Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know what it is. They were asking who was harmed.
Double conformation would presumably help Dominoes as it would encourage people to accept tracking.
[deleted]
France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
141–150 of 217 posts
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#142Actually 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...
I'm actually okay with the Apple Camera app asking me once and the Domino's Pizza app having to ask me twice. Who are the consumers being harmed here?
Are you also okay with Apple only asking once for Apple Advertising and making other advertising ask twice?
I don't mean ads for Apple products. I mean the ads that Apple sells in News, the App Store, where they track your behavior to personalize the ads you see and to see if you ever buy what the ad is selling.
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
Were Windows 98 users "harmed" because IE5 was bundled with the OS? They "knowingly bought into the Microsoft ecosystem", after all. Clearly the consensus is that YES , they were harmed, and the proof is the Web 2.0 revolution driven by the eventually broken browser monopoly by Firefox and Chrome. But at the time the tech industry trenches were filled with platform fans cheering Gates et. al. and claiming sincerely t…
The “consensus” was only in the EU. The US never had a browser mandate and never forced Microsoft to ship Windows without IE. And browser choice in the EU had little long term affect https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/12/windo...
FWIW, that's just saying that government antitrust action didn't break the monopoly in question, not that it wasn't harmful. Clearly it was harmful. And Apple's is too.
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#144No good deed goes unpunished. Don't protect users' privacy, and you get flak from regulators for "not doing enough". Protect users' privacy, and you get flak from regulators because it's "too complex and hurts small companies that rely on advertising revenue". You see similar levels of cynicism directed at Google. When firefox banned third party cookies, it was almost universally welcomed, but when Chrome does it the…
[flagged]
You're completely unaware of the financial shenanigans that US tech does in Europe.
I'll just leave you with the fact that Apple across two decades paid pennies in taxes in Italy (claiming few millions in revenues) because they would have bullshit like Apple Ireland selling Apple Italy iPhones for 1000€s and selling them for 1000€s plus vat.
Meanwhile Apple Ireland was buying those iPhones for the pennies it costs to make them (few hundred $ at best) and thanks to Irish corporate taxes being close to non existent (0.5%) Apple has paid virtually nothing for decades.
If you believe that us European voters love our countries to be subsidized by rich American countries you're out of your mind, but what we dislike is being taken advantage over and over.
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. If they really gave a shit they'd be getting Apple to open up their APIs so we can get data out of Reminders and Notes etc without having to resort to necromancy and hacking... Apple need one of these https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/openspecs/
As an Apple user, I don’t want third party apps to be able to have access to that data. Apple has earned my trust, but most third party apps have not. I buy Apple specifically because I want the level of privacy that their platform provides. If third party devs don’t like it, they can ship for Android.
You know you're free to just not use a feature, application, or deny consent?
Privacy is about making access transparent, not by having customers in tiers.
I swear there's a parallel world with lunatics saying they are glad that only XCode can access their file system and processes and they don't want that Vim, VSC, Emacs or IntelliJ crap.
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
The “consensus” was only in the EU. The US never had a browser mandate and never forced Microsoft to ship Windows without IE. And browser choice in the EU had little long term affect https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2014/12/windo...
FWIW, that's just saying that government antitrust action didn't break the monopoly in question, not that it wasn't harmful. Clearly it was harmful. And Apple's is too.
And yet and still without government intervention, Chrome now dominates to the point where Microsoft gave up and now uses the Chromium engine.
Just maybe if the EU spent more time encouraging innovation instead of passing laws, they would have a real tech industry.
Every Mac and Windows user who uses Chrome made an affirmative choice to download Chrome and didn’t need the government to help them make a decision.
Today in the US, even though the average selling price of an iPhone is twice that of an Android where there are dozens of choices and Android is backed by a trillion dollar company, 70% of users in the US choose iPhones.
In every single country, people with more money choose Apple devices using their own free will even though there are dozens of cheaper Android devices to choose from.
Just like people said “no” to ad tracking when given a choice and now the ad tech industry isn’t happy with that choice.
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#147At this point, I am convinced EU fines American tech companies for fun.
And you're wrong.
That being said in that specific case this is odd because in general:
- EU (albeit not France) gives plenty of time to OS developers to adapt and often talks to them directly when they are as big as Apple
- The timing makes it look like with a different less disruptive administration it would've went differently
In any case US companies abusing any possible loophole for paying pennies for decades in Europe don't get any sympathy by me.
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#148150M is ridiculously low for a company with a 3.34T market cap. It's the equivalent of fining a millionaire 150 EUR, or a regular person fifteen cents. That's not a fine, it's a show put on for people who can't do division.
Comparing a fine with market cap doesn't make a lot of sense. More logical is to compare it to their yearly profit. Net income was $74B last year. So the fine is ~0.2% of that, which is pretty significant for something as tiny as having two pop-up messages rather than a single combined one. And for a regular person making $50K/yr, it would equate to a $100 fine. Not fifteen cents.
No, you'd need to first take the expenses out of the person's salary. Assuming the person needs 35k to live it's a 30$ one.
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#149150M is ridiculously low for a company with a 3.34T market cap. It's the equivalent of fining a millionaire 150 EUR, or a regular person fifteen cents. That's not a fine, it's a show put on for people who can't do division.
Do you actually agree with the fine? Don't give users a choice in tracking: complaints Give users a choice in tracking: now it's too many pop ups
The issue here is that Apple only needs one click to sell your data (and yes they do it, they made 11B $ on ads last year) and others need two.
In fact Apple is making more and more money on ads because they limit data access to third parties, but still sell yours in search and store.
Re: France fines Apple €150M for “excessive” pop-ups that let users reject tracking
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
Consumers are only part of the competition equation. I bet consumers also love the initial phases of dumping, but regulators have to look beyond short-term consumer preferences.
Regulators don’t have to look beyond short term consumer preference (or rather, consumer benefit) with respect to dumping actually, because only the long term aspect of dumping (when prices are raised on consumers after driving competitors out of the market) is illegal. A company is free to burn as much capital as it wants while it is trying to enter and take over a market.
What mechanism can the regulators use to prevent competition going out of business while maintaining the artificially low prices? Ban price hikes after the competition is dead? What if the dumper decides to leave the market entirely after destroying the competition? [see Walmart leaving small towns, and the resulting food deserts].
The more proactive approach is tractable since it preserves competition (easy) instead of low prices (hard, on shakier legal footing)