svanstrom

Got to love organisations joining people together to fight for individuals that otherwise would get lost among people with monetary and political power.

https://www.sumofus.org/media/apple-increasingly-isolated-over-hong-kong-security-law-campaigners-warn/

https://www.sumofus.org/media/protesters-tell-apple-protect-free-speech-in-china/

https://www.sumofus.org/media/apple-adopts-landmark-new-human-rights-policy-following-shareholder-pressure/

Fidonet127 said:

svanstrom said:

Fidonet127 said:

CloudTalkin said:

Fidonet127 said:

Mac Rumors has an update from Apple confirming.

This is not a reduction of privacy for normal users, only for beta users and only for a short amount of time.

The battles with Epic and regulators weakened Apple. Apple cannot fight all sides, and every battle at once.

Apple wasn't weakened by Epic or regulators.  That's silly.  Apple has internal and external legal representation.  They can fight as many battles as they need to fight.  They made a conscious decision to appease the dev community.  No sense trying to portray Apple as down trodden waif being bullied.  Apple is a behemoth with considerable might. Pretty sure they are going to figure out a way for the devs to continue to thrive on the App Store, thus allowing the App Store to continue to thrive filled with apps.  The App Store/dev relationship is symbiotic.  One can't survive without the other. 

Ever hear the term, death of a thousand cuts? Every organization only has a finite number of resources. Each person only has a finite number of hours they live, in which they have to sleep, eat, work and if they can, play. Not a single organization can fight every battle. That is why you are told to pick and choose your battles. 

Takes those thousand, and about a gazillion more cuts to wear down Apple, though. You'd run out of people finding it worth making those cuts before Apple run out of resources to handle them.

Not at the same time.

Thing is, at a certain stage the coordinated "attack" on Apple would become too ridiculous for the legal/political system to not sort of bulge and contort.

There's just this basic concept of being able to mount a fair and reasonable legal defence, and that right is/will be protected; and the legal system will autocorrect/throttle, as it will be both overloaded and having to wait for the outcome of other processes before they're able to proceed with what's going on in their courts.

Apple will be good.

Fidonet127 said:

CloudTalkin said:

Fidonet127 said:

Mac Rumors has an update from Apple confirming.

This is not a reduction of privacy for normal users, only for beta users and only for a short amount of time.

The battles with Epic and regulators weakened Apple. Apple cannot fight all sides, and every battle at once.

Apple wasn't weakened by Epic or regulators.  That's silly.  Apple has internal and external legal representation.  They can fight as many battles as they need to fight.  They made a conscious decision to appease the dev community.  No sense trying to portray Apple as down trodden waif being bullied.  Apple is a behemoth with considerable might. Pretty sure they are going to figure out a way for the devs to continue to thrive on the App Store, thus allowing the App Store to continue to thrive filled with apps.  The App Store/dev relationship is symbiotic.  One can't survive without the other. 

Ever hear the term, death of a thousand cuts? Every organization only has a finite number of resources. Each person only has a finite number of hours they live, in which they have to sleep, eat, work and if they can, play. Not a single organization can fight every battle. That is why you are told to pick and choose your battles. 

Takes those thousand, and about a gazillion more cuts to wear down Apple, though. You'd run out of people finding it worth making those cuts before Apple run out of resources to handle them.

auxio said:

pulseimages said:

I was eagerly looking forward to not being blitzed by personalized ads while on Facebook and Instagram. This is bullshit. 

I was eagerly looking forward to the tech industry changing so that companies aren't forced to turn to customer data monetization in order to make a go of it.  They can do it based on the merits and value of their technology alone.

They were never forced to work this way, it was just easier than making a product that people actually would be willing to pay for.

For example, many apps could be made to work in either offline mode or mostly decentralised; which would make it a lot cheaper to run the services (no backend constantly eating up resources when the apps are used). But the apps end up intentionally "crippled" and heavily reliant on a backend, simply because the developers designed the whole thing to not provide a service; they developed it to grab people's data, and to keep their attention for ads.

So they were never forced to work this way, they intentionally worked this way because there were sheep that were easy targets because the OS didn't offer enough protection.

pulseimages said:

I was eagerly looking forward to not being blitzed by personalized ads while on Facebook and Instagram. This is 🐃💩. 

You might be interested in this: https://lockdownhq.com/

(No affiliation etc, and so on.)