Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple vs. Meta: The Illusion of Privacy

growth.design

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 359 posts

Re: Apple vs. Meta: The Illusion of Privacy

#181

Post by daft_pink »

Timber-6539 wrote: post #141
hedora wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the top hit for IDFA (the wikipedia article): > Starting in iOS 14.5, iPadOS 14.5, and tvOS 14.5, users are prompted to decide whether to opt-in or out of IDFA sharing before apps can query it. This choice can be altered in Settings.[2][3] In May, 2021, Verizon-owned advertisement analytics company Flurry Analytics reported that 96% of US users opted out of IDFA sharing.[4]

It's by default opt-out and am pretty sure the prompt doesn't apply for Apple's own apps. And since you brought out the opt-out option, one can also block Facebook's trackers through uBlock and/or DNS filters. The defaults are what matters. From the same Wikipedia article, > Users can opt-out of IDFA via the "Limit Ad Tracking" (LAT) setting (and an estimated 20% do). 80% users never change the defaults.

Using an opt-out is completely different from using third party ad blocking technology and is much more friendly. I can set the IDFA opt-out on my father's iPhone and nothing will break, but if I set him up with ublock or dns blocking and it starts breaking websites, he will be totally confused and not recognize what's happening. Also, using hacks to block tracking is not 100% reliable and allowing the user to have a specific option like Apple does is better for the user.

Re: Apple vs. Meta: The Illusion of Privacy

#182

Post by heavyset_go »

soperj wrote: post #93
toastal wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you go the custom ROM + microG option that 98% of folks would never do… or you embrace the Linux phone OS which has no ‘apps’ (like that banking app that banned you for rooting your other Linux (Android) phone) & the telephony barely works if it even does. This duopoly sucks.

I just use my banking website from my phone. Why install apps?

I've seen authentication flows that require you to login, or confirm logins, via the bank's app if you're trying to use the account outside of the app itself.

Re: Apple vs. Meta: The Illusion of Privacy

#183

Post by nirvdrum »

OmarShehata wrote: post #147
nirvdrum wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given companies are doing subject tracking with in-store cameras and can use facial recognition to tell who you are, cash isn't going to be sufficient. They'll be able to build a pretty compelling shopping profile and can tie associate your cash purchases to your profile. Sure, it's not 100% fool-proof, but it doesn't need to be to be a massive privacy invasion. I suppose you could wear a mask, but that's generally f…

The industry is still struggling to track who's clicking on ads properly in all cases...we're very far from this idea of tracking cash purchases & building a profile with facial recognition. This sounds like science fiction. Are there any companies actually doing anything like this? Closest thing I know is companies who sell "foot traffic" data, of who walks in front of your store. But that's done with phones pinging…

I think the problems with click fraud are orthogonal. They're a different domain with different characteristics and different solutions.

Facial recognition has been deployed to combat shoplifting [1][2]. Amazon Go is a store built around not needing to check out at a register at all. Microsoft offers Azure Kinect [3] as a way for retailers to track people moving through a store. There's no shortage of companies purporting to use AI to analyze in-store video in real-time to analyze customer behavior [4][5]. There was a video shared on this site a few weeks back showing a coffee shop tracking both customers and baristas [6] (more discussion there, including some skepticism).

I'm speculating that if they can track you in the store and build a profile on you that they'll be able to track your cash purchases. I don't think it's a terribly large leap to tie into their point of sale terminals but I don't know if any retailer is currently doing that or even planning to do that.

[1] -- https://youtu.be/g5Xf9Y6-RS4?si=De7EZTyVD66BQPeG

[2] -- https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/28/technology/facial- recognition-shoplifters-britain.html

[3] -- https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/kinect-dk/

[4] -- https://viso.ai/features/

[5] -- https://twitter.com/jowyang/status/1214657642313871360

[6] -- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37186806

Re: Apple vs. Meta: The Illusion of Privacy

#184

Post by wiseowise »

daneel_w wrote: post #73
raspyberr wrote: post #27

Privacy blog post. vercel-insights.com, www.google.com, 'Sign up with Google', Join 132,793 people from companies like: Microsoft, Amazon, facebook, Google, Disney "There it is again. That funny feeling."

Ironic, isn't it. And the author apparently has nothing at all to say about Android and Google.

