4 ms·

Good, an older friend of mine that barely knows how to access the appstore got charged 70€ a month without having any idea why.

wpietri 8y ago
This stuff makes my blood boil. However much I appreciate free markets in general (which is quite a bit) I don't think vulnerable users should be sacrificed on an ideological altar. Good for Apple stepping up here.
- briandear 8y ago
  Actually both of your positions aren’t contradictory. Free markets are predicated on free flows of information: fully informing people of what they are potentially buying or agreeing to is not inconsistent with free markets. I’d argue that misleading information is really not a free market thing at all, quite the contrary. If your app is worth the money, you should gladly accept the price. The fact that some apps use “tricks” means that their app isn’t worth what is being asked.
  - wpietri 8y ago
    I'd personally agree, but a great many people who claim to be for free markets are in practice for unregulated markets. Their theory is that the invisible hand will optimize all things. To me that sounds more like an invisible magic sparkle pony. Having worked for financial traders, I got to see up close that some of our most effective markets are very tightly regulated, and for good reason. If a market participant can trust the deals on offer, trades are fast and frequent, and sellers compete on dimensions like price and quality. But if a seller can do well by scamming, that not only harms the people they trade with, but the market itself, in that trust is reduced. That raises costs for all buyers (because they have to do more verification work before each trade), and puts a burden on all sellers (because they have to work harder to prove they're not evil). It also reduces turnover, as increased risk means fewer deals done. So for me the question is how we get a free flow of accurate information. I think the obvious answer is tight regulation with a willingness to sanction deceptive actors. But for a lot of people, and they seem especially common here, that kind of regulation is anathema, as to them it's the opposite of "free".

wpