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

Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 734 posts

Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules

#611

Post by TACIXAT »

move-on-by wrote: post #44

I 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 was a long time Android user (and former Google employee) and this was the feature that got me to buy an iPhone.

Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules

#612

Post by fairity »

hef19898 wrote: post #302
pyrophane wrote: post #20

> Apple says in the coming weeks, it will update its iOS software for iPhones to require apps to get explicit consent to track what people are doing on their phones for the purposes of sharing it with third-parties. That's all they are doing. They aren't preventing companies from tracking users in this way. They are just requiring them to get permission. Says a lot about Facebook's business model that this is a cause…

Honest question here, as this story almost got me to buy an iPhone. And really don't like them, just a personal taste thing. If I don't install apps, say facebook, it can't collect this data right? So by being careful of what I install, and staying clear of facebook, which I am already, using an Android should have a similar effect, right? Or am I getting this wrong?

Not entirely, Facebook collects a lot of information about you when you're browsing third-party sites. This tracking is done through the Facebook Pixel, which is loaded via javascript on ~15% of sites you visit.

Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules

#613

Post by [deleted] »

ogre_codes wrote: post #598
ASalazarMX wrote: post #573

Earlier 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…

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 ver…

[deleted]

Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules

#614

Post by Infinitesimus »

zepto wrote: post #92
menacingly wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple would be a hero for threatening _its own_ significant revenue streams with a pro-privacy decision, not someone else's.

They have done. Apple could have also built a business around tracking their users and selling targeted ads etc. They have forgone all the revenues associated with such practices because in the long term, they think society won’t accept them.

For reference, they tried: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAd

Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules

#615

Post by m463 »

ogre_codes wrote: post #600
m463 wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

To disable ibeacon you turn off bluetooth and/or location services. I don't know about find my - it may locate other people's stuff no matter what you do. You can't really disable deep linking. If you get a text message with an amazon link, the amazon app will see it.

It is not apple's way to advertise this capability is available, and give you granular control.

Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules

#616

Post by giantrobot »

phabora wrote: post #585
firephreek wrote: post #553

"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…

Small business is just a propaganda tool. The idea has some allure, maybe because it reminds Americans of their priomordial beginning as settlers, homesteaders, yeomans, craftsmen (or so the stories go).

In real numbers most businesses in the US are "small businesses" because they have 500 or fewer employees. It says nothing about their financials though. A hedge fund managing billions of dollars, a start up with millions in VC funding, and a mom and pop florist are all "small businesses".

I'm definitely not disagreeing "small business" has been turned into a propaganda term. That process was helped by the silly tax classification of what's a "small business". A lot of marketing dollars go into making people think the mom and pop florist when they hear the term and not the hedge fund.

Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules

#617

Post by r00fus »

ChrisKnott wrote: post #39
whoisburbansky wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a nice bit of semantic ju-jitsu to say "they take this data and sell a service that wouldn't be possible without it" isn't the same as "selling this data," isn't it? Especially given that the targeting mechanisms don't have any k-anonymity guarantees, and I'm aware of at least one paper showing information leaks through the ad portal [1] https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_events/122...

Seems to me like you're more playing "semantic ju-jitsu" than OP. Facebook collect data to sell targetted adspace, they do not sell data. This is a plain fact.

No they just have surprise leaks of data through API usage like for Cambridge Analytica then say they were hacked, when it's all above-board.

Until/unless personal data becomes a liability for corporations they will continue to mine it and let us mortals deal with the fallout.

Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules

#618

Post by Daho0n »

multiplegeorges wrote: post #278
smilliken wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple also insists that you must use their payment services, you can't use a competitor's. the policies are designed so that they get a cut of all revenue in the ecosystem, that's effectively a tax.

> Apple also insists that you must use their payment services, you can't use a competitor's. Yes, you can. Put your app on Android. Done.

"Microsoft wasn't abusing it's monopoly. You could just use Linux!"

BS.

Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules

#619

Post by r00fus »

prepend wrote: post #469
lotsofpulp wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple released a $400 to $550 iPhone SE in Apr 2020 after years of not having an updated small phone option, so I imagine many who really wanted a smaller phone jumped on that. And then 6 months later they came out with 12 mini, so I wouldn’t expect a size able amount of demand for the 12 mini would have been sucked up by the new SE.

The SE is fantastic as it’s much cheaper and works well. I switched from an XS and years of latest models and forgot how much I love thumb reader over face. Apple Pay in particular is better with thumb reader instead of the tap, look at, tap again buggy process.

FaceID is great for me (and my aging parents), but not for some use cases (wearing masks, or starting usage while in pocket).

I could really get behind having both (esp if I could combined).

Re: Facebook is pushing back on Apple’s new iPhone privacy rules

#620

Post by zepto »

Infinitesimus wrote: post #614
zepto wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have done. Apple could have also built a business around tracking their users and selling targeted ads etc. They have forgone all the revenues associated with such practices because in the long term, they think society won’t accept them.

For reference, they tried: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAd

No they didn’t.

Ads don’t automatically imply data collection without consent.

They didn’t have data for targeting, which is possibly why they didn’t pursue it.

Post reply on HN