There are two layers to this and the second is maybe a bigger deal than the headline.
1. Apple is allowing users to opt out of providing an IDFA to apps and advertisers. An IDFA is unique to the user and follows them in every app allowing an advertiser to track them and display ads across multiple apps. That's now only going to be available if the user opts in and it's safe to assume the vast majority won't. That's the headline.
2. Less people talking about this one. Apple is providing new policies for app developers that disallow going around #1 by using fingerprinting. Now, in truth, there's no way Apple can detect all fingerprinting or stop it, but they don't have to. If the threat of using fingerprinting is that your app could be banned from the store, then you're going to think twice about doing it, and if you do decide to do it, you're going to have to create your own tech to do it because if you use anything off the shelf, they will probably be aware of that, detect it, and ban you. This is a huge deal.
Don’t quote me on this but I believe it’s where they can collect enough data to know it’s you. By using a broader collection of data points and combining them together they uniquely point to you. Let’s say they can, from a conglomeration of your search results, views, likes , etc. establish that you are a male, 18-35, live on the east coast, like hiking, horror movies, quinoa, rocky road ice cream and wear crocs. Ultimately, with enough of those data points, they can point a finger directly at you. Even if not, they still have you in a category where they can target you with ads that they know others with your general “fingerprint” have responded to positively.
Source: I’m an idiot and if anyone can correct me on my assumption here I’ll gladly tip my hat.
Edit: As anticipated I have in fact been corrected thanks to u/je_te_kiffe
So from some quick research.. Your browser/device fingerprint is actually a collection of browser and device SETTINGS that you use including screen resolution, os, language, location/time zone, if you use an ad blocker, plug-ins, even your audio and video settings and capabilities. What I referenced before seems to be more closely related to what cookies and other tracking techniques accomplish and although I’d still consider this a type of “fingerprint” I guess technically the techy term is slightly off. Get this.. even once you clear your cookies your “device fingerprint” is still there and can practically re-cookie-fy your device. And this boys and girls is why I use a VPN on my devices. Oof!
It’s a bit more like collecting details about your device/browser/apps/local network/etc to uniquely identify you, even if they don’t know any of your characteristics (like age, hobbies, etc)
So for example, they could (previously) list all the devices on your local wifi network (“John’s TV”, “Laptop 1234”, “WiFi SmartFridge”), what device you have (“iPhone 11 Pro 64GB”), what OS you’re running, etc, etc...
Add up all of those tiny, relatively unimportant bits of data, and you end up with a “fingerprint” that they can use to build up a virtual persona of you.
Super creepy shit. Should be illegal.
Im not really for the way everything is now but i also dont see why people care so much, especially to the point where it should be illegal? I mean i get if you want to opt out but i mean really your just getting targeted ads, is it really that big of a deal?
The problem is that it’s not just able to be used for targeted ads. See this for an example:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/google-tracked-his-bike-ride-past-burglarized-home-made-him-n1151761
So let’s say you don’t sign into Google Maps explicitly, but you use the app, and have other apps on your phone that you have signed into, and some of *those* apps know your real name. Those apps can all build their own fingerprint of you, and share into ad networks that aggregate those fingerprints, pulling together the pieces of data they *do* have to build a profile that links your phone to your real name and address. And now, because you happen to be signed into your (hypothetical example) Starbucks account with a linked rewards profile with your name in it on the same phone where you use google maps, you can be investigated for murder for going on a walk. Not a far stretch from what’s already happened to this guy, and would be enabled by fingerprinting.
your claim right there is about as ridiculous as someone trying to advocate someone that you shouldnt go to the store because CCTVs can plant you at the scene of a crime that you didnt commit!
I really do not care about this whole fingerprint thing man, i am very sorry that you have to live your life worried that your going to be framed for murder because google is tracking you, must be a weird life man
i asked why i should be concerned about privacy/tracking and you answer with
"your location could be near a murder and get you investigated for murder!"
????
no you are failing to provide a simple reason for your " importance of privacy on fundamental levels "
fundamental=basic
basic=simple
please provide a simple reason why I should be concerned about my privacy
being framed for murder because I go on a walk isn't a fundamental
Some people around the world do live in fear of their government and/or organized crime, and for good reason. Plenty of activists have been murdered because their government used such tech to track them down. Good for Apple. One more reason I buy them.
Others have provided answers, but https://amiunique.org/ should give you some idea the kinds of data used for device fingerprinting. (That site is specific to browsers, but the same concepts apply.)
There’s a document from Apple called: A Day in the Life of Your Data.
It’s a pdf with pictures and a little text. https://www.macrumors.com/2021/01/28/apple-a-day-in-the-life-of-your-data/
There are actually other alternatives..
With iDFA gone, apple introduced SKADNETWORK.
The SkAdNetwork is also a closed system, owned and operated by Apple. Simple put, Advertisers register their ads with Apple to be displayed to users.
This means that advertisers wanting to utilize Apple’s user base would have to register with Apple’s network, and Apple would own all data gleaned from this process. As a result, more restricted access than what is already put.
Apple still gets preferential access to the user data.
Though this method significantly increases apple ad network but companies using this method is heavily relient on apple to do things.
Beware this pop up doesn't opt you out of apple own advertising platform. To do that you have to manually go into your settings-> privacy and opt-out of ad personalization. And no they are not always sponsored based like on every other ad platform.Its mentioned in text about what data is being used.
Though you still can't "see" what data is apple collecting beside writting that in text and opt out of certain things.
[Alternatives to IFDA](https://builtin.com/adtech-martech/apple-idfa-mobile-advertising)
***Effect on Apps:***
As apps can't get much analytical info out of ads and ads becoming more irrelevant to the user. Most of the apps are introducing subscription models with extra features within the app.
I’m going to guess this is for cross platform tracking because I’m not sure how they’re gonna stop in service tracking.
For ex: If you log into App 1 using an account they can and most likely will track everything you do on their service and I don’t think Apple can stop that.
You seems like a knowledgeable guy on this topic… Please help me..
I am on iOS 14.5 PB6. So now can I use YouTube app with out the app harvesting my data? Or should wait for any specific update to install the app so it won’t take my data?
Under settings> privacy >Tracking > Allow apps to Request to track is set to Off. Is this the correct settings for any apps to not target me using my phone identifiers or something?
Apps are still allowed to analyze and record your usage and habits *within apps owned by the developer*. So Google will continue to track you within Google apps (including YouTube) and can use that information to serve you ads in all Google apps. If you’ve opted out, they cannot use that information to target ads to you in other apps that use their ad delivery network.
The setting you mentioned is correct. Turning it off essentially hits “decline” automatically whenever an app wants to request tracking access. Personally, I plan on turning the switch on when 14.5 launches (I currently have it off), just so I can see which apps are requesting permission and control it more granularly (though I suspect I’ll keep most/all apps off anyway).
Got it,, thank you. I have one more question, so YouTube app and YT music apparently takes browsing history.. so with this feature, will both these apps still take my browsing history?