Why should they? They compare Meta and Apple, aren’t they?

Re: Apple vs. Meta: The Illusion of Privacy

#185

Post by [deleted] »

charcircuit wrote: post #169
heavyset_go wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the way i see it, the worst case scenario is you get an Ad for something you might actually like... That's hardly the worst case scenario when there are countless stories like "Facebook Allowed Advertisers to Target Users Interested in “White Genocide” — Even in Wake of Pittsburgh Massacre"[1]. There's also the time Facebook's targeted ads were used to facilitate genocide in Myanmar[2][3]. [1] https://theintercept.…

>when there are countless stories like "Facebook Allowed Advertisers to Target Users Interested in “White Genocide” What's wrong with that? The more interests available the better ads can be targetted. >There's also the time Facebook's targeted ads were used to facilitate genocide in Myanmar The article doesn't mention ads were used. It just sounds like Facebook was connecting people based off a common interested peo…

[deleted]

Re: Apple vs. Meta: The Illusion of Privacy

#186

Post by hoppyhoppy2 »

soperj wrote: post #93
toastal wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you go the custom ROM + microG option that 98% of folks would never do… or you embrace the Linux phone OS which has no ‘apps’ (like that banking app that banned you for rooting your other Linux (Android) phone) & the telephony barely works if it even does. This duopoly sucks.

I just use my banking website from my phone. Why install apps?

My bank and credit union allow me to deposit checks from my phone via the apps; their websites don't offer that option.

Re: Apple vs. Meta: The Illusion of Privacy

#187

Post by taneq »

boesboes wrote: post #4

Fuck me that’s the worst UX I’ve seen in ages

"Use your KEYBOARD ARROWS to view the story" reminds me of the way Minecraft Legends pops up a hint saying "Press [left mouse button graphic] to start" when you click or press space or escape or literally any other commonly used "ok that's nice, please proceed" key.

If you understand my intent well enough to post a passive-aggressive note telling me how I should ask to move to the next part, you understand me well enough to just skip to the next fkn part.

Edit: Just launched Minecraft Legends to confirm details and that it still does this. Apparently it's changed a bit but still pops up "Press [left mouse button] to start" on the splash screen and, if you hit space, changes to "Press [picture of enter key] to start" so I feel my point stands.

Edit2: Oh and when a cinematic starts... if you hit Esc it pops up a similar tip saying "Press ␣ to continue." WHAT DID YOU THINK I WANT- ugh I'm over it.

Re: Apple vs. Meta: The Illusion of Privacy

#188

Post by giantrobot »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #97
giantrobot wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple sells services ? That you elect to use and pay for? The nerve of them!

Sorry if the implication wasn't obvious. Once they sell B2C services it's just a matter of time before that too becomes ad supported, then your data (or at least eye balls) are for sale.

That just doesn't follow. You're making multiple leaps. First that Apple is going to add or switch to ad support for their services. The second is those ads will be as invasive as Facebook ads.

Re: Apple vs. Meta: The Illusion of Privacy

#189

Post by isodev »

Timber-6539 wrote: post #94
goalieca wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple does not have a tracking pixel on half the popular web. Apple's main source of income is through luxury hardware and subscription services. Facebook sells your information and attention to willing buyers.

What the difference between Meta's tracking pixel and Apple's IDFA?

The IDFA on iOS is a random device identifier and not tied to your identity. It would allow an advertiser to correlate that it’s the same device that has installed several apps, nothing more. It also resets in certain situations.

Facebook on the other hand, creates a grand central repository of everything there is to know about you and sells it to whoever wants to pay. Just like Google.

Re: Apple vs. Meta: The Illusion of Privacy

#190

Post by [deleted] »

tomnipotent wrote: post #133
factorialboy wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed the point. Apple tracks every app launch. And reports it to an external server. Not localized. Not anonymized.

You didn't make a point. App telemetry is absolutely benign compared to the kind of invasive ad tracking that Facebook participates in. There's no shortage of horror stories of poorly implemented Facebook Pixel integrations passing sensitive user data that marketers then use to create custom ad campaigns. Most recent examples that come to mind: https://www.extremetech.com/internet/341111-tax-filing-websi... https://g…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN