161–170 of 205 posts
I'm seeing a lot of comments saying things like "seems reasonable" and "of course", but I thought Apple was supposed to be for the privacy conscious? Why is HN not bothered by this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whatever Apple is doing, it should be possible to buy a phone and not have it phone home without permission. And you should be able to use the phone without ever contacting the vendor again. Otherwise you bought a service, not a product. Also, I recall a case where MacOS was asking Apple permission whenever the user wished to start an executable. This is nuts.
Apple doesn't even allow users to turn off Bluetooth or GPS (easily in a straight-forward way, it prevents you to make it easy). And while some of it is to provide a better experience to you, major reason is to provide service to other Apple customers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a different discussion but I don't buy the "alternatives exists" argument. There are huge network effects. Some governments even make apps only for the duopoly. Banks also. Yes, sometimes you can use websites instead of apps, but it is not the same thing. Alternatives exist only in theory. Companies should not have absolute freedom if this means that the freedom of the consumer is restricted in any way. "Alterna…
I agree there should be basic standards of service, disclosure, quality and safety that products should have to meet in order to be marketable. Basically, purchasers should be able to have confidence in the products they purchase, so the question is what are the appropriate minimum standards. Personally analytics don't bother me, I don't think they're a significant privacy issue. The service provider already knows al…
But what confidence do you have if the product you bought is tethered to the original vendor? What if they decide to do something that makes you unable to use the product?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What data can apps collect without you giving them permission that websites can’t?
A unique identifier which is 100% stable over multiple sessions for once. Which makes the rest of the data so much more useful.
I don't know about you, but I basically assume every app is doing this. Is this really a surprise? Were not all apps doing this for a long time?
Instagram? Facebook? Maybe. I certainly did not think Apple would do this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple doesn't even allow users to turn off Bluetooth or GPS (easily in a straight-forward way, it prevents you to make it easy). And while some of it is to provide a better experience to you, major reason is to provide service to other Apple customers.
Can’t you just swipe down from the top of the screen and press the Bluetooth icon, or am I missing something?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tracking how users use their own phones is certainly malicious. Regardless of whether they are using an application that you wrote, it is their phone .
That is not what is happening here. Users' on-screen taps inside the App Store app are being tracked. Not their interactions with any other aspect of the phone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a different discussion but I don't buy the "alternatives exists" argument. There are huge network effects. Some governments even make apps only for the duopoly. Banks also. Yes, sometimes you can use websites instead of apps, but it is not the same thing. Alternatives exist only in theory. Companies should not have absolute freedom if this means that the freedom of the consumer is restricted in any way. "Alterna…
I agree there should be basic standards of service, disclosure, quality and safety that products should have to meet in order to be marketable. Basically, purchasers should be able to have confidence in the products they purchase, so the question is what are the appropriate minimum standards. Personally analytics don't bother me, I don't think they're a significant privacy issue. The service provider already knows al…
Knowing is not the issue. The issue is they use that understanding to their advantage, not yours. Their duty is to maximize shareholder value, not your health, happiness, and well being.
I'm not saying don't use them. I am saying it's naive to trust so blindly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree there should be basic standards of service, disclosure, quality and safety that products should have to meet in order to be marketable. Basically, purchasers should be able to have confidence in the products they purchase, so the question is what are the appropriate minimum standards. Personally analytics don't bother me, I don't think they're a significant privacy issue. The service provider already knows al…
> Basically, purchasers should be able to have confidence in the products they purchase, so the question is what are the appropriate minimum standards. But what confidence do you have if the product you bought is tethered to the original vendor? What if they decide to do something that makes you unable to use the product?
As for making the product unusable, they can do that anyway through OTA updates, which are applied at the user's discretion. If you think that's a problem then you should regulate that, not some other technical issues that may or may not be related.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A unique identifier which is 100% stable over multiple sessions for once. Which makes the rest of the data so much more useful.
My guess? They don't only get a unique identifier, but they get to know and link you to other more useful data using your Apple/Android device ID and so on, that they can use to track you across multiple user accounts. Something that browser fingerprinting can't guarantee 100% (but getting very accurate these days)