411–420 of 734 posts
If personalized ads are really so beneficial to their customers, Facebook should have no problem convincing them to allow the tracking they need and opt-in.
> Some apps, like Facebook, allow for some data tracking to be manually disabled. But by default, it is turned on. That gives the company reams of personal data on who we are and what we are doing, which it then vacuums up, packages and sells. My understanding is that Facebook does not sell this data, but rather lets advertisers create hyper-targeted ads, which are only possible because of this data. Edit: Certainly…
My understanding is that Facebook does not sell this data Selling the actual data and selling access to use the data is a meaningless distinction. Money changes hands. The data is used. Perhaps we should say "renting" the data. Just the way a hotel rents you a room, but you use it on the hotel's premises.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
everyone seems to conveniently forget about the absolute moral nightmare that is Apple’s supply chain No, everyone hasn't. Apple has its problems, too, and nobody denies that. But arguments like yours amount to no more than "Hey, look over there! Don't look at Facebook, look at this other thing!" Deflection. Whataboutism. Call it what you will.
What are you talking about? I am responding to someone calling Apple a hero. I did nothing other than to point out the fact that like many things in life, it's not that simple. There is no attempt to help Facebook or whatever you had in mind, that was your own projection. We can talk about 2 issues at the same time.
> Some apps, like Facebook, allow for some data tracking to be manually disabled. But by default, it is turned on. That gives the company reams of personal data on who we are and what we are doing, which it then vacuums up, packages and sells. Facebook would be giving away money if they ever actually sold your data. As everyone here knows, they use that data to target the ads that they sell. Do journalists phrase it…
I don't expect the usual reader to understand how that data is commoditized inside Facebook to serve better ads. Do you remember how a US Senator had a hard time understanding how ads allowed Facebook to remain free? People will not grasp without significant effort the ads economy and no journalist wants to take on that every time they write about tracking.
It's a tough situation. I'm not satisfied with how they do it, but I understand it's a limitation related to the medium and target audience.
In the long run this will be a net loss for the Apple customers whose experiences will likely suffer compared to Android and other players. Already in my subjective opinion Android on Pixel phones provides a much richer and engaging environment than iOS and the difference will only become even more pronounced.
Now it's a race. Will Apple superior hardware and privacy focus draw the majority of users before Google and others deliver clearly better software experiences, or whether the difference in software smarts will cause users to gravitate away from the walled garden of iOS and towards more permissive ecosystems.
The fact that Facebook appears to consider user consent an existential threat to their business model tells me everything I need to know about them right now.
> Some apps, like Facebook, allow for some data tracking to be manually disabled. But by default, it is turned on. That gives the company reams of personal data on who we are and what we are doing, which it then vacuums up, packages and sells. Facebook would be giving away money if they ever actually sold your data. As everyone here knows, they use that data to target the ads that they sell. Do journalists phrase it…
I think there's room to be charitable and that most people don't see a meaningful distinction between "sell ads based on your data" and "sell your data to people to use in ads".
My guess is over time most free apps that depend on tracking will refuse to work unless allowed to track. And most users will acquiesce, just so they can use an app that they want to use. Even the Facebook app itself could refuse to work unless tracking is turned on. It's still a positive change overall, and still affects Facebook but it appears to me the effect will be minor, even temporary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Between this privacy fight and the form factor of the iPhone Mini, there's a 90% chance my next phone will be an iPhone after more than a decade on Android. I'm done with this ad-sponsored trash ecosystem.
I'm worried the iPhone mini will be canned next update cycle. I wish I was in a position to buy one, but I only got an iPhone X in Jan 2020 to replace my dying iPhone SE with great reluctance. It's too soon for me to replace, as it works perfectly and I can't justify the cost or the waste. I just hope there's a mini iPhone in 2 or 3 years when I need to upgrade. I waited a long time for a new small iPhone and eventua…
Similar to how they let the Mac line languish for a while because it wasn't their top seller without realizing if they sleep on that segment it will hurt the iPhone in the long run.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, you literally are Apple’s product to their iOS developer ecosystem, in the sense that developers fork over 30% of their revenue to Apple for access to you.
No, that's not right. The app is the product, the customer is the buyer of the app, and the split of revenue is 70/30 (or 85/15 for small devs). Saying that developers are "buying" users makes no sense. Devs are not a customer of apple. If anything, devs are a supplier to apple. Since the net money flow is from Apple to Dev. As always, just follow the money.
(I’m not entirely opposed to this arrangement; I’m typing this on my iPhone. But I bought it knowing and accepting that I’m partly the product)