem to think that all content should be free and that the people creating it are somehow a charity. I am ok with paywalls, but I don’t like to…

I pay for a few paid news but I'm not fine with paywalls. It blocks non-subscriber's access, that's the problem. Obviously no one can subscribe all subscriptions, a few is max for most people. Ads is far better in this time. I wish Apple News' approach is getting popular.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#374

Post by rahoulb »

filoleg wrote: post #298
giancarlostoro wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen articles that defend this by stating Facebook buys debit card data, but then I was shown an ad about something extremely niche, like way out there... Aircraft pavement, specifically for aircraft hangars. One single comment was mentioned to me 8 hours prior... Involving aircraft hangar gravel or something, I never googled it, I never have even thought about such a product in my entire life. Yet there was the…

> Involving aircraft hangar gravel or something, I never googled it, I never have even thought about such a product in my entire life. Yet there was the ad from a completely once in a lifetime conversation I had with someone. It's too damn niche to be coincidence. You might have not googled it yourself, but I bet the person you had that conversation with did. If the conversation took place in real life, then that per…

Absolutely this.

Facebook literally knows who your friends are. If your friend is interested in something there’s a good chance you are too.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#376

Post by account42 »

fumar wrote: post #217
coldpie wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be thrilled if online advertising became unviable as a business model. Most of what makes the web suck today (megabytes of javascript on every page; clickbait articles; outrage-driven social media; warehouses of PII waiting to be bought/sold/stolen) is because of advertising. Yes, I do want to pay for the services I use.

How would you pay for the services and content you consume?

> content you consume

Most content I consume is, like your comment, already shared by users without them receiving any compensation for it. It is usually someone who is not the content creator that profits from content on the internet.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#377

Post by raxxorrax »

ogre_codes wrote: post #338

Advertisers : The app eco-system would not exist without tracking!!! Reality : Commercial and free software has existed for 70 years and ad supported software only arrived in the past 20 years. The app/ software market will do just fine without tracking.

Only 15 years ago it was very unlikely an app phoned home. It was seen as a violation of trust. I hate those that changed this. They made confidential communication unfeasible for the vast majority of people without creating a benefit.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#378

Post by account42 »

avianlyric wrote: post #165
littlestymaar wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, less than a month ago all Mac apps worldwide refused to open because the listening service at Apple failed to respond, so you don't even have to look at the network to know that Apple is spying… Apple has access to all apps you open, your position, the content of your iCloud, etc. etc.

Yeah you might want to do a little more research on that topic as you clearly have no idea what your talking about. Incidentally did you know that web browsers tell certificate authorities about every website you visit that uses TLS with support for OCSP stapling.

> Incidentally did you know that web browsers tell certificate authorities about every website you visit that uses TLS with support for OCSP stapling.

OCSP stapling is exactly what enables the browser to verify the revocation status without contacting the cert authority. Also, not all browsers check OCSP.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#379

Post by fsflover »

user-the-name wrote: post #116
fsflover wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Freque...

I don't even see the issue of preventing third-party apps from tracking you addressed on that page, and that is exactly my worry with these kinds of projects: It is not clear to me that they even know what the threat model is. They do not seem to focus at all on the largest issues facing modern phone app ecosystems.

The threat model is the same as in GNU/Linux desktop I would say. It's probably less secure than Android (ignoring its proprietary bits), but is' improving.

Re: Apple’s Anti-Tracking Plans for iPhone

#380

Post by user-the-name »

fsflover wrote: post #379
user-the-name wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even see the issue of preventing third-party apps from tracking you addressed on that page, and that is exactly my worry with these kinds of projects: It is not clear to me that they even know what the threat model is. They do not seem to focus at all on the largest issues facing modern phone app ecosystems.

The threat model is the same as in GNU/Linux desktop I would say. It's probably less secure than Android (ignoring its proprietary bits), but is' improving.

Generally, Android is worse for privacy than iOS, and this is worse than Android.

So if one follows your advice to use this instead of iOS, you give up a LOT of privacy protection.

That does not seem like good advice to me.

Post reply on HN