My small revenge on Apple • Hacker News Board

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#401

Post by haswell » Wed, Aug 04, 2021, 4:38 PM UTC

CryptoBanker wrote: post #182

karlkloss wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm the opposite. I NEVER use a third party login, my it be Apple, Google, Facebook or whatnot. If your website/app doesn't offer their own independent login, I don't even think once whether I really need it.

Agreed, it screams two things to me. First that the company is supremely interested in collecting my personal information beyond what I would normally expect to provide. Second that they’re just too lazy to implement their own user system. Neither is a good thing

To the average user, social login is about convenience. I see a large number of responses in this thread that seem to have forgotten about the most important person in this whole conversation: the end-user.

Users want

- Easy access

- A familiar experience

- A consistent experience

- To avoid more passwords

They generally are not aware of the privacy tradeoffs they're making by using social login.

I'd argue that if the developer truly wants to fight the good fight, they should remove social login altogether.

I find it odd that the options they support willingly are the options that are most user-hostile from a privacy perspective while the option they begrudgingly support (while making a big fuss about it) is the one option that actually tries to protect the user.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#402

Post by HWR_14 » Wed, Aug 04, 2021, 4:40 PM UTC

pier25 wrote: post #236

kraf wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Protest is an important form of participation in a democracy, it's not petty at all. Forcing developers to add Apple ID as a sign-in method is the petty thing. The developers have no power unless they unionize in some form which seems absolutely impossible. So it seems to me that it's all a developer can really do to make a statement and I think it's brave.

Apple is extremely hostile to developers. After a couple of bad experiences with the app store I simply refused to do any development for iOS.

Apple is extremely restrictive to developers. As a developer, I hate it. As a consumer, I love it.

Apple has never shown me hostility. On the contrary, I found Apple to offer reasons why they do things and how to work around them. Have they sometimes forced me to do things I don't want (and felt were worse)? Yes. But it was obvious what I needed to do to comply.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#403

Post by johnny_b_g » Wed, Aug 04, 2021, 4:45 PM UTC

spacedcowboy wrote: post #348

johnny_b_g wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you admit to accusing without evidence.

I admit to distrust. I distrust anyone who tries to downplay privacy as important. I distrust anyone who tries to brand a genuine privacy upgrade as "hype" And, frankly, signing in (with AppleID or not) doesn't prove a thing one way or another. The OP could be simply harvesting email addresses and selling them off later[+]. (S)he could be upset that HME and SIWA are a threat to that business. Far-fetched ? Sure. More…

Yup, Apple fanboiz always be deflecting. No wonder Apple doesn't need a marketing/PR dept - the fanboiz will happily come to Apple's rescue for free!

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#404

Post by CivBase » Wed, Aug 04, 2021, 4:55 PM UTC

mikeryan wrote: post #386

CivBase wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's evidently not true. Plenty of apps, including the author's, use Google's and Facebook's auth solutions without being coerced into doing so. EDIT: Can someone explain how this is wrong?

The point is that many developers would prefer to have a “real” email address. If you’re using Google or Facebook ads the email data point allows them to track you across apps and target advertising that data goes back into your personalized profiles. Apples solution of an anonymous email breaks this personalized tracking which is good for privacy concerned users but potentially “harmful” for app developers, particul…

Thank you! That makes sense. A malicious dev would be okay with implementing Google's and Facebook's SSO solution because it allows them to continue accessing the user's email.

However, Apple's policy gives malicious devs an obvious way out: just don't support any SSO solutions. So this policy doesn't really do anything to stop malicious devs at the end of the day. It stops them from taking advantage of alternative SSOs, but I wouldn't expect that to have much effect.

