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

Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 160 posts

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#131

Post by GeekyBear »

kevingadd wrote: post #126
GeekyBear wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but I prefer the ability to do things like easily reverse fraudulent in app purchases, instantly cancel subscriptions without a hassle, and say no to location tracking without the app in question being allowed to drop functionality if I do so.

Tracking protection can and should be done at the OS level, not at the store level. Even Windows has this. Canceling a Fortnite subscription is as simple via them as it is on any other storefront: https://www.epicgames.com/help/en-US/fortnite-c5719335176219... So all that's left is reversing purchases. You can do that through your bank or credit card issuer for any fraudulent purchase, if you want Apple to act as tha…

> Tracking protection can and should be done at the OS level

How does the OS force an app not to disable functionality if you refuse to allow tracking?

>Canceling a Fortnite subscription is as simple via them as it is on any other storefront

Are we pretending that there is no such thing as a company that makes cancelling a subscription as difficult as possible?

>You can do that through your bank or credit card issuer for any fraudulent purchase

If you read the article linked above, one of the reasons Epic was fined half a billion dollars was that anyone who got their credit card issuer to reverse fraudulent purchases found that Epic banned accounts for that.

You seem to be ignoring reality here.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#132

Post by galleywest200 »

GeekyBear wrote: post #131
kevingadd wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tracking protection can and should be done at the OS level, not at the store level. Even Windows has this. Canceling a Fortnite subscription is as simple via them as it is on any other storefront: https://www.epicgames.com/help/en-US/fortnite-c5719335176219... So all that's left is reversing purchases. You can do that through your bank or credit card issuer for any fraudulent purchase, if you want Apple to act as tha…

> Tracking protection can and should be done at the OS level How does the OS force an app not to disable functionality if you refuse to allow tracking? >Canceling a Fortnite subscription is as simple via them as it is on any other storefront Are we pretending that there is no such thing as a company that makes cancelling a subscription as difficult as possible? >You can do that through your bank or credit card issuer…

They did get their money back, so that point still stands. They just happened to have their accounts banned for this.

However, this situation is likely due to corporate America's toxicity towards chargebacks which are commonly issued due to the corporation's incompetence or malice.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#133

Post by GeekyBear »

galleywest200 wrote: post #132
GeekyBear wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tracking protection can and should be done at the OS level How does the OS force an app not to disable functionality if you refuse to allow tracking? >Canceling a Fortnite subscription is as simple via them as it is on any other storefront Are we pretending that there is no such thing as a company that makes cancelling a subscription as difficult as possible? >You can do that through your bank or credit card issuer…

They did get their money back, so that point still stands. They just happened to have their accounts banned for this. However, this situation is likely due to corporate America's toxicity towards chargebacks which are commonly issued due to the corporation's incompetence or malice.

No, the point would stand if you could get a refund, cancel subscriptions, and withhold personal data from app developers without retaliation.

The app store allows these sorts of things today.

If you have other priorities, other device options exist.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#134

Post by robswc »

dagmx wrote: post #66
tyleo wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I don’t know what the big deal is with people in this thread saying, “bah, this is impossible” but I work on a COPPA compliant game and “chat off for kids by default” is absolutely a must.

It’s because a lot of engineers get hung up in the “oh there’s so many ways to defeat this” mindset, and forget that perfect is the enemy of good. Sensible defaults are a good enough start and many regulations like this are based around best efforts , not absolute perfection.

It seems so pointless though.

I was signing up for all sorts of things when I was a kid. Nothing bad by any stretch of the imagination but I knew when they asked "are you 13" you just click "yes" and you're good to go.

Seems like a "feel good" solution that will collectively waste thousands of hours. I don't see why this is required, quite honestly.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#135

Post by [deleted] »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #96
temprose wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's stopping the kid from making a new account though? Knowing myself, I did similar things as a child especially since my parents were not very tech literate.

100% stopping kids in voice chat isn't the goal. Stopping kids from accidentality joining voice chat is. So nothing is stopping them from purposefully getting a chat activated account, that's the point.

[deleted]

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#136

Post by zamadatix »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #96
temprose wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's stopping the kid from making a new account though? Knowing myself, I did similar things as a child especially since my parents were not very tech literate.

100% stopping kids in voice chat isn't the goal. Stopping kids from accidentality joining voice chat is. So nothing is stopping them from purposefully getting a chat activated account, that's the point.

The law itself disagrees. It's quite explicit that the point is to not allow kids into chat rooms at all without parental consent. It does not mention anything about preventing kids from accidentally joining chat just that they are not the ones able to provide consent to allow chat.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#137

Post by robswc »

PurpleRamen wrote: post #61
ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10 year olds aren't as dumb as you're assuming here, they'd either make a new account, or have already been been putting an 18+ birth date for years. All anyone cares about is covering their own ass, so it'd solve that issue, but it would have neglibile effect on anything real. Source: Used the internet when I had to lie to every site about being over 13, so lied to every site about being over 13. Also vrchat require…

It doesn't matter whether some will circumvent the age-gate. The company made an attempt, and enough kids are blocked by it, this is a good enough for the law, at the moment. But Epic is not willing to even walk this short way...

What is the point then? It would be like a bar tender asking if you're 21 and letting you drink if you just reply "yes." Regulators would be happy though because "at least you tried?"

I get its just trying to shift the burden onto the parents and the "lying child" but at the end of the day it just seems like it would collectively waste so many hours.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#138

Post by zamadatix »

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #97
temprose wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's stopping the kid from making a new account though? Knowing myself, I did similar things as a child especially since my parents were not very tech literate.

Voice chat without parental approval is less likely to happen if the device is in public space in the residence.

This is true independent of the law.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#139

Post by dagmx »

robswc wrote: post #134
dagmx wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s because a lot of engineers get hung up in the “oh there’s so many ways to defeat this” mindset, and forget that perfect is the enemy of good. Sensible defaults are a good enough start and many regulations like this are based around best efforts , not absolute perfection.

It seems so pointless though. I was signing up for all sorts of things when I was a kid. Nothing bad by any stretch of the imagination but I knew when they asked "are you 13" you just click "yes" and you're good to go. Seems like a "feel good" solution that will collectively waste thousands of hours. I don't see why this is required, quite honestly.

It is somewhat performative but it does save some percentage of children who are honest about it, and at the very least it lets you pass the buck to the user.

Yeah it’s easily defeated but so is wearing seatbelts when you drive.

Re: Epic Games to pay $520M to resolve FTC allegations

#140

Post by robswc »

jasmer wrote: post #109
paxys wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with keeping voice chat off by default? That is a sensible approach for everyone, not just kids.

Exactly. It's extremely intrusive to have some random fool listening in on my own household, when I may be unaware. People have no idea how technology works, even smart people. Default mic/camera etc. off - they can provided a nice little popup and have us turn it on. Because companies will always push boundaries and cross the line, we need legislation unfortunately and can only hope the legislators don't fuck it up.

This I can get behind... but I do always go to the options and turn on "push to talk."

I don't like the idea of legislation requiring such a thing though.

Post reply on HN