11–20 of 217 posts
* explain and prompt the user for consent
* if they acquiesce pop the real modal
* otherwise bide your time and try again later
The reason for this is because once you receive a rejection in the official modal you are not allowed to ask again.
If the EU isn't fining someone for tracking users too much, they're fining them for not tracking users enough.
A simple yes-no for third-party applications makes it easier for the user to reject tracking and doesn't make the process more cluttered than for Apple apps.
Do other apps require double consent or is it actually a dark pattern they’ve adopted: * explain and prompt the user for consent * if they acquiesce pop the real modal * otherwise bide your time and try again later The reason for this is because once you receive a rejection in the official modal you are not allowed to ask again.
It's specifically recommended by apple.
https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-guideline...
Most of you won't read the past the headline but this isn't accurate >The agency said there is an "asymmetry" in which user consent for Apple's own data collection is obtained with a single pop-up, but other publishers are "required to obtain double consent from users for tracking on third-party sites and applications." The press release notes that "while advertising tracking only needs to be refused once, the user m…
If no, then first party vs third party having different standards of consent seems reasonable?
I’m curious how things like this play into Trumps recent reciprocal tariff threats.
It's all just silly.
Most of you won't read the past the headline but this isn't accurate >The agency said there is an "asymmetry" in which user consent for Apple's own data collection is obtained with a single pop-up, but other publishers are "required to obtain double consent from users for tracking on third-party sites and applications." The press release notes that "while advertising tracking only needs to be refused once, the user m…
Is Apples third party though? I don’t know, genuinely asking. If no, then first party vs third party having different standards of consent seems reasonable?
Actually Apple were fined because they don't apply the same standard to their own pop-ups that allow users to reject tracking. On Apple popups you seem to need one click, while on 3rd party popups you need to confirm twice. So the fine seems to be for treating 3rd parties differently from their own stuff. They could make their own popups require double confirmation instead...
1. the ATT permission prompt from iOS
2. a prompt from the app itself
?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is Apples third party though? I don’t know, genuinely asking. If no, then first party vs third party having different standards of consent seems reasonable?
This is referring to Apple's first party apps so no they aren't third party. I can understand why someone would make that argument but the French regulator argument here is that in the spirit of competition, third-parties should have the same barrier to entry as Apple's first party apps and I can see the argument they are making.
Most of you won't read the past the headline but this isn't accurate >The agency said there is an "asymmetry" in which user consent for Apple's own data collection is obtained with a single pop-up, but other publishers are "required to obtain double consent from users for tracking on third-party sites and applications." The press release notes that "while advertising tracking only needs to be refused once, the user m…
Is Apples third party though? I don’t know, genuinely asking. If no, then first party vs third party having different standards of consent seems reasonable?