(no title)
keepper | 4 years ago
"here’s a bunch of reasons why this might not work, not least that no-one except Google and Apple want Google and Apple to have that much control over publishing and advertising. "
I've said this previously, if you for a second think Apple is protecting you against evil "Social Media company" or "Evil X Advertiser", you are wrong. Apple is only looking out for Apple. And they want to be the one who controls user data. Plain and simple.The enemy of your enemy is not necesarily your friend.
Things SHOULD change. Moving the power from one big corp to another big corp is not the answer. No matter how convenient it may seem.
defaultname|4 years ago
How are these two sentences at odds with each other? Apple is absolutely "protecting me against evil social media companies" because I give them a lot of money for their products that offer privacy as a feature. They are looking out for Apple by providing a high value, sadly unique service in the industry, and their users obviously appreciate it.
It is possible for there to be aligned interests between a user and a provider. Pointing out that they're doing it for their own reasons (which in this case is their product positioning) isn't the slam dunk you think it is.
keepper|4 years ago
I'm saying Apple is ok with exempting themselves. How come their apps are not using the same dialog? Why do they hide behind "location services", when in reality, they are used for similar purposes?
Example, Airtags. https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2021/06/remember-apple-airtags-an...
How can AirTags highjack ANY apple device to report their location, without asking the device owner? Do IOS owners get asked in a dialog about allowing air tag tracking? NOPE
macintux|4 years ago
unknown|4 years ago
[deleted]
keepper|4 years ago
So why is it ok for apple to do that, and non of their vendors?