Asking for consent or informing about tracking is bullshit. I would bet 99% "voluntary conscious consent" is either not conscious or not voluntary. People just are given no real choice (they would be denied service or forced to go through an intimidating configuration dialog if they object) and/or have no actual idea about what does that really mean.
Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules
591–600 of 734 posts
Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules
#592Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you cared about ethical treatment of labour in China, presumably you’d prefer to buy products from a company that rigorously audited its supply chain, excluded suppliers they caught violating it, ensured workers were paid above average industry wages and had below average suicide rates in their suppliers, right? Presumably if you were going to criticise companies using Chinese suppliers, a company like that wouldn…
I don't know why people are like this. You can be pro human rights and also not dedicate your entire life to supply chain audits. I'm making a point that the largest company in the world not only does so but actively took steps to ensure they wouldn't be legally prevented from doing so in the future.
This is not correct, I've seen it said here several times so I looked into it. Apple lobbied for some amendments to the act on the grounds of practicality but did not oppose it and said they thought it should become law.
Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules
#593Asking for consent or informing about tracking is bullshit. I would bet 99% "voluntary conscious consent" is either not conscious or not voluntary. People just are given no real choice (they would be denied service or forced to go through an intimidating configuration dialog if they object) and/or have no actual idea about what does that really mean.
The point is to introduce some friction into app developers using these methods, by informing users what's possible.
It's disgusting what some apps do to slurp off personal information, that they are only able to get away with because users don't understand whats at stake.
Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules
#594Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that the most used phrasing of "selling your data" is factually wrong. On the other hand, I think it is approximately true enough for the general public. 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…
But that still means a real estate agency doesn’t have my address, and the painter doesn’t have the list of shoes I have bought. Only being able to show me ads in some apps is a comically narrow way of way of “having sold all my data”, akin to “Thugs have sold my house” for “temporarily skinny-dipping in my swimming pool while we were on holidays”. Not nice, but they didn’t sell my house, and Facebook didn’t sell my…
I don't think the analogy helps. Digital goods can be sold infinitely many times, unlike your house. Explaining the difference between selling data and selling a service enabled by that data is not as easy as it sounds. It means that a real state agency doesn't have to know your address to assess how much your property is worth - someone else is doing the math and connecting you and them.
Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules
#595Earlier quoted context omitted.
I could be wrong, but I think the argument is against the framing of "do you want this app to track you" being one-sided, rather than against an opt-in interstitial in general. E.g. if anti-vaxxers started pushing a campaign saying "doctors want to stab your arms with needles", I'd expect a similar pushback from the medical community about the perception-coloring of this phrasing (even if it's technically true). In b…
I think the prompt's phrasing is completely fair, especially since facebook can make their case in their pre-consent screen and in the string in the system popup.
This is a fair point. I hold that there are still scenarios in which opt-in text could sway users one way or another, but given that individual apps can make their case before the user sees the interstitial here, I don't personally see anything wrong with the phrasing of "Can this app track you?"
Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules
#596I don't have Facebook and I'm generally skeptical of Apple's pro-privacy messaging. However, seeing this response from Facebook has gotten me very excited for this update. There must be more to it then Apple's generic 'Most Advanced Update Ever' marketing. I'm still skeptical of Apple's commitment to privacy, but I'm certainly happy to get this update. Apple should thank Facebook for the free marketing.
> I'm generally skeptical of Apple's pro-privacy messaging That's a very healthy attitude towards Apple's claims. They developed all these APIs that allow app makers to spy on their users, and then blame the app makers for spying. For example, why does any app need to know which other apps I have installed, and how long I use them? This permission should very sparingly pass the review process, and only for apps in sp…
Android allows apps to list other apps installed.
IOS does not allow this.
The premise of your post is incorrect, and you should issue a correction and an apology to the HN community for posting ignorant horseshit.
Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules
#597Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's probably hard to fathom now but while working at Chevron in 1990 / 1991 the two smokers in my group got their own office so no one else had to share with them while they smoked at their respective desks. Thankfully they kept the door closed, but any time you had to go in there everything - the walls, the ceiling, their keyboards and monitors, their books - everything had an odiferous brown patina. It was like wa…
I had to do some work at a customer datacenter, which was a converted print/mainframe room in a 70s high-rise with lots of windows. The customer had built a wall blocking all of the windows in the late 80s (this was circa 2000), we had to go in the the area inbetween.... 10-15 years of no interior cleaning and high temps resulted in these weird formations of tar drips. It almost looked like a cave formation. Absolute…
Hahahhaah. That's cool and disgusting at the same time. A former coworker shared with me he was tasked to investigate why the mainframe was throwing errors only at night. He discovered a couple of operators were rolling a couple and then disconnecting the air ducting to the mainframe to use as a covert way to vent their own exhaust.
Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules
#598I don't have Facebook and I'm generally skeptical of Apple's pro-privacy messaging. However, seeing this response from Facebook has gotten me very excited for this update. There must be more to it then Apple's generic 'Most Advanced Update Ever' marketing. I'm still skeptical of Apple's commitment to privacy, but I'm certainly happy to get this update. Apple should thank Facebook for the free marketing.
> I'm generally skeptical of Apple's pro-privacy messaging That's a very healthy attitude towards Apple's claims. They developed all these APIs that allow app makers to spy on their users, and then blame the app makers for spying. For example, why does any app need to know which other apps I have installed, and how long I use them? This permission should very sparingly pass the review process, and only for apps in sp…
Why does an app need to know which other apps you have installed? Because it might want to interface with those apps obviously. Apple has actually ratcheted down permissions on that API because it was abused.
People want apps to be able to do things and those things can often allow tracking in addition to being useful to the user. There is pretty much one API Apple devised specifically for tracking users and this very issue is Apple attempting to shut down.
Clarification: Just to be clear, Apple isn’t shutting down the API entirely, they are changing it from opt-out to opt-in.
Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules
#599"Personalized Ads for Small Businesses" What a bunch of malarkey. I've worked in ad space and the actual ability for SB's to compete is laughable. Their budgets are so comparatively small that they simply don't get the assistance necessary. They're drinking through paper straws while the big dogs swim in lakes. SB's absolutely need a platform to compete, but I'm absolutely incredulous that FB is that platform, much l…
For a small business that’s been very successful through word-of-mouth and is now gearing up to begin marketing that includes online advertising:
What tools or platforms for advertising are a better fit for small business in your mind?
Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules
#600Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm generally skeptical of Apple's pro-privacy messaging That's a very healthy attitude towards Apple's claims. They developed all these APIs that allow app makers to spy on their users, and then blame the app makers for spying. For example, why does any app need to know which other apps I have installed, and how long I use them? This permission should very sparingly pass the review process, and only for apps in sp…
Not only do they develop these technologies (wifi location db, ibeacon, deep linking, findmy, etc) They don't give you the ability to block them. and of course, you can't find out what is going in and out of your phone over the network, and you definitely can't firewall it. ("content blockers" are nerfed)
You can disable almost all of those things in one way or another.
The problem is all of these things you mention are also useful for things users want. Often they are useful for things users want inside their applications. Nobody wants a neutered OS.