121–130 of 339 posts
I'm impressed (in a bad way) at the subtle emotional manipulation in the combination of "support businesses" and the header image they chose for this design.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's true, I forgot about that. I appreciate that those prompts don't highlight a particular option which tends to force you to read them. I wonder how often Apple will allow apps to re-request this permission when it's been denied; I have a handful of iOS apps that are constantly asking me to grant permission to see more of my photos, and I wish they'd rate-limit that kind of abuse.
It actually is. A while ago, someone (i think fb) produced an article that showed that to avoid the issue, they find it is best to show user their own similar screen, and only if the user clicks "yes", show the OS screen (cause for that one you only get one chance). I suspect you're seeing the apps' first "app-made" screen and not the OS one. Look carefully. If so, click yes there, and NO on the OS screen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree in principle, and so did I, but there's no denying that it puts a major crimp on your social life. It's wrong that people are forced to decide between accepting predatory terms or losing touch with friendly acquaintances. Also, if you own a small business, there's a real chance that you'd rely on Facebook for a significant portion of your business, because without a presence on their platforms you had may as…
> but there's no denying that it puts a major crimp on your social life In what way? Social lives existed before 2008 when FB went mainstream. I don't have a FB anymore, and I still text my friends for get-togethers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Remember though that this doesn't replace Apple's prompt!
That's true, I forgot about that. I appreciate that those prompts don't highlight a particular option which tends to force you to read them. I wonder how often Apple will allow apps to re-request this permission when it's been denied; I have a handful of iOS apps that are constantly asking me to grant permission to see more of my photos, and I wish they'd rate-limit that kind of abuse.
They do. Observe that apps will prompt you in-app, and only if you indicate you're open to it will they invoke the system prompt, which will only trigger from the app a single time before you have to change it from the system preferences pane.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It actually is. A while ago, someone (i think fb) produced an article that showed that to avoid the issue, they find it is best to show user their own similar screen, and only if the user clicks "yes", show the OS screen (cause for that one you only get one chance). I suspect you're seeing the apps' first "app-made" screen and not the OS one. Look carefully. If so, click yes there, and NO on the OS screen.
Wouldn't this be against the Apple TOS? Might want to report application that are using this kind of dark pattern.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People like you and I didn't decide that it was what we wanted. We just have no other options, because the companies which impose the terms aggressively snuff out or buy up their competition. I would argue that people are accepting these terms under duress; "consent" is the wrong word. The market believes that Facebook et al will be able to continue enforcing their will unilaterally, and that is good for the companie…
Everyone has options. I deleted FB years ago. No one actually needs FB.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's true, I forgot about that. I appreciate that those prompts don't highlight a particular option which tends to force you to read them. I wonder how often Apple will allow apps to re-request this permission when it's been denied; I have a handful of iOS apps that are constantly asking me to grant permission to see more of my photos, and I wish they'd rate-limit that kind of abuse.
It actually is. A while ago, someone (i think fb) produced an article that showed that to avoid the issue, they find it is best to show user their own similar screen, and only if the user clicks "yes", show the OS screen (cause for that one you only get one chance). I suspect you're seeing the apps' first "app-made" screen and not the OS one. Look carefully. If so, click yes there, and NO on the OS screen.
The dialog I am constantly seeing is this one, which seems to come from the OS: https://i.imgur.com/7JGotq3.png
Now that iOS allows you to share only some photos with apps (which is great) I see this before practically every photo selection dialog in third-party apps. My choice here doesn't affect my ability to share a single image with the app in that moment; they just want to suck my whole library of photos in for background processing. I'd very much like to not see this dialog more than once a month.
You can't read the article without going via Google's AMP servers, unless you use a website like https://printfriendly.com to parse it for you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone has options. I deleted FB years ago. No one actually needs FB.
> No one actually needs FB. No one actually needs a car either. Or to eat industrially produced food. Or etc. etc. "Nobody actually needs X" where X is a thing that empirically a huge percentage of people do, is I suspect never a compelling argument. edit: bordercases brings up a good point, I picked particularly entrenched/difficult areas for examples but it wasn't necessary. My point was more about the futility of…
Facebook is only ~15 years old and it deals mostly with aggregating text-based communications from people that feel the compulsion to post almost entirely because it's there. And they don't need Facebook, they just need the functions it provides; there was a time when these functions would have been split up into separate services until they were acquihired or integrated.
And although Facebook is monolithic, its monopoly is primarily enforced by network effects and conventions. Shit happens, like stock rallies or privacy scares. Facebook might still be around but the exodus of e.g. WhatsApp to Signal still shows the power of close substitutes to challenge what is "necessary".
There's also nothing fallacious in your counterargument. Both cars and industrial farming are being challenged in their own right. Cars for issues behind pollution and sprawl (resulting in ride-sharing, electric cars and transit) and industrial farming for its ethics and chemical impact on the environment (organic food, veganism, greater awareness of bioaccumulation of pesticides and microplastics). In educated circles these have become widely considered as Good Things, but would involve challenging the assumption that things we take for granted as necessary are actually so. That's just progress.
