When Apple gives away it's products for free, do let me know.
i get free software from apple. new operating systems and iWork and ilife. thanks to the educational discounts i got quite a bit of money off my new MacBook Pro and had free beats headphones added to boot.
google lets you have software for free, mostly online software, that they have the right to scour your data-- well, their data now.
I don't have a problem with ads on web pages. What I don't want is those ads to impede my reading experience by automatically loading the iOS App Store, or covering the content with a big square of crap I don't care about.
I don't want half the page filled with ads that start with phrases like 'You won't believe …' or 'Ten ways to …'
If the ad syndicates would just think about what they're doing then Apple wouldn't have to do this.
I'm no fan of Google, but they don't decide how many ads go on a page.
The whole ad impression, click bait paradigm for funding web presence has created a sewage system of the internet, where information is propelled in a stream of excrement at huge inefficiency while we pay in bandwidth and the most precious commodity, time.
The worst part about those ads/“articles” is not that they exist, but that they actually work on people. They actually affect the psyche of average people.
The worst part about those ads/“articles” is not that they exist, but that they actually work on people. They actually affect the psyche of average people.
Well, that is indeed very scary. Some of these people are probably allowed to drive and use sharp pencils.
The whole ad impression, click bait paradigm for funding web presence has created a sewage system of the internet, where information is propelled in a stream of excrement at huge inefficiency while we pay in bandwidth and the most precious commodity, time.
The whole ad impression, click bait paradigm for funding web presence has created a sewage system of the internet, where information is propelled in a stream of excrement at huge inefficiency while we pay in bandwidth and the most precious commodity, time.
Oh, the irony.
Oh the irony indeed!
Here we are on a site that used to be known for its divisive and sharp witted editorial; now it's almost exclusively news aggregation, with little in the way of unique rumors, and notable for its forum skirmishes. Sure, there is useful information, but is it unique information, or is it just convenient aggregation?
If I and others choose ad blocking in large enough numbers, then many things might happen with this site as far as financial support and countermeasures to blocking. But the ultimate question is whether this site in its current form is even necessary to the Apple community? Would there be any long term loss felt by Apple users, or would this niche be absorbed by others.
The worst part about those ads/“articles” is not that they exist, but that they actually work on people. They actually affect the psyche of average people.
All psychology, as proven by numerous studies. From kids choosing vegetables offered in McDonald's fries' package over "natural", over product placements in Supermarkets and movies and beyond. It works even when you try to be conscious about it, just to a different degree. While I am personally not sure whether ever one Internet Ad worked on me, as I saintly find them annoying, I would not be surprised if seem buttons inside were pushed now and then.
To be consequent to the last extent all advertising should be verboten, and all products sold in grey, unmarked boxes.
(Hm, coming to think of it, possibly it would reveal those funny messages, like "CONSUME", "BREED", "WATCH TV", if you know what I mean... ;-) )
If this is a technique Apple expressly allows and even mentions in a tech note, then ideal or not, I surely don't blame Google for pointing some developers in that direction.
Maybe I'm slow today. From what I understand, and in simple terms, Apple puts a technique in place in order to make the iOS more safe, by disallowing potentially insecure/nefarious HTML code by making HTTPS mandatory. At the same time they propose loopholes for this in a tech note? Che?
I finished reading Google's ATS handling. It seems to only be limited apps that communicate using nonsecure HTTP connections. I hate Google in general, but even their paper says that they want people to start upgrading their apps to use encrypted HTTPS connections, and if that is done, everything will be fine and no "workarounds" will be needed.
Am I missing something? It's more like Google is telling app developers to update their apps to be more current and secure.
Yes Google is helping lazy developers to sidestep Apple's security protocols, which Apple has given developers plenty of time to implement. Telling them to update their apps all while giving them the tools to put it off having to do the updates even further thereby sidestepping Apples policies is slimey.
Yes Google is helping lazy developers to sidestep Apple's security protocols, which Apple has given developers plenty of time to implement. Telling them to update their apps all while giving them the tools to put it off having to do the updates even further thereby sidestepping Apples policies is slimey.
Apple says "App Transport Security is a feature that improves the security of connections between an app and web services. The feature consists of default connection requirements that conform to best practices for secure connections. Apps can override this default behavior and turn off transport security." Then discusses it.
When Apple gives away it's products for free, do let me know.
Google doesn't give away its products for free. Its products are user profiles that are matched with ads. They charge a lot for our personal habits. Maybe I'm misreading your comment, but I think you're mistaken about Google's business model.
Trolls bristle when it is pointed out that Google is an advertising business whose product is consumer data like spending habits, website visits and the like. Google is not a ‘high tech’ company by any means. It makes its money the old fashioned way by standing on a soapbox and hawking information.
Comments
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
DESTROY THEM
Hardcode into iOS: “if Google, then refuse to load”. Remove their products from the App Store. MAKE THEM BLEED.
Take one valium a day, with food.
When Apple gives away it's products for free, do let me know.
i get free software from apple. new operating systems and iWork and ilife. thanks to the educational discounts i got quite a bit of money off my new MacBook Pro and had free beats headphones added to boot.
google lets you have software for free, mostly online software, that they have the right to scour your data-- well, their data now.
Nah, the company needs to be destroyed and its employees scattered to the winds.
I don't have a problem with ads on web pages. What I don't want is those ads to impede my reading experience by automatically loading the iOS App Store, or covering the content with a big square of crap I don't care about.
I don't want half the page filled with ads that start with phrases like 'You won't believe …' or 'Ten ways to …'
If the ad syndicates would just think about what they're doing then Apple wouldn't have to do this.
I'm no fan of Google, but they don't decide how many ads go on a page.
The whole ad impression, click bait paradigm for funding web presence has created a sewage system of the internet, where information is propelled in a stream of excrement at huge inefficiency while we pay in bandwidth and the most precious commodity, time.
'You won't believe …' or 'Ten ways to …'
The worst part about those ads/“articles” is not that they exist, but that they actually work on people. They actually affect the psyche of average people.
The worst part about those ads/“articles” is not that they exist, but that they actually work on people. They actually affect the psyche of average people.
Well, that is indeed very scary. Some of these people are probably allowed to drive and use sharp pencils.
The whole ad impression, click bait paradigm for funding web presence has created a sewage system of the internet, where information is propelled in a stream of excrement at huge inefficiency while we pay in bandwidth and the most precious commodity, time.
Oh, the irony.The whole ad impression, click bait paradigm for funding web presence has created a sewage system of the internet, where information is propelled in a stream of excrement at huge inefficiency while we pay in bandwidth and the most precious commodity, time.
Oh, the irony.
Oh the irony indeed!
Here we are on a site that used to be known for its divisive and sharp witted editorial; now it's almost exclusively news aggregation, with little in the way of unique rumors, and notable for its forum skirmishes. Sure, there is useful information, but is it unique information, or is it just convenient aggregation?
If I and others choose ad blocking in large enough numbers, then many things might happen with this site as far as financial support and countermeasures to blocking. But the ultimate question is whether this site in its current form is even necessary to the Apple community? Would there be any long term loss felt by Apple users, or would this niche be absorbed by others.
The worst part about those ads/“articles” is not that they exist, but that they actually work on people. They actually affect the psyche of average people.
All psychology, as proven by numerous studies. From kids choosing vegetables offered in McDonald's fries' package over "natural", over product placements in Supermarkets and movies and beyond. It works even when you try to be conscious about it, just to a different degree. While I am personally not sure whether ever one Internet Ad worked on me, as I saintly find them annoying, I would not be surprised if seem buttons inside were pushed now and then.
To be consequent to the last extent all advertising should be verboten, and all products sold in grey, unmarked boxes.
(Hm, coming to think of it, possibly it would reveal those funny messages, like "CONSUME", "BREED", "WATCH TV", if you know what I mean... ;-) )
If this is a technique Apple expressly allows and even mentions in a tech note, then ideal or not, I surely don't blame Google for pointing some developers in that direction.
Maybe I'm slow today. From what I understand, and in simple terms, Apple puts a technique in place in order to make the iOS more safe, by disallowing potentially insecure/nefarious HTML code by making HTTPS mandatory. At the same time they propose loopholes for this in a tech note? Che?
Yes Google is helping lazy developers to sidestep Apple's security protocols, which Apple has given developers plenty of time to implement. Telling them to update their apps all while giving them the tools to put it off having to do the updates even further thereby sidestepping Apples policies is slimey.
Apps can override this default behavior and turn off transport security."
Why would Apple want to do this?
Trolls bristle when it is pointed out that Google is an advertising business whose product is consumer data like spending habits, website visits and the like. Google is not a ‘high tech’ company by any means. It makes its money the old fashioned way by standing on a soapbox and hawking information.
Just the default ones.
Why would Apple want to do this?
I get why they provide it in the short term. Is there any global settings on the iPhone that default is https that can't be overridden by the app?