←back to thread

Apple’s ad network gets ‘preferential access to users’ data’ vs Facebook, Google

(www.forbes.com)
113 points blinding-streak | 3 comments | 10 Aug 20 14:36 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
jeffbee ◴[10 Aug 20 15:06 UTC] No.24110022[source]▶
Apple exempts all their iOS software from their own privacy scaremongering. iOS never pops up a scary dialog warning you that Camera has accessed your location twice in the last week, even though Camera accesses your location every time you start it. There is a completely separate iOS privacy regime for Apple's own apps.
replies(10): >>24110218 #>>24110222 #>>24110240 #>>24110241 #>>24110424 #>>24110468 #>>24110686 #>>24110765 #>>24110829 #>>24112373 #
3pt14159 ◴[10 Aug 20 15:20 UTC] No.24110218[source]▶
The idea is that we trust Apple already by using their computers. If Apple was sending that data back to their servers each time then that would ruin their reputation, but there are no such guarantees for third-party applications. Yes, theoretically, Apple reviews third party code, but it is easy enough to slip something small by them.
replies(2): >>24110328 #>>24110361 #
slowmovintarget ◴[10 Aug 20 15:31 UTC] No.24110361[source]▶
We are not using "their computers". We are using our own computers. Apple made them.

I realize Apple likely doesn't feel the same way. I also think this is kind of an "of course Apple does that." A great many people pay money for this particular experience.

replies(1): >>24110832 #
1. chipotle_coyote ◴[10 Aug 20 16:15 UTC] No.24110832[source]▶
With due respect, you're giving the OP a deliberately ungenerous reading to score a point. If I tell you "I like using Dell's servers because [reasons]" you wouldn't say, "They're YOUR servers, Dell just made them" because I said "Dell's servers" rather than "Dell servers".
replies(2): >>24111774 #>>24112126 #
2. slowmovintarget ◴[10 Aug 20 17:31 UTC] No.24111774[source]▶
The trouble is with the language though, especially when thinking about who is permitted to do what with the device.

I wasn't trying to score cheap points, I was attempting to demonstrate two concepts that had been collapsed into the pronoun "their" really must be considered separately when thinking about authorization.

I apologize if the message was muddled in "gotcha" language. I aim to do better than that.

3. saurik ◴[10 Aug 20 18:02 UTC] No.24112126[source]▶
I live in my landlord's apartment. Technically, they have a key to enter. I absolutely have to trust them to ensure they don't come inside if I am not here. However, they still have to ask permission to enter (unless it is some clear and obvious emergency), as we don't consider it to be my landlord's apartment: we consider it to be my apartment; the language is trying to shift the discussion into some weird natural stance that somehow, just because Apple made something and I can't know for sure they aren't lying to me about whether they honor the restrictions I tell them, it somehow means they don't have to ask... that's bullshit :/.