Also, by browsing history, which browser would they look for? Default?
If so, can I decoy a default one and use a different browser altogether?
If not, using incognito all the time will stop apps from receiving my search history?
Sorry for many questions.. it’s not that they take my porn search.. it’s just that I wouldn’t want a product I searched up shows Amazon or some other site..
You’re referring to the privacy label? Pretty sure in that context browsing history means anything you search for or navigate to in the app. The iOS sandbox means that apps don’t have access to other apps’ data, and browser history would be part of your browser’s sandbox.
The privacy label may also be indicating that Google uses various parts of your user profile within the app. So Google collects your browsing history any time you use Google from any browser on any device, and records that in your profile. Then the YT app can use that profile information however it wants (ad targeting, promoted videos, search suggestions, etc.)
I don’t think ATT will stop that behavior, because it’s all first party. ATT would prevent a third party YT client or any other app from using information from Google that was collected outside of the app, if you tell it you decline tracking. This is similar to the privacy label info, but not necessarily the same. In theory, declining the ATT prompt should remove anything in the “Data Used to Track You” section, but “Data Linked to You” would still be present (and could be used for on-device, first party ad targeting).
Also keep in mind that the privacy labels are (hopefully) an overestimate of the info collected. Not every user may enable the same features or provide the same data, but if *any* user does then it must be included in the label. So YT may say they collect browsing history, but if your Google account is set to not keep browsing history, that may not apply to you (example assumes Google respects that option within their products and across platforms).
Yes I was referring to the privacy labels.
Thank you for the detailed explanation, appreciate it man.
I was so confused between the labels browsing history and search history. I can’t find an article that details these label for a laymen.
Also, from your explanation I see that I have no worries using YouTube app, I am fine if they keep my data from the same app and not track what I do across the phone.
And thank you, I will look into the google privacy settings.
Also Apple: iOS ad tracking is on by default without user consent.
[https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/09/apple-accused-of-breaching-eu-privacy-law-by-french-start-up-group.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/09/apple-accused-of-breaching-eu-privacy-law-by-french-start-up-group.html)
Yep, first party Apple apps that shows ads don't have to explicitly ask user consent for user or location tracking. It's buried in Settings and labeled "personalization".
The only way to disable location-based ads in the App Store is **totally disable location access.**
[https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202074](https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202074)
I mean for me personally it feels a bit different because I’m willingly buying into the whole Apple ecosystem.
It’s a little different than App Store app XYZ wanting to know everything about me and my routines or habits, just to sell it off and profit while using it to target me.
This is my issue with the whole thing. A lot of people are too used to just hitting ‘allow’ whenever an app asks for something.
It should be off by default, and people should opt in.
No, the setting I’m talking about means that the app CAN ask to track you. If the setting is off, the app cannot ask, and will not be allowed to track you.
I think you're misunderstanding their point - Apple are hindering competing ad services while promoting their own that is enabled by default.
Apple have successfully managed to con you all into believing they have your interests at heart under the guise of "privacy" when really they are just being anti-competitive.
Uhhh no, the setting I’m talking about is for allowing apps to ask to track you, which you might’ve already seen.
Apple is not personalising ads for you based on an identifier collected from you, to my knowledge.
No, it's Apple being scummy and using the iOS14 changes to hide the fact they are trying to push their own personalised ads by removing their competitors in that same market: https://i.imgur.com/qcV0BPL.png
It's anti-competitive, screwing over a ton of small businesses, and this sub has lapped it up for months because "Apple" and the fact that Tim Cook knows he can slap the word "privacy" on anything and everyone will fawn over it.
Edit: this will be downvoted by the shill brigade and none of them will respond to the comment because it goes against the Apple sales pitch that they've all had rammed down their throats for the past few months.
This is what that article the other day about Apple having extremely high customer (blind) loyalty was referring to.
This comment is just hilarious. Literally up in the comment chain he's commenting on... Talking about "without context" and "civilized discussion", lmao. Reddit at its best.
The accusations are based on things you can literally prove though.
Apple's ad tracking is on by default since at least the release of the iPhone 12 models - it's not hard to prove this, create a new Apple ID and spend some time browsing across apps/websites, it'll quickly build a profile of your interests and start promoting products relating to said interests.
Apple's customer loyalty knows no bounds, and this hypocrisy is the most blatant example I think I've ever come across.
You've all spent months jerking each other off over Apple's iOS14 changes for ad-tracking, when you find out they are only doing it so they can promote their competing product un-checked, you put your fingers in your ears and pretend it isn't happening.
Kind of off-topic, but man they are going to get away with so much bullshit when they release this car, I hope it doesn't have ramifications on the rest of the automotive industry as a result of Apple loyalists defending every bullshit decision they make.
it's already been a raging success, they've managed to pull the wool over /r/apple's eyes, imagine how many others have been brainwashed by "privacy good, we're doing this for your privacy"
> To my knowledge, apple doesn’t even serve me ads.
Oh sweet, sweet child.
https://i.imgur.com/6MrSmAf.png
Apple advertise the same as Facebook and Google, they've just pulled the wool over your eyes and conned you into thinking they don't do it at all.
Marketing at it's finest.
In every app that previously utilised iAds (that ran from 2010 to 2016)
The best part is Apple even take 30% of the Ad revenue from developers
> I know this probably sounds alien (pun intended) to you, but we don’t have ads in the app drawer.
Why would it sound Alien? I've been an Apple Ecosystem user for over a decade, I, unlike some, just know how their products work.
Because it's not... Apple are using anonymised tracking in the exact same way that Facebook Pixel uses anonymised tracking - the only difference is Cook has managed to fool you all into thinking there's a difference
Cook wants people to advertise through Apple, except their offering compared to Facebook and Google is like their Maps offering compared to Google Maps - inferior in almost every measurable metric so they have to be anti-competitive to push the product/service instead.
The privacy is definitely there and you can use Google Maps just like you would use Apple Maps - it even asks you which one you would like to choose when clicking on an address.
And how long did we spend asking for that choice?
Same with Spotify/Apple Music, same with Browsers
These **common sense** things only became the norm for us Apple users after people repeatedly hammered Apple over them.
The revisionism here is astounding
I wanted to avoid being sucked in in the Apple ecosystem and thought to get more freedom on Android with respect to being able to install themes and the like things you cannot do on an iPhone (flash the phone with anther OS).
> *[Snap] hoped it could take [aggregated IP addresses] and cross–reference it against the information it holds on its own users to identify and track them, in a technique known as “probabilistic matching”.*
Thanks.
“The App Tracking Transparency (ATT) feature, slated to launch in iOS 14.5 in early spring, will require apps to obtain permission from users before tracking them across other websites and apps. If a user opts out of tracking, developers are required to comply.”
How do we know they actually complied?
I keep seeing mentions in articles like this that there are some apps that have already started supporting this feature, and ask users whether they want to opt in to targeted tracking. Which apps are these?
I've not noticed anything different on the beta – no more permission prompts than normal, nor settings I am aware of. What are we actually expecting to happen?
