Live data from Hacker News

Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy

techcrunch.com

11–20 of 162 posts

Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy

#11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every user would just check that option and press yes. The reality is that most users don't ever read any message the phone gives to them, they just treat it like any other popup and press yes. Take a look at any normal person using a phone when a permission notification appears or an error appears: they won't even read it, just press any button that closes it as fast as possible. There's good reason to not have this…

> Every user would just check that option and press yes. Not if it's available in the developer options, or has more other sorts of friction to check the box. Or if it has a red warning label with the phrase "may increase the chance of hackers stealing your data and impersonating you". One just has to make it unattractive enough to most.

This is the heart of the issue though. Most users don't care unless you purposefully go out of your way to scare them with enough melodrama and dark patterns as to border on outright dishonesty. It's not an issue of them being informed, they just genuinely do not care about the risk when the actor is a familiar megacorp because their viewpoint is that if billions of dollars can't keep the data safe then it was never going to be genuinely safe anyway.

Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy

#12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every user would just check that option and press yes. Not if it's available in the developer options, or has more other sorts of friction to check the box. Or if it has a red warning label with the phrase "may increase the chance of hackers stealing your data and impersonating you". One just has to make it unattractive enough to most.

This is the heart of the issue though. Most users don't care unless you purposefully go out of your way to scare them with enough melodrama and dark patterns as to border on outright dishonesty. It's not an issue of them being informed, they just genuinely do not care about the risk when the actor is a familiar megacorp because their viewpoint is that if billions of dollars can't keep the data safe then it was never…

And of course - often apps ask for permissions they don't need at opprotune time ie "enable development mode to get 100 more gems" or "enable notifications to use this app"

Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy

#13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every user would just check that option and press yes. Not if it's available in the developer options, or has more other sorts of friction to check the box. Or if it has a red warning label with the phrase "may increase the chance of hackers stealing your data and impersonating you". One just has to make it unattractive enough to most.

This is the heart of the issue though. Most users don't care unless you purposefully go out of your way to scare them with enough melodrama and dark patterns as to border on outright dishonesty. It's not an issue of them being informed, they just genuinely do not care about the risk when the actor is a familiar megacorp because their viewpoint is that if billions of dollars can't keep the data safe then it was never…

Especially if the person already uses Messenger or WhatsApp for personal conversations etc. Meta already has control over their important data at that point (chat logs and phone calls, probably location history). What more could be on the device other than web browsing and photos. It's the same thing with trusting Microsoft or Google - they already have access to all your data via control of the entire operating system and could in theory do anything with it. So users have to trust them to psychologically be ok with using those devices at all.

Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy

#14
post #10

The Reuters report on this is much more detailed: https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-slams-metas-numerou... And yes, Meta isn’t denying requesting everything under the sun. Their only retort is Apple’s privacy concerns are anticompetitive excuses. Two things can be true: Apple is only protecting their own interests, and Meta is a terrible would-be guardian of all the data they’re requesting.

The rename from Facebook didn't change the base nature of that company. Their product is selling user data. All their other “products” are just suction pipes for hoovering up that data.

Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy

#15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every user would just check that option and press yes. Not if it's available in the developer options, or has more other sorts of friction to check the box. Or if it has a red warning label with the phrase "may increase the chance of hackers stealing your data and impersonating you". One just has to make it unattractive enough to most.

This is the heart of the issue though. Most users don't care unless you purposefully go out of your way to scare them with enough melodrama and dark patterns as to border on outright dishonesty. It's not an issue of them being informed, they just genuinely do not care about the risk when the actor is a familiar megacorp because their viewpoint is that if billions of dollars can't keep the data safe then it was never…

If that is truly a foregone conclusion then we should eradicate the megacorps, not pander to them or negotiate with them.

Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy

#16
Meta’s request for interoperability is regarding their hardware, not their flagship apps, if you take it at face value.

They want their glasses and headsets to integrate as tightly as an Apple Watch or Vision Pro to show messages and other notifications, connect to WiFi, and share files with an iPhone, but Apple uses private APIs for their own devices. Meta says that is anticompetitive and the APIs should be public.

Apple lays out their rebuttal in detail here and it’s clear Meta asked for everything in the hopes that Apple will settle for some of these things: https://developer.apple.com/support/downloads/DMA-Interopera...

Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy

#17
post #10

The Reuters report on this is much more detailed: https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-slams-metas-numerou... And yes, Meta isn’t denying requesting everything under the sun. Their only retort is Apple’s privacy concerns are anticompetitive excuses. Two things can be true: Apple is only protecting their own interests, and Meta is a terrible would-be guardian of all the data they’re requesting.

Also Apple's own apps request permissions the same way third party apps do

Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy

#18

Meta understands that in an AI agentic world, having access at the OS level is crucial. The AI becomes significantly more useful if it understands your digital life more. Only Apple has OS level access for agentic AI but Meta wants it too.

> The AI becomes significantly more useful if it understands your digital life more. "Useful" is misleading. It should be "useful for the big corps for entrenching you further into proprietary technology so that they can take advantage of you later".

> for entrenching you further into proprietary technology

But isn’t this already the case right now? In my opinion this argument is kind of backwards because the lack of (or access to) APIs is precisely what’s preventing us from having alternatives!

Siri is proprietary, closed source, big corp, etc.

Want an open source, community based, interoperable, fully local, etc. assistant/AI? It cannot exist in today's world simply because it requires what Meta asks for.

I dislike Meta very much but I refuse to believe that creating or opening up such APIs would foster „entrenching you further into proprietary technology“.

Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy

#19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every user would just check that option and press yes. The reality is that most users don't ever read any message the phone gives to them, they just treat it like any other popup and press yes. Take a look at any normal person using a phone when a permission notification appears or an error appears: they won't even read it, just press any button that closes it as fast as possible. There's good reason to not have this…

> Every user would just check that option and press yes. Not if it's available in the developer options, or has more other sorts of friction to check the box. Or if it has a red warning label with the phrase "may increase the chance of hackers stealing your data and impersonating you". One just has to make it unattractive enough to most.

I think we saw how well this approach worked with the cookie popups post GDPR. It doesn't really work. At this point I feel most people have some idea of how their data is used and sold and if they continue to use Meta apps, its because they think the tradeoff is worth it. There are either no alternatives or strong network effects that make Instagram, Facebook, Whatsapp etc a worthwhile choice in many cases and we know it.

Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy

#20
post #10

The Reuters report on this is much more detailed: https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-slams-metas-numerou... And yes, Meta isn’t denying requesting everything under the sun. Their only retort is Apple’s privacy concerns are anticompetitive excuses. Two things can be true: Apple is only protecting their own interests, and Meta is a terrible would-be guardian of all the data they’re requesting.

Also Apple's own apps request permissions the same way third party apps do

They certainly don’t. We’re talking about apps like Phone, Messages, Photos, Files and system stuff like app tracking (Screen Time etc.).
Post reply on HN