When an app asks for permissions, it should have a “feed fake data” option

Post by curt15 » Sat, Jul 08, 2023, 8:14 PM UTC

l33t233372 wrote: post #185

grishka wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might not be as much of a problem in the US, but it is a real pain in the ass people have to contend with, for example, in Russia. I've seen it myself. Apple is enforcing US sanctions against some Russian companies, which means they can't have an iOS app. At all. I heard stories about how a sanctioned bank would load some kind of shadily signed copy of its app onto people's iPhones in branches. For Android, that s…

This sounds like a good thing; the sanctions are working as intended.

Post by OOPMan » Sat, Jul 08, 2023, 8:17 PM UTC

Post by riwsky » Sat, Jul 08, 2023, 8:21 PM UTC

codeguro wrote: post #237

marvin wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re celebrating the possibility that EU regulation will remove Apple’s ability to enforce good user experience?

Apple doesn't get to dictate what constitutes a good user experience. Especially for me - that is my prerogative and mine alone. So yes, I will be extremely happy with it. This opens doors to all kinds of software that can compete with one another, and if I don't like it, I can simply uninstall it myself.

Post by floomk » Sat, Jul 08, 2023, 8:29 PM UTC

ethanbond wrote: post #236

floomk wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We're reviewing your app, not theirs, so what they can do is irrelevant rules for thee but not for me Apple has never been fair with its review, sadly. > I would expect Apple's response to be "change it back". Companies should not have to bend over to apple's whims just to get their software in end user hands. Hopefully upcoming EU regulation will reign apple's overreach in a bit.

Or (1) is: it’s impossible to create codified rules that have no false negatives and no false positives and we’re smart enough not to act like it’s possible. You know, this is how almost every rule system on the planet operates. Ultimately there’s an arbiter whose job is to look at the totality of the case.

Post by ethanbond » Sat, Jul 08, 2023, 8:31 PM UTC

floomk wrote: post #257

ethanbond wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or (1) is: it’s impossible to create codified rules that have no false negatives and no false positives and we’re smart enough not to act like it’s possible. You know, this is how almost every rule system on the planet operates. Ultimately there’s an arbiter whose job is to look at the totality of the case.

A better response would be: "Thank you for making us aware, we will revisit their evaluation or update the guidelines" (and then they would actually do so) This isn't what's happening though. If you're a big app you get to do whatever you want, and if you're small then you have to do as you're told.