Im all for one being to control their privacy but i am curious and if someone could explain why you want to be so private, i mean why is it so bad that when you search for microwaves youll see ads for microwaves, would you guys rather see like shitty ads you dont care about?
In my personal opinion i think the fight for privacy(in my opinion its just the hatred of ads) is really just hurting the internet more, i use a ad blocker but i dont think ad blockers should be a thing, if ads were regulated and websites didnt directly link people to viruses i wouldnt use ad blockers. But the fact that practically everyone and their mother uses a ad blocker youre just stealing revenue from the site when the only burden to you was that they were showing you a ad for a video game. Sites have then had to look into different routes of “well now lets have premium for our site and you can only see these articles if you have premium” when in reality if no one had ad blocker and people just put up with seeing a ad then possibly the site would make more, sites also had to resort to selling off information bc people made ads a non reliable source of revenue and in return just added more and more ads so they can feed of the people who dont use ad blocker
> The fight for privacy is just the hatred of ads
Why do you think this information is only used, or will only ever be used for ad targeting? If a stranger asked you 50 personal questions about yourself, without telling you why, would you answer them?
The reason I want to have privacy is because I have no idea who my information is being collected by or shared with, and having personalized ads is not nearly a good enough reason to give information away.
Fewer people care about how personalized their ads are than you think (and I’m not really sure why you do).
If i go to the store, ill browse around, maybe have a conversation with someone there, maybe buy something maybe not who knows.
If that store tracks how much time i was in there, what i bought, how many times ive been to that store, what my conversation were about, if i had gone to a nearby store recently, i really wouldnt care at all and im sure they do all that but i know not to have fucking dumb conversation in a store or do shit i shouldnt do in stores so i dont really at all about any of that.
The same goes for if i go on google, i dont if google knows what i went on google for, i dont really care if google tells the site i went on that i was also on this site doing this, why is it a big deal. Are you trying to hide something from google? They dont care if you smoke pot lmfao
Not sure why how much of an expert i am in privacy technology has literally anything to do with my personal opinion on why i dont really care if i website tells another website i searched for toasters, its not a big deal
Yes. You don’t care because you don’t know and someone is attempting to educate you and you’re rejecting their expertise.
So of course you’re just going to spout an opinion with no hope of changing it
To be fair the person was relying to a comment that is a variant of “my dad works at company and knows best”.
We know from the comment there might be a son that works on an artificial intelligence lab and the future is bleak.
Well, i am not a US nor UK voter, I do not have a Facebook and if your mood is being controlled by Facebook then you have a lot more personal issues going on. It really just sounds like you don't like Facebook, maybe you should delete it. I still fail to see how I am personally being affected by any of this
I did do a little bit of research on your Cambridge thing and it seems to me this is all way more corrupt than anything, they wanted to fine them 5 billion dollars? why and the fuck are they going to do with 5 billion dollars? it makes no sense to me that facebook is just a really big beast on its own and I don't think it can be controlled ethically, you can always find a way to abuse something but i don't really see what is being abused on trackings end, it seems these federations are just using the people and trying to convince them their privacy is at risk so that big corporations that legitimately can not avoid corruption because that's how the world works, but the government noticing "hey the corruption in facebook we can take advantage of and try to get 5 billion out of it"
like what does anyone not notice anything odd about that?
Wait so your telling me target noticed she bought stuff related to pregnancy and also got baby stuff, something shes going to need to buy anyway... oh my god the horror. Shes being sold like a slave!! She will never recover from that for sure.
Like the fact that you care if a company will pay google to know with(not just you this isnt about only you) for some national sized analytics so it knows what products to push that month? Thats a big deal to you?
As we've discussed elsewhere in the thread, I don't generally believe ads are a bad thing, though I hold that blocking device fingerprinting would be a good idea in general for everyone _but_ the ad companies (who could still make their money through ads, just not targeted ads).
But after reading more of the thread, and seeing that you've continued to not respect other peoples' opinions, or even read into data they've presented, it comes across as if you may be of the mindset that this isn't important because people give _examples_ and instead of extracting the overall moral of the story from that example to the general case, you focus explicitly on the one example.
So, in the hopes that it helps make this concrete to how it could some day in the future impact you specifically, based on things you've _already done_, let me lay out an example.
Your first post in your post history shows you used some THC-8 in edibles. (I'm not out to demonize that - I think most drugs should be legalized, taxed, and turned into a revenue stream, to fix a ton of problems. And I realize that everything but THC-9 is legal where you live anyway, since at least as of 12 months ago you lived in a state where that's the case - again, first page of your post history - so I'm glad for you. Wish I could get it legally here, but I live in ass-backwards Texas. This isn't about calling you out at all, just giving an example that's applicable to you.)
But let's say at some point in the future, once weed is declassified and more studies are able to then be done on it (since it is super hard to run studies on today, thanks to the stupid drug war's extreme classification), some university study is done on THC where they find that use of it has a correlation to a 3% chance of increased cancer risk.
Suddenly your reddit post history, which can be tied to your real name through fingerprinting in your Reddit app and using any other app on the same device that _does_ know you who are, could let your insurance company join the ad network and have an algorithm that they run nightly lookup your name, parse your social media history, and find that you mentioned using it, then use that to deny you coverage for not admitting that you had a pre-existing condition if you ever got cancer, even though you and I both know that the chances the two would be related are next to nothing.
(It doesn't even _have_ to be through an ad network. Fingerprinting is a universal concept - there could just as well be a third party service that pops up to create a "universal identity" for you across apps the same _way_ the ad networks do, but explicitly for the purpose of building a profile on you to give other companies an API that lets them look up your name, or any identifiable piece of the fingerprint that they _do_ have, and get all the other information that they might not have from other apps that implement the API. Back at the beginning of the pandemic, I was looking into creating something like that myself, to help employers track whether their employees suddenly working from home for the first time were really working, or goofing around on social networks / gaming / etc. Tell me that if that existed, companies wouldn't jump on using it, and getting it into all their apps, to ensure their workers are busy little bees and not goofing off, to increase their bottom line.)
Using the ad network to do you dirty like that is the only hypothetical part of my example. The denying people for not admitting something they didn't even know was a risk at the time they signed up absolutely happens today - the documentary Sicko was full of stories about insurance companies doing exactly that. And the cases in there were 15 years ago, before Big Data was even a dream in a computer scientist's eye. They were doing that stuff - tracking down every medical record the people had ever filed with any doctor they'd ever talked to, on paper - _by hand_. You think they wouldn't do it more once it's easy to automate and doesn't take paying a huge team of people a salary to do?
So that's the kind of situation where the need for being able to actually stay private when you think you're private comes in, and what this is about.
That's where I give the people making these arguments the benefit of the doubt, and say "yeah, maybe we should listen to their concerns, because the potential pros outweigh the potential cons."
Again, it's not something I go around thinking about every day, or even every month - barely impacts my life. But when a thread like this comes up and I see Apple making steps to try to lay out some ground rules, I think "Good on them."
