At the very least, for apps that require this much access, such "interoperability" should be off by default with a big warning that says: [ ] Check here if you want to share all your data (or something more precise) with Meta. Warning: possibly insecure. Use at your own risk.
Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy
21–30 of 162 posts
Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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 s…
Yes, it is. The entrenchment is an ongoing process designed to give us short-term benefits that appear harmless. But they slowly add up and produce an ecosystem that is actively harmful and not much better than before (on average).
By the way, I don't argue for or against Meta having access to APIs. I am against Meta entirely -- and the only logical answer to them is to dismantle them.
Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy
#23At the very least, for apps that require this much access, such "interoperability" should be off by default with a big warning that says: [ ] Check here if you want to share all your data (or something more precise) with Meta. Warning: possibly insecure. Use at your own risk.
Only if Apple's uses of that data have to go through the same flow, with equally scary text.
Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy
#24At the very least, for apps that require this much access, such "interoperability" should be off by default with a big warning that says: [ ] Check here if you want to share all your data (or something more precise) with Meta. Warning: possibly insecure. Use at your own risk.
Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy
#25At the very least, for apps that require this much access, such "interoperability" should be off by default with a big warning that says: [ ] Check here if you want to share all your data (or something more precise) with Meta. Warning: possibly insecure. Use at your own risk.
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…
If such popups were introduced in iOS, they should be universal, of course, and the same danger prompts should show for Apple's software as for their competitors. Apple won't do that (outside of the EU) but it'd be a solution to the data hunger without compromising market accessibility too much.
A good alternative would be for Apple to remove APIs entirely, including for themselves. If they consider some data and some interactivity to be too dangerous for users, perhaps they shouldn't be messing with it either.
Apple makes a habit out of exaggerating the dangers of complying with any regulation. Just a bit of fear mongering gets their fans in a state where they'll maintain Apple's walled garden even when they stand to benefit from it being opened up.
Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy
#26At the very least, for apps that require this much access, such "interoperability" should be off by default with a big warning that says: [ ] Check here if you want to share all your data (or something more precise) with Meta. Warning: possibly insecure. Use at your own risk.
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…
The only part I disagree with is that it's limited to phones, it absolutely isn't. It's any computing device, be it a general purpose PC, a tablet, a phone, your car's infotainment system, what have you.
The large majority of the population does not understand how these devices work, and what kinds of problems they can create if used unsafely, and they don't care to know. And like, I get why: life is complicated enough as it is. Simple fact is when Joe Consumer pulls a new TV out of it's box and it comes with the contrast and color saturation through the ceiling so everything looks like shit, and motion smoothing is adding 60ms of delay to the response of connected hardware, he's fine with that. I don't like that for him, and I wish he wasn't, but most people just don't care. Most people want to speed run whatever damn things they gotta click to make the stupid light and noise machine do what they need it to do, so they can resume their idle time.
That's why if we actually want to make progress on reigning in these socially corrosive services, we need not just options, but a set of default settings, mandated by law, that respects user privacy. As a user of electricity, I do not need to be informed about how electricity works to safely use my outlets. As a user of water, I do not need to be informed about how plumbing works to safely take a shower. I shouldn't need to know jack about smartphones or computers either in order to not have my personal information used to sell me gross new flavors of Coke.
Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy
#27Can we see the interoperability requests that meta submitted? That would clarify if the shade is legit.
It's probably a bit of both. One part Apple being monopolistic jerks and one part Meta wanting to hoover up even more private data. One issue I can see is that the EU would side with Meta, knowing that the EU privacy laws will protect its citizens, but Apple has to consider the ramification for all users, including those not protect be the GDPR. So Apple is forced to open up and Meta will start using the opening to suck up private information on its American users.
Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy
#28Earlier 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.
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 kn…
Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy
#29Earlier 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.
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 kn…
Re: Apple and Meta go to war over interoperability vs. privacy
#30Earlier 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…
I found MIUI's solution to this quite well designed, even if it's a little infuriating when altering permissions for a list of apps. There's a big red warning with a user friendly description of the danger and a countdown to prevent quick click through, locked behind an "I accept the risk" checkbox. You need to read at least one UI element that says "danger" before you can complete the interaction. If such popups wer…
> A good alternative would be for Apple to remove APIs entirely, including for themselves. If they consider some data and some interactivity to be too dangerous for users, perhaps they shouldn't be messing with it either.
I don’t want this and it doesn’t make any sense. I trust Apple as a vendor in a way I don’t trust third-party developers (or else I wouldn’t have purchased an iPhone), and it’s entirely reasonable to grant them permissions I don’t grant anybody else. Removing those entirely makes my phone considerably less useful.