121–130 of 162 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Trying to outsource those decisions to corporations and government simply isn't working I don’t follow. What is wrong with the status quo?
> What is wrong with the status quo? Businesses are deciding who lives and who dies, instead of people being allowed to have their own choice in the matter. These businesses make decisions based on data stolen from users. If the data were on paper in a person's home, it would be considered private and inaccessible. Why should a company decide that they should have access to your every move and every data, just becaus…
In an ideal world that would be great. However, right now it is either Apple of Google when it comes to smart devices for average consumers. Kinda like political dichotomy in US politics.
Democracy will not function with an educated public. And dumbing down choices are just a way to get give power to megacorp and political institutions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple routinely rejects apps that try tactics like this. Otherwise it'd be an easy way around the "Ask App Not To Track" prompt.
>Apple routinely rejects apps that try tactics like this. This is going to be irrelevant in the EU once sideloading gets popular.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thankfully the EU also has legislation that makes "share data to use" tactics illegal, so this shouldn't be a problem.
Citation? I think this is not true. The EU law seems to just require explicit consent. So websites and apps can ask whether user wants to share data to keep using them for free or pay a subscription fee.
Article 7 https://gdpr-info.eu/art-7-gdpr/
Recital 43 https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-43/
Those two in combination stop companies processing data for unrelated task to the services they provide. And it's indeed true and already been applied, see this: https://www.digitalguardian.com/blog/google-fined-57m-data-p...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>You mean like on Android? Hell nowadays you can choose "approximate location" instead of tracking people. Apps can and do detect this and deny access certain features. For instance the mcdonalds app won't give you offers if you choose approximate location.
And there's nothing wrong with that. If users don't have the will power to close and delete the app when faced with such a situation then that's on them. An adult has the right to decide that their privacy is worth a 50 cent discount off a shitty burger.
I think one of my personal issues with allowing Meta to access these private APIs is that they may not take "don't allow" for an answer. I have WhatsApp to talk to some family and I recently disabled allowing all contacts in iOS 18. WhatsApp now has a persistent notification at the top of messages to "Allow All Contacts". If Apple allows users to choose whether or not to give Meta access, and users choose "no", Meta…
Here's the thing, take a look at just a bit of what Meta is demanding: *AirPlay Continuity Camera *App Intents *Devices connected with Bluetooth *Apple Notification Center Service *iPhone Mirroring *CarPlay *Connectivity to all of a user’s Apple devices *Messaging *Wi-Fi networks and properties Now ignoring the obvious societal dangers in this request. (I mean really? Should you be using a Meta headset while you're d…
The Meta HUD glasses seem like they're definitely designed to be used while driving, and provide a safer way to access info like notifications than looking down at your iPhone. That isn't "Apple data and APIs" this is a notification that someone needs to display on their HUD.
Really, the fact that Apple doesn't want to allow this sort of thing pretty clearly demonstrates they're acting in bad faith.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Let Apple offer users the option That's easy to say, and much more difficult to implement than it sounds. Careful: There's a lot of nuance in how these kinds of options are presented to the user. Depending on how they're designed, "the general public" will default to yes or no; or get frustrated / overwhelmed with pedantic permission dialogs. Thus, part of "Let Apple offer users the option" is a commitment to study…
The thing is, at some point users must become comfortable with "pedantic permission dialogs." Users must take responsibility for knowing how software works and the motivations of its creators. Trying to outsource those decisions to corporations and government simply isn't working. Since computer users (I include phone users in that definition) can no longer trust software developers (Apple, Meta, etc.) to be ethicall…
This doesn't seem reasonable. Let's try to apply the logic elsewhere:
> Patients must take responsibility for knowing how medicine works and motivations of its creators/prescribers.
Requiring everyone to have deep technical knowledge about anything they use would prevent everyone from using more than the things they are experts in. So, there needs to be either a technological regression, or something to help defend users from unethical practices. The only entity really in a position to do that is a government, for better or worse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> All their other “products” are just suction pipes for hoovering up that data. I don't think that's true for their VR/MR hardware. That's Meta's attempt to get a product that is _not_ like that, but which instead gets them in a position similar to where Google and Apple are for phones. I.e., where they own the platform and can profit off of that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Apple routinely rejects apps that try tactics like this. This is going to be irrelevant in the EU once sideloading gets popular.
Why would a normal person want to sideload?
The last time I used iOS I found the app store quality was also really bad. People listing "free apps" that immediately require you to start an expensive monthly subscription to use. The effect on the mobile games industry has been so disastrous that people would rather carry an entirely separate mobile device on them just to play "real games".
On google play or the app store you can play a mobile version of minecraft with microtransactions for $7. With sideloading you can just play a full version of the more popular java edition PC game, for free. (pojavlauncherteam.github.io). I think that sums up the sideloading experience.