I guess maybe the policy is intended to mitigate the potential damage caused by negligent devs? As in devs who are not malicious, but risk allowing malicious actors to access user data through negligent design? That feels more like stretch to me, though.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#405

Post by HWR_14 » Wed, Aug 04, 2021, 4:58 PM UTC

ksec wrote: post #157

RL_Quine wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They implemented end to end encryption in iMessage to collect more data? There's a vast array of technical instances where apple has gone above and beyond to implement privacy preserving technology, even when they weren't talking about it. This is, like the OP, hysteria without any basis in fact.

>They implemented end to end encryption in iMessage to collect more data? iMessage backed up on iCloud where Apple has key to decrypt.

I'm pretty sure I was asked to provide an additional password to save my messages. Are you sure Apple has a key to decrypt?

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#406

Post by HWR_14 » Wed, Aug 04, 2021, 5:02 PM UTC

Toutouxc wrote: post #29

> The best way to convince Apple prisoners is to tell them what they need. Trust must only belong to Apple. Give them your money, your will, your worship, your everything. Apple will keep you safe > Perhaps Apple customers deserve the luxury of "choice" (between different Apple devices, of course) I don't understand the tone. Do these people actually not understand that different people have different preferences and…

> they're, as we speak, pulling off the biggest and smoothest on-the-fly architecture transition ever.

I think Microsoft's architecture transitions between OSes were far smoother, in terms of ensuring backwards compatibility and giving developers far more advance notice. Of course, they stayed within the same chip family (well, except increasing the N in N-bit), so it was a smaller transition, but it worked well.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#407

Post by HWR_14 » Wed, Aug 04, 2021, 5:07 PM UTC

hoseja wrote: post #83

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Apple prioritizes their customers over developers. If they didn’t force developers to adopt this, they would never do it as it’s in their interest to harvest the e-mail addresses of their customers.

Why then should Apple have monopoly on harvesting emails?

> Why then should Apple have monopoly on harvesting emails?

They don't, and aren't trying to. They are trying to disrupt the Google/Facebook duopoly in the SSO space. Devs are free to require new accounts that they have the email for, just not outsource it to FB/Google.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#408

Post by imwillofficial » Wed, Aug 04, 2021, 5:24 PM UTC

collaborative wrote: post #217

imwillofficial wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly, they are totally cool with a Facebook login, but decry an Apple login. Incredible. Literally.

nah, I'm cool with both, so long as no one is forcing me to add them to my app. Which Apple is doing, so go figure

No nobody is forcing you to do anything. You want to be in the App Store, you go by Apple’s User respecting rules. I’m cool with that.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#409

Post by Aaargh20318 » Wed, Aug 04, 2021, 5:37 PM UTC

collaborative wrote: post #267

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't see that they want to close you in and make sure they are the only contact you ever have with anyone. You don’t see that I want to only have to deal with one party. I don’t want 74637728 different logins if I can help it.

That's great I want to not be forced by Apple to add things to my app. I want to add them willingly

And that’s why Apple forces it, because we all know you won’t add it willingly.

Re: My small revenge on Apple

#410

Post by spacedcowboy » Wed, Aug 04, 2021, 5:56 PM UTC

johnny_b_g wrote: post #403

spacedcowboy wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I admit to distrust. I distrust anyone who tries to downplay privacy as important. I distrust anyone who tries to brand a genuine privacy upgrade as "hype" And, frankly, signing in (with AppleID or not) doesn't prove a thing one way or another. The OP could be simply harvesting email addresses and selling them off later[+]. (S)he could be upset that HME and SIWA are a threat to that business. Far-fetched ? Sure. More…

Yup, Apple fanboiz always be deflecting. No wonder Apple doesn't need a marketing/PR dept - the fanboiz will happily come to Apple's rescue for free!

It's funny - it always seems those who use "fanboiz" or other collective terms akin, always seem to be projecting...

They don't seem to be able to grasp that maybe there are different viewpoints in this world. Maybe that's even a good thing, and perhaps denigrating entire swathes of people as "fanboiz" says more about the person doing it than about the people they're complaining about.

Just maybe.