Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#211

Post by nsenifty » Fri, Feb 04, 2022, 3:06 PM UTC

alwillis wrote: post #96

shawabawa3 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn't be that straightforward Probably what OP is suggesting is that in return for that $5B, Apple will call up Google and say "hey we're adding these new privacy protections, will that be a problem?" and Google will have time in advance to get around them

For Apple, which has a market cap of over $3 trillion , the $10B from Google is the equivalent of sofa cushion money. Apple isn’t going do any favors for Google for a measly $10B. It’s much more meaningful for Google and Google knows it. For them, it’s a bargain, as it gives its advertisers access to customers who actually spend money.

You're comparing income with market cap. Apple's net income in 2021 was around $100B of which $10B is a significant sum.

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#212

Post by YXNjaGVyZWdlbgo » Fri, Feb 04, 2022, 3:06 PM UTC

patrec wrote: post #194

YXNjaGVyZWdlbgo wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's a conspiracy theory because he presents it as facts without providing sources for his statements. it's about how not what. yikes.

How about a bit of critical thinking before yelling "Conspiracy!"? Concerning "sources", if Apple and Google are engaged in joint anti-competitive behavior, they'd probably not write press releases about it. But of course there is well-documented precedence of them doing exactly that, being caught and getting a mild slap on the wrist, so it's not a completely outlandish notion to entertain. As for the officially stat…

You are speculating as much as the op does. It's just not based in truthful statements. Ofc everything you and op are rhyming together can be true but at least don't state it as fact like op did.

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#213

Post by z3rgl1ng » Fri, Feb 04, 2022, 3:07 PM UTC

samwillis wrote: post #67

Nextgrid wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity, why can’t you just make the ad point to a custom URL (on which you can then set a cookie if you wanted) and do attribution that way?

That is almost exactly what UTM url parameters are [0]. We use these and via them our other tracking collaborates our theory on Facebooks tracking. There is actually a real problem with tracking via cookies on Facebook ads when the destination is a website. The ad click will open in a Facebook "In App Browser", any cookie that you (or any analytical service) sets will be within that IAB. If the user then uses the "op…

No post body was provided.

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#214

Post by CaptainZapp » Fri, Feb 04, 2022, 3:08 PM UTC

echelon wrote: post #207

criddell wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this isn't a lie and Apple flipping that switch cost Facebook $10bn, then that tells me my personal information is worth a lot. What I was getting from Facebook in exchange for my data was too little. I use Google a lot more than Facebook and frankly what I get from them in exchange for my data is probably also way too little. I wish there was some type of consumer union where we could negotiate with these compani…

Not a lie at all. Apple is as dirty as they come. Apple is a cartel and Google pays the protection money that Facebook failed to. If Apple really cared about privacy and not money, they'd block Google from the platform too. A single policy changed wiped 25% of a trillion dollar company's market cap. That's a gravitational wave that shows what kind of overwhelming monopoly power Apple wields. To be clear, I hate Faceb…

> they'd block Google from the platform too.

To be fair, they didn't block Facebook from their platform. Users now just need to agree that they want to be tracked (spoiler: practically no one wants to be tracked).

I don't disagree with your general take and save for an iPod classic I don't own any Apple gear. But in my book that was one of the better moves that Apple ever pulled.

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#215

Post by hotpotamus » Fri, Feb 04, 2022, 3:08 PM UTC

nickthegreek wrote: post #190

hotpotamus wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see this in the thread but I have to say that I disagree a bit. I'm certainly glad Apple gave users a choice, but you have to consider "the tyranny of the default" which is a great phrase I think. Most people will simply use the default option, so Apple's choice of default says something.

If they tyranny of the default is to protect my privacy, I see no tyranny at all.

I just like the phrase. Tyranny probably brings along a bad assumption, but it really just means that most people will stick with the default. It's something I learned independently, though it had been realized many times before I did. I'm also happy with the outcome in this case.

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#216

Post by scarface74 » Fri, Feb 04, 2022, 3:10 PM UTC

criddell wrote: post #101

eric4smith wrote: post #91

Lies. Don’t you all see it? Facebook has been declining over the past year and this is a convenient way to blame someone - anyone. Let’s face it, what are your friends all using now? That’s right - video - YouTube and TikTok. Facebook had no answer for video and thus lost a lot of eyeballs. Instagram is a poor clone of TikTok and most people just repost their popular TikTok videos on Instagram reels anyway - hardly a…

If this isn't a lie and Apple flipping that switch cost Facebook $10bn, then that tells me my personal information is worth a lot. What I was getting from Facebook in exchange for my data was too little. I use Google a lot more than Facebook and frankly what I get from them in exchange for my data is probably also way too little. I wish there was some type of consumer union where we could negotiate with these compani…

“I care a lot about my privacy. That’s why I use Google”…

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#217

Post by outside1234 » Fri, Feb 04, 2022, 3:12 PM UTC

eric4smith wrote: post #91

Lies. Don’t you all see it? Facebook has been declining over the past year and this is a convenient way to blame someone - anyone. Let’s face it, what are your friends all using now? That’s right - video - YouTube and TikTok. Facebook had no answer for video and thus lost a lot of eyeballs. Instagram is a poor clone of TikTok and most people just repost their popular TikTok videos on Instagram reels anyway - hardly a…

Agreed - and the regular Facebook site is just awful now - my parents don’t even use it

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#218

Post by scarface74 » Fri, Feb 04, 2022, 3:13 PM UTC

pnutjam wrote: post #148

sfe22 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except the government is a monopoly with its own agenda. In addition it already kind of owns us (well a large percentage), what would it gain if it negotiated this deal for us? I would argue it can gain more power by making a deal with facebook.

Everyone who doesn't vote and ignores their role in Democracy let's this happen. The president matters much less then the Mayor or the Governor.

So let’s say I’m in CA voting for my two Senators. How much does my vote actually count when 10 other states combined have the same population but 20 Senators?

How much does my vote count even for representatives if I’m in a state that’s heavily gerrymandered?

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#219

Post by eric4smith » Fri, Feb 04, 2022, 3:13 PM UTC

throwhauser wrote: post #168

eric4smith wrote: post #91

Lies. Don’t you all see it? Facebook has been declining over the past year and this is a convenient way to blame someone - anyone. Let’s face it, what are your friends all using now? That’s right - video - YouTube and TikTok. Facebook had no answer for video and thus lost a lot of eyeballs. Instagram is a poor clone of TikTok and most people just repost their popular TikTok videos on Instagram reels anyway - hardly a…

I was with you up to here: > And Zuck is very smart. The moment I saw the rebrand to Meta I knew that he saw this day coming perhaps years ago. He knows the next frontier is the meta verse Zuckerberg has been a surprisingly good steward of the one successful idea he came across, the social network graph. His acquisitions (Instagram, etc) worked very well to supplement the social network graph and keep it going longer…

Zuck did not get to where he is by being short sighted or stupid.

The Metaverse is the obvious next evolution of online. Accelerated by the happenings of the last 2 years.

Re: Apple's privacy push cost Meta $10B

#220

Post by sfe22 » Fri, Feb 04, 2022, 3:13 PM UTC

CaptainZapp wrote: post #208

sfe22 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no democracy other than direct democracy. If you cant fire your government this afternoon, they own you, not the other way around.

That's not how direct democracy works. If we assume that Switzerland is probably closest to the ideal of a direct democracy please take note that voters can not directly vote for the executive government (The Bundesrat, or federal council). They elect members of the two houses, which in turn elects the 7 executives. Usually this is based on the recommendation by the parties and with a specific formula considering par…

I looked up the Swiss system, and it certainly is not direct democracy.