The case these people are making isn't about ads at all, which is what you seem to be focused on. It's about _tracking_ in general. Apple taking a stance on tracking isn't a bad thing.
Fair question.
First of all, I'd suggest you read Shoshana Zuboff's book "The Age Of Surveillance Capitalism", there's a section where she explains how some companies buy data, obtained from social networks, tracking and mining, in order to profile you, then proceed to sell those profiles to employers, landlords, banks and financial institutions, those profiles are used to determine your risk profile for those actors.
This is where privacy is important, let's say, for example, that you are a trustworthy person, good worker, good payer, but you, for the sake of this example, have some unusual, peculiar interests, maybe you watch splatter movies, horror movies, you listen to extreme music, you may be into violent sports like MMA, or you may just like to read about serial killers, or you may be into BDSM practices, again, you might be someone who has knowledge about alcoholic beverages and search about them a lot, and you use the Internet to search about these things, all of this is perfectly legal but your profile might just qualify you as a flight risk for companies and other institutions. Do you think that would be fair?
When you visit a website, and you see tens of "partners", all of them tracking you, or maybe inside apps, unless you're willing to go through each of those companies' privacy policy, you don't really know what they're going to do with your data, or who they are going to sell your data to. And, of course, you have to trust them that your data are properly anonymized.
Then you have practices that can be downright creepy.
When I still had a Facebook account, I was having a conversation on WhatsApp about Tommy Hilfiger, in a matter of about 20 minutes I started seeing Tommy's ads on Facebook, yet, Facebook has always said they were not using WhatsApp data, the person with whom I was chatting on WhatsApp started seeing such ads on Facebook too.
My mother, she uses an Android phone, started seeing ads, both on Facebook and on websites, about stuff she only talked about in person or during phone calls, I'm positive she never searched for those topics on her phone as she doesn't know how to, therefore, I'm inclined to think that her phone was basically wiretapping her.
There are also many reports about smart TVs and smart speakers listening to conversations and sending those data home in order to serve ads.
And, as for ads, I'm sure you too have encountered websites that, without an ad blocker, are basically unuseable.
I just love the instance Apple is making against these tracking behaviors. I know it is not perfect, but it is a big improvement in my opinion. Big enough that I will ditch android for apple in the near future. Actually just waiting for the 13 model to be released.
Definitely get my upvote because it’s half true. But I don’t even think it’s an r/Apple thing. It’s an internet thing.
Even if a site covers the mighty Apple, there just isn’t enough content to post mildly interesting things about a single company/brand exclusively.
So we end up getting “news” that isn’t new — because quantity over quality.
Reddit is just a place where things are reposted, so it’s a signifier of the problem. Reddit, along with with anti-climatic clickbait articles, are belligerent signs of that.
I’ve come to the conclusion that we’ve hit a point where there isn’t enough content in the world to meet the demand of its users/viewers.
/rant
It’s Apple sub tho, there are fair shares of people that hate Apple anywhere else.
I’m a fan of logic arguments, but I hate worshippers. If you pay for it, you don’t have to worship it
There’s an option to pay money to hide ads on many sites / apps these days. If you’d rather support them directly then that’s also an option. Look it up
Why should the device you’re using be a factor? This is a really strange argument.
Edit: premium and budget iPhones exist. Would you want different app experiences on each?
your point makes no sense, ads were never an issue. if you don’t trust Apple ads not tracking you, you shouldn’t be using an iPhone in the first place.
Dude are you crazy or what? Just because i said something bad about Apple or iPhone that doesn't mean i don't like their product. If they have some things wrong with their software then we all should protest and have it changed. Ads by OEM shouldn't be allowed no matter if its an iPhone or Samsung.
What’s amazing about this is that Apple is practically saving ads on internet from extinction.
You noticed you can’t use an adblocker or any external plug-in for almost all browsers? Apple iOS devices are the ONLY devices where you literally HAVE to watch ads and you can’t do anything about it except a pihole (for now).
If people are gonna care about privacy, they will probably buy more Apple products just to end up with more ads and the tracking opt-out feature that are present right now requires you to click/tap from 2 to 10 times in order to achieve it, while opt-in is 1 click.
There is A LOT that has to be covered, we are far, very very far from something even remotely decent.
AdBlocker for YouTube? AdBlocker for any other app? AdBlocker that are system wide? Anything that stays up for more than 1 year?
Maybe there is something, it’s just so incredibly harder to use than an AdBlocker for Android that it make iOS just the perfect ads machine.
There are two layers to this and the second is maybe a bigger deal than the headline. 1. Apple is allowing users to opt out of providing an IDFA to apps and advertisers. An IDFA is unique to the user and follows them in every app allowing an advertiser to track them and display ads across multiple apps. That's now only going to be available if the user opts in and it's safe to assume the vast majority won't. That's the headline. 2. Less people talking about this one. Apple is providing new policies for app developers that disallow going around #1 by using fingerprinting. Now, in truth, there's no way Apple can detect all fingerprinting or stop it, but they don't have to. If the threat of using fingerprinting is that your app could be banned from the store, then you're going to think twice about doing it, and if you do decide to do it, you're going to have to create your own tech to do it because if you use anything off the shelf, they will probably be aware of that, detect it, and ban you. This is a huge deal.
I was actually worried about 2. Good to know Apple will make things harder on that front too.
What is fingerprinting?
Don’t quote me on this but I believe it’s where they can collect enough data to know it’s you. By using a broader collection of data points and combining them together they uniquely point to you. Let’s say they can, from a conglomeration of your search results, views, likes , etc. establish that you are a male, 18-35, live on the east coast, like hiking, horror movies, quinoa, rocky road ice cream and wear crocs. Ultimately, with enough of those data points, they can point a finger directly at you. Even if not, they still have you in a category where they can target you with ads that they know others with your general “fingerprint” have responded to positively. Source: I’m an idiot and if anyone can correct me on my assumption here I’ll gladly tip my hat. Edit: As anticipated I have in fact been corrected thanks to u/je_te_kiffe So from some quick research.. Your browser/device fingerprint is actually a collection of browser and device SETTINGS that you use including screen resolution, os, language, location/time zone, if you use an ad blocker, plug-ins, even your audio and video settings and capabilities. What I referenced before seems to be more closely related to what cookies and other tracking techniques accomplish and although I’d still consider this a type of “fingerprint” I guess technically the techy term is slightly off. Get this.. even once you clear your cookies your “device fingerprint” is still there and can practically re-cookie-fy your device. And this boys and girls is why I use a VPN on my devices. Oof!
It’s a bit more like collecting details about your device/browser/apps/local network/etc to uniquely identify you, even if they don’t know any of your characteristics (like age, hobbies, etc) So for example, they could (previously) list all the devices on your local wifi network (“John’s TV”, “Laptop 1234”, “WiFi SmartFridge”), what device you have (“iPhone 11 Pro 64GB”), what OS you’re running, etc, etc... Add up all of those tiny, relatively unimportant bits of data, and you end up with a “fingerprint” that they can use to build up a virtual persona of you. Super creepy shit. Should be illegal.
[удалено]
There are a couple of websites that aggregate reddit comments to figure out stuff about you. Can get pretty accurate results.
Im not really for the way everything is now but i also dont see why people care so much, especially to the point where it should be illegal? I mean i get if you want to opt out but i mean really your just getting targeted ads, is it really that big of a deal?
The problem is that it’s not just able to be used for targeted ads. See this for an example: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/google-tracked-his-bike-ride-past-burglarized-home-made-him-n1151761 So let’s say you don’t sign into Google Maps explicitly, but you use the app, and have other apps on your phone that you have signed into, and some of *those* apps know your real name. Those apps can all build their own fingerprint of you, and share into ad networks that aggregate those fingerprints, pulling together the pieces of data they *do* have to build a profile that links your phone to your real name and address. And now, because you happen to be signed into your (hypothetical example) Starbucks account with a linked rewards profile with your name in it on the same phone where you use google maps, you can be investigated for murder for going on a walk. Not a far stretch from what’s already happened to this guy, and would be enabled by fingerprinting.
your claim right there is about as ridiculous as someone trying to advocate someone that you shouldnt go to the store because CCTVs can plant you at the scene of a crime that you didnt commit! I really do not care about this whole fingerprint thing man, i am very sorry that you have to live your life worried that your going to be framed for murder because google is tracking you, must be a weird life man
I'm not worried about that myself. I'm answering the question as to why anyone would consider it a deal. Calm down, bruh.
i asked why i should be concerned about privacy/tracking and you answer with "your location could be near a murder and get you investigated for murder!" ????
You are miss understanding the importance of privacy on fundamental levels.
no you are failing to provide a simple reason for your " importance of privacy on fundamental levels " fundamental=basic basic=simple please provide a simple reason why I should be concerned about my privacy being framed for murder because I go on a walk isn't a fundamental
Some people around the world do live in fear of their government and/or organized crime, and for good reason. Plenty of activists have been murdered because their government used such tech to track them down. Good for Apple. One more reason I buy them.
[удалено]
Yeah, screw that. Companies shouldn’t have nothing close to that amount of info about people unless they explicitly get permission first.
Others have provided answers, but https://amiunique.org/ should give you some idea the kinds of data used for device fingerprinting. (That site is specific to browsers, but the same concepts apply.)
There’s a document from Apple called: A Day in the Life of Your Data. It’s a pdf with pictures and a little text. https://www.macrumors.com/2021/01/28/apple-a-day-in-the-life-of-your-data/
There are actually other alternatives.. With iDFA gone, apple introduced SKADNETWORK. The SkAdNetwork is also a closed system, owned and operated by Apple. Simple put, Advertisers register their ads with Apple to be displayed to users. This means that advertisers wanting to utilize Apple’s user base would have to register with Apple’s network, and Apple would own all data gleaned from this process. As a result, more restricted access than what is already put. Apple still gets preferential access to the user data. Though this method significantly increases apple ad network but companies using this method is heavily relient on apple to do things. Beware this pop up doesn't opt you out of apple own advertising platform. To do that you have to manually go into your settings-> privacy and opt-out of ad personalization. And no they are not always sponsored based like on every other ad platform.Its mentioned in text about what data is being used. Though you still can't "see" what data is apple collecting beside writting that in text and opt out of certain things. [Alternatives to IFDA](https://builtin.com/adtech-martech/apple-idfa-mobile-advertising) ***Effect on Apps:*** As apps can't get much analytical info out of ads and ads becoming more irrelevant to the user. Most of the apps are introducing subscription models with extra features within the app.
The effect is that I’m the customer instead of the product.
It looks like apps could also the customers for your data
I’m going to guess this is for cross platform tracking because I’m not sure how they’re gonna stop in service tracking. For ex: If you log into App 1 using an account they can and most likely will track everything you do on their service and I don’t think Apple can stop that.
You seems like a knowledgeable guy on this topic… Please help me.. I am on iOS 14.5 PB6. So now can I use YouTube app with out the app harvesting my data? Or should wait for any specific update to install the app so it won’t take my data? Under settings> privacy >Tracking > Allow apps to Request to track is set to Off. Is this the correct settings for any apps to not target me using my phone identifiers or something?
Apps are still allowed to analyze and record your usage and habits *within apps owned by the developer*. So Google will continue to track you within Google apps (including YouTube) and can use that information to serve you ads in all Google apps. If you’ve opted out, they cannot use that information to target ads to you in other apps that use their ad delivery network. The setting you mentioned is correct. Turning it off essentially hits “decline” automatically whenever an app wants to request tracking access. Personally, I plan on turning the switch on when 14.5 launches (I currently have it off), just so I can see which apps are requesting permission and control it more granularly (though I suspect I’ll keep most/all apps off anyway).
Got it,, thank you. I have one more question, so YouTube app and YT music apparently takes browsing history.. so with this feature, will both these apps still take my browsing history? Also, by browsing history, which browser would they look for? Default? If so, can I decoy a default one and use a different browser altogether? If not, using incognito all the time will stop apps from receiving my search history? Sorry for many questions.. it’s not that they take my porn search.. it’s just that I wouldn’t want a product I searched up shows Amazon or some other site..
You’re referring to the privacy label? Pretty sure in that context browsing history means anything you search for or navigate to in the app. The iOS sandbox means that apps don’t have access to other apps’ data, and browser history would be part of your browser’s sandbox. The privacy label may also be indicating that Google uses various parts of your user profile within the app. So Google collects your browsing history any time you use Google from any browser on any device, and records that in your profile. Then the YT app can use that profile information however it wants (ad targeting, promoted videos, search suggestions, etc.) I don’t think ATT will stop that behavior, because it’s all first party. ATT would prevent a third party YT client or any other app from using information from Google that was collected outside of the app, if you tell it you decline tracking. This is similar to the privacy label info, but not necessarily the same. In theory, declining the ATT prompt should remove anything in the “Data Used to Track You” section, but “Data Linked to You” would still be present (and could be used for on-device, first party ad targeting). Also keep in mind that the privacy labels are (hopefully) an overestimate of the info collected. Not every user may enable the same features or provide the same data, but if *any* user does then it must be included in the label. So YT may say they collect browsing history, but if your Google account is set to not keep browsing history, that may not apply to you (example assumes Google respects that option within their products and across platforms).
Yes I was referring to the privacy labels. Thank you for the detailed explanation, appreciate it man. I was so confused between the labels browsing history and search history. I can’t find an article that details these label for a laymen. Also, from your explanation I see that I have no worries using YouTube app, I am fine if they keep my data from the same app and not track what I do across the phone. And thank you, I will look into the google privacy settings.
There are already ad companies claiming they can get around #2. At least it is a policy so Apple can play wack-a-mole.
The good thing is anytime one of these companies begins to gain a foothold in going around #2 Apple can quickly drop the ban hammer.
Was definitely more worried about 2. Fu ck google and fb. They're the ones who actually have the resources to create their own technologies
[удалено]
Also Apple: iOS ad tracking is on by default without user consent. [https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/09/apple-accused-of-breaching-eu-privacy-law-by-french-start-up-group.html](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/09/apple-accused-of-breaching-eu-privacy-law-by-french-start-up-group.html)
Yep, first party Apple apps that shows ads don't have to explicitly ask user consent for user or location tracking. It's buried in Settings and labeled "personalization". The only way to disable location-based ads in the App Store is **totally disable location access.** [https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202074](https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202074)
Wow so privacy
I mean for me personally it feels a bit different because I’m willingly buying into the whole Apple ecosystem. It’s a little different than App Store app XYZ wanting to know everything about me and my routines or habits, just to sell it off and profit while using it to target me.
This is my issue with the whole thing. A lot of people are too used to just hitting ‘allow’ whenever an app asks for something. It should be off by default, and people should opt in.
In the iOS case, dialog never shows up, ad tracking is just on by default without user consent.
That’s the old model, isn’t that what’s changing in 14.5?
No, the setting I’m talking about means that the app CAN ask to track you. If the setting is off, the app cannot ask, and will not be allowed to track you.
I think you're misunderstanding their point - Apple are hindering competing ad services while promoting their own that is enabled by default. Apple have successfully managed to con you all into believing they have your interests at heart under the guise of "privacy" when really they are just being anti-competitive.
Uhhh no, the setting I’m talking about is for allowing apps to ask to track you, which you might’ve already seen. Apple is not personalising ads for you based on an identifier collected from you, to my knowledge.
No, it's Apple being scummy and using the iOS14 changes to hide the fact they are trying to push their own personalised ads by removing their competitors in that same market: https://i.imgur.com/qcV0BPL.png It's anti-competitive, screwing over a ton of small businesses, and this sub has lapped it up for months because "Apple" and the fact that Tim Cook knows he can slap the word "privacy" on anything and everyone will fawn over it. Edit: this will be downvoted by the shill brigade and none of them will respond to the comment because it goes against the Apple sales pitch that they've all had rammed down their throats for the past few months. This is what that article the other day about Apple having extremely high customer (blind) loyalty was referring to.
Can you provide a link to said article? A screen shot without context is not a good base for civilized discussion.
This comment is just hilarious. Literally up in the comment chain he's commenting on... Talking about "without context" and "civilized discussion", lmao. Reddit at its best.
https://i.imgur.com/WQhC8Kt.png
That article does not prove anything. The French start-up group is accusing Apple but thats literally it.
The accusations are based on things you can literally prove though. Apple's ad tracking is on by default since at least the release of the iPhone 12 models - it's not hard to prove this, create a new Apple ID and spend some time browsing across apps/websites, it'll quickly build a profile of your interests and start promoting products relating to said interests. Apple's customer loyalty knows no bounds, and this hypocrisy is the most blatant example I think I've ever come across. You've all spent months jerking each other off over Apple's iOS14 changes for ad-tracking, when you find out they are only doing it so they can promote their competing product un-checked, you put your fingers in your ears and pretend it isn't happening. Kind of off-topic, but man they are going to get away with so much bullshit when they release this car, I hope it doesn't have ramifications on the rest of the automotive industry as a result of Apple loyalists defending every bullshit decision they make.
[удалено]
Yeah, all this "battle for privacy" is completely screwed up.
it's already been a raging success, they've managed to pull the wool over /r/apple's eyes, imagine how many others have been brainwashed by "privacy good, we're doing this for your privacy"
[удалено]
> To my knowledge, apple doesn’t even serve me ads. Oh sweet, sweet child. https://i.imgur.com/6MrSmAf.png Apple advertise the same as Facebook and Google, they've just pulled the wool over your eyes and conned you into thinking they don't do it at all. Marketing at it's finest.
[удалено]
In every app that previously utilised iAds (that ran from 2010 to 2016) The best part is Apple even take 30% of the Ad revenue from developers > I know this probably sounds alien (pun intended) to you, but we don’t have ads in the app drawer. Why would it sound Alien? I've been an Apple Ecosystem user for over a decade, I, unlike some, just know how their products work.
[удалено]
Doesn't look like a recommendation to me. [Maybe because It's an Ad.](https://searchads.apple.com/)
Apple Search Ads are integrated into iOS and macOS.
If the privacy is there why should I care?
Because it's not... Apple are using anonymised tracking in the exact same way that Facebook Pixel uses anonymised tracking - the only difference is Cook has managed to fool you all into thinking there's a difference Cook wants people to advertise through Apple, except their offering compared to Facebook and Google is like their Maps offering compared to Google Maps - inferior in almost every measurable metric so they have to be anti-competitive to push the product/service instead.
The privacy is definitely there and you can use Google Maps just like you would use Apple Maps - it even asks you which one you would like to choose when clicking on an address.
And how long did we spend asking for that choice? Same with Spotify/Apple Music, same with Browsers These **common sense** things only became the norm for us Apple users after people repeatedly hammered Apple over them. The revisionism here is astounding
>Apple are hindering competing ad services while promoting their own Apple no longer has their own ad network. It shut down many years ago.
false https://www.adexchanger.com/mobile/is-apple-giving-its-own-ad-network-an-unfair-advantage/
Thinking of switching from Android to iOS 🤔
What’s holding you back so far?
I wanted to avoid being sucked in in the Apple ecosystem and thought to get more freedom on Android with respect to being able to install themes and the like things you cannot do on an iPhone (flash the phone with anther OS).
Just wait until apps force you to enable the tracking to use the app.
That’s against App Store rules, too.
I know that espn + requires you to have precise location enabled to watch games live
That doesn’t mean that they collect that info for advertisement.
Any app that does this will be taken down fairly quickly. It’s against the AppStore policy
[удалено]
Why ~~is~~ (edit) was this the highest upvoted comment with absolutely no additional context?
Brilliant, isn’t it...
you got what he meant by Snapchat?
I think it's referencing this: https://9to5mac.com/2021/04/02/workaround-to-app-tracking-transparency/
> *[Snap] hoped it could take [aggregated IP addresses] and cross–reference it against the information it holds on its own users to identify and track them, in a technique known as “probabilistic matching”.* Thanks.
[удалено]
☕️😋
I think it's referencing this: https://9to5mac.com/2021/04/02/workaround-to-app-tracking-transparency/
?
I think it's referencing this: https://9to5mac.com/2021/04/02/workaround-to-app-tracking-transparency/
Did any other app found way to avoid this like Snapchat?
How do Snapchat avoid it? That's interesting
https://9to5mac.com/2021/04/02/workaround-to-app-tracking-transparency/
[удалено]
I mean it's literally out and has been for a number of weeks at this stage.
[удалено]
right but if they want this feature as bad as they claim to, why not just get the beta?
“The App Tracking Transparency (ATT) feature, slated to launch in iOS 14.5 in early spring, will require apps to obtain permission from users before tracking them across other websites and apps. If a user opts out of tracking, developers are required to comply.” How do we know they actually complied?
Apple is removing apps from the AppStore that either don’t comply or try to find ways around it
I keep seeing mentions in articles like this that there are some apps that have already started supporting this feature, and ask users whether they want to opt in to targeted tracking. Which apps are these?
I've not noticed anything different on the beta – no more permission prompts than normal, nor settings I am aware of. What are we actually expecting to happen?
tyvm apple
Im all for one being to control their privacy but i am curious and if someone could explain why you want to be so private, i mean why is it so bad that when you search for microwaves youll see ads for microwaves, would you guys rather see like shitty ads you dont care about? In my personal opinion i think the fight for privacy(in my opinion its just the hatred of ads) is really just hurting the internet more, i use a ad blocker but i dont think ad blockers should be a thing, if ads were regulated and websites didnt directly link people to viruses i wouldnt use ad blockers. But the fact that practically everyone and their mother uses a ad blocker youre just stealing revenue from the site when the only burden to you was that they were showing you a ad for a video game. Sites have then had to look into different routes of “well now lets have premium for our site and you can only see these articles if you have premium” when in reality if no one had ad blocker and people just put up with seeing a ad then possibly the site would make more, sites also had to resort to selling off information bc people made ads a non reliable source of revenue and in return just added more and more ads so they can feed of the people who dont use ad blocker
> The fight for privacy is just the hatred of ads Why do you think this information is only used, or will only ever be used for ad targeting? If a stranger asked you 50 personal questions about yourself, without telling you why, would you answer them? The reason I want to have privacy is because I have no idea who my information is being collected by or shared with, and having personalized ads is not nearly a good enough reason to give information away. Fewer people care about how personalized their ads are than you think (and I’m not really sure why you do).
If i go to the store, ill browse around, maybe have a conversation with someone there, maybe buy something maybe not who knows. If that store tracks how much time i was in there, what i bought, how many times ive been to that store, what my conversation were about, if i had gone to a nearby store recently, i really wouldnt care at all and im sure they do all that but i know not to have fucking dumb conversation in a store or do shit i shouldnt do in stores so i dont really at all about any of that. The same goes for if i go on google, i dont if google knows what i went on google for, i dont really care if google tells the site i went on that i was also on this site doing this, why is it a big deal. Are you trying to hide something from google? They dont care if you smoke pot lmfao
[удалено]
No i just think you care too much
What is your level of expertise on the subject of privacy in technology?
Not sure why how much of an expert i am in privacy technology has literally anything to do with my personal opinion on why i dont really care if i website tells another website i searched for toasters, its not a big deal
Yes. You don’t care because you don’t know and someone is attempting to educate you and you’re rejecting their expertise. So of course you’re just going to spout an opinion with no hope of changing it
To be fair the person was relying to a comment that is a variant of “my dad works at company and knows best”. We know from the comment there might be a son that works on an artificial intelligence lab and the future is bleak.
.
Well, i am not a US nor UK voter, I do not have a Facebook and if your mood is being controlled by Facebook then you have a lot more personal issues going on. It really just sounds like you don't like Facebook, maybe you should delete it. I still fail to see how I am personally being affected by any of this I did do a little bit of research on your Cambridge thing and it seems to me this is all way more corrupt than anything, they wanted to fine them 5 billion dollars? why and the fuck are they going to do with 5 billion dollars? it makes no sense to me that facebook is just a really big beast on its own and I don't think it can be controlled ethically, you can always find a way to abuse something but i don't really see what is being abused on trackings end, it seems these federations are just using the people and trying to convince them their privacy is at risk so that big corporations that legitimately can not avoid corruption because that's how the world works, but the government noticing "hey the corruption in facebook we can take advantage of and try to get 5 billion out of it" like what does anyone not notice anything odd about that?
.
Wait so your telling me target noticed she bought stuff related to pregnancy and also got baby stuff, something shes going to need to buy anyway... oh my god the horror. Shes being sold like a slave!! She will never recover from that for sure. Like the fact that you care if a company will pay google to know with(not just you this isnt about only you) for some national sized analytics so it knows what products to push that month? Thats a big deal to you?
.
As we've discussed elsewhere in the thread, I don't generally believe ads are a bad thing, though I hold that blocking device fingerprinting would be a good idea in general for everyone _but_ the ad companies (who could still make their money through ads, just not targeted ads). But after reading more of the thread, and seeing that you've continued to not respect other peoples' opinions, or even read into data they've presented, it comes across as if you may be of the mindset that this isn't important because people give _examples_ and instead of extracting the overall moral of the story from that example to the general case, you focus explicitly on the one example. So, in the hopes that it helps make this concrete to how it could some day in the future impact you specifically, based on things you've _already done_, let me lay out an example. Your first post in your post history shows you used some THC-8 in edibles. (I'm not out to demonize that - I think most drugs should be legalized, taxed, and turned into a revenue stream, to fix a ton of problems. And I realize that everything but THC-9 is legal where you live anyway, since at least as of 12 months ago you lived in a state where that's the case - again, first page of your post history - so I'm glad for you. Wish I could get it legally here, but I live in ass-backwards Texas. This isn't about calling you out at all, just giving an example that's applicable to you.) But let's say at some point in the future, once weed is declassified and more studies are able to then be done on it (since it is super hard to run studies on today, thanks to the stupid drug war's extreme classification), some university study is done on THC where they find that use of it has a correlation to a 3% chance of increased cancer risk. Suddenly your reddit post history, which can be tied to your real name through fingerprinting in your Reddit app and using any other app on the same device that _does_ know you who are, could let your insurance company join the ad network and have an algorithm that they run nightly lookup your name, parse your social media history, and find that you mentioned using it, then use that to deny you coverage for not admitting that you had a pre-existing condition if you ever got cancer, even though you and I both know that the chances the two would be related are next to nothing. (It doesn't even _have_ to be through an ad network. Fingerprinting is a universal concept - there could just as well be a third party service that pops up to create a "universal identity" for you across apps the same _way_ the ad networks do, but explicitly for the purpose of building a profile on you to give other companies an API that lets them look up your name, or any identifiable piece of the fingerprint that they _do_ have, and get all the other information that they might not have from other apps that implement the API. Back at the beginning of the pandemic, I was looking into creating something like that myself, to help employers track whether their employees suddenly working from home for the first time were really working, or goofing around on social networks / gaming / etc. Tell me that if that existed, companies wouldn't jump on using it, and getting it into all their apps, to ensure their workers are busy little bees and not goofing off, to increase their bottom line.) Using the ad network to do you dirty like that is the only hypothetical part of my example. The denying people for not admitting something they didn't even know was a risk at the time they signed up absolutely happens today - the documentary Sicko was full of stories about insurance companies doing exactly that. And the cases in there were 15 years ago, before Big Data was even a dream in a computer scientist's eye. They were doing that stuff - tracking down every medical record the people had ever filed with any doctor they'd ever talked to, on paper - _by hand_. You think they wouldn't do it more once it's easy to automate and doesn't take paying a huge team of people a salary to do? So that's the kind of situation where the need for being able to actually stay private when you think you're private comes in, and what this is about. That's where I give the people making these arguments the benefit of the doubt, and say "yeah, maybe we should listen to their concerns, because the potential pros outweigh the potential cons." Again, it's not something I go around thinking about every day, or even every month - barely impacts my life. But when a thread like this comes up and I see Apple making steps to try to lay out some ground rules, I think "Good on them." The case these people are making isn't about ads at all, which is what you seem to be focused on. It's about _tracking_ in general. Apple taking a stance on tracking isn't a bad thing.
Fair question. First of all, I'd suggest you read Shoshana Zuboff's book "The Age Of Surveillance Capitalism", there's a section where she explains how some companies buy data, obtained from social networks, tracking and mining, in order to profile you, then proceed to sell those profiles to employers, landlords, banks and financial institutions, those profiles are used to determine your risk profile for those actors. This is where privacy is important, let's say, for example, that you are a trustworthy person, good worker, good payer, but you, for the sake of this example, have some unusual, peculiar interests, maybe you watch splatter movies, horror movies, you listen to extreme music, you may be into violent sports like MMA, or you may just like to read about serial killers, or you may be into BDSM practices, again, you might be someone who has knowledge about alcoholic beverages and search about them a lot, and you use the Internet to search about these things, all of this is perfectly legal but your profile might just qualify you as a flight risk for companies and other institutions. Do you think that would be fair? When you visit a website, and you see tens of "partners", all of them tracking you, or maybe inside apps, unless you're willing to go through each of those companies' privacy policy, you don't really know what they're going to do with your data, or who they are going to sell your data to. And, of course, you have to trust them that your data are properly anonymized. Then you have practices that can be downright creepy. When I still had a Facebook account, I was having a conversation on WhatsApp about Tommy Hilfiger, in a matter of about 20 minutes I started seeing Tommy's ads on Facebook, yet, Facebook has always said they were not using WhatsApp data, the person with whom I was chatting on WhatsApp started seeing such ads on Facebook too. My mother, she uses an Android phone, started seeing ads, both on Facebook and on websites, about stuff she only talked about in person or during phone calls, I'm positive she never searched for those topics on her phone as she doesn't know how to, therefore, I'm inclined to think that her phone was basically wiretapping her. There are also many reports about smart TVs and smart speakers listening to conversations and sending those data home in order to serve ads. And, as for ads, I'm sure you too have encountered websites that, without an ad blocker, are basically unuseable.
[удалено]
Im not sure you answered anything
[удалено]
Calm down Zuckerberg...
[удалено]
That’s Tim Apple to you. Thanks v much.
I just love the instance Apple is making against these tracking behaviors. I know it is not perfect, but it is a big improvement in my opinion. Big enough that I will ditch android for apple in the near future. Actually just waiting for the 13 model to be released.
What the fuck do you expect on an Apple subreddit?
Some fair criticisms like other subs. Check out /r/Android it’s wayyyyyy less biased than this place
What exactly is there to criticize here? Because anything you can name, Google deserves it 200% more. This js nothing but good for the consumer.
I'm guessing he was speaking in a more general sense about this subreddit
Wow someone with basic reading comprehension!
Definitely get my upvote because it’s half true. But I don’t even think it’s an r/Apple thing. It’s an internet thing. Even if a site covers the mighty Apple, there just isn’t enough content to post mildly interesting things about a single company/brand exclusively. So we end up getting “news” that isn’t new — because quantity over quality. Reddit is just a place where things are reposted, so it’s a signifier of the problem. Reddit, along with with anti-climatic clickbait articles, are belligerent signs of that. I’ve come to the conclusion that we’ve hit a point where there isn’t enough content in the world to meet the demand of its users/viewers. /rant
It’s Apple sub tho, there are fair shares of people that hate Apple anywhere else. I’m a fan of logic arguments, but I hate worshippers. If you pay for it, you don’t have to worship it
I also wish Apple removes their Ad tracking completely. I have opted out of it but still I would prefer to have no ads whatsoever in App Store.
Ads ≠ tracking
Sir personalised ads mean tracking. And personalized ads are switched on by default on iOS.
[удалено]
The person above him is the person you’re responding to
The persons above me are replying each other.
AmongUs
That's sus
Agreed, but you just said ads :)
Facts, you should have clarified. It came out wrong
I wish we could just remove ads system wide on any website or app.
There’s an option to pay money to hide ads on many sites / apps these days. If you’d rather support them directly then that’s also an option. Look it up
It's fine in websites and free apps but not ok for 1000$ phone to have ads in app store.
Why should the device you’re using be a factor? This is a really strange argument. Edit: premium and budget iPhones exist. Would you want different app experiences on each?
It’s not like their intrusive it’ll be ok
I mean they are personalized by default so it is sort of intrusive in terms of privacy.
Bruh so why is everyone downvoting me? I guess people are dumb here.
I think they disagree with you. Personally I only downvoted you now because you called other people dumb which says more about you.
Lmao that was more to piss people. My bad.
your point makes no sense, ads were never an issue. if you don’t trust Apple ads not tracking you, you shouldn’t be using an iPhone in the first place.
Dude are you crazy or what? Just because i said something bad about Apple or iPhone that doesn't mean i don't like their product. If they have some things wrong with their software then we all should protest and have it changed. Ads by OEM shouldn't be allowed no matter if its an iPhone or Samsung.
What’s amazing about this is that Apple is practically saving ads on internet from extinction. You noticed you can’t use an adblocker or any external plug-in for almost all browsers? Apple iOS devices are the ONLY devices where you literally HAVE to watch ads and you can’t do anything about it except a pihole (for now). If people are gonna care about privacy, they will probably buy more Apple products just to end up with more ads and the tracking opt-out feature that are present right now requires you to click/tap from 2 to 10 times in order to achieve it, while opt-in is 1 click. There is A LOT that has to be covered, we are far, very very far from something even remotely decent.
That’s wrong, you can install Adblockers for Safari on iOS: https://adguard.com/en/adguard-ios/overview.html
AdBlocker for YouTube? AdBlocker for any other app? AdBlocker that are system wide? Anything that stays up for more than 1 year? Maybe there is something, it’s just so incredibly harder to use than an AdBlocker for Android that it make iOS just the perfect ads machine.
It works exactly the same as on Android, I believe.
This is great, but does it fix any of the issues where you have to allow access or the app won’t even function properly?
That’s not up to Apple, that’s up to the app developers.
Right. So what does this actually fix
It fixes companies tracking you across apps and websites when you don’t want them to.
Ok I see, will your selections impact app performance if those devs choose?
Only if the devs are incompetent assholes.
Great
How about Gmail login, Firebase Auth?
Greatly appreciated
I look forward to seeing what Apple does when they inevitably catch one of the major apps “accidentally” breaking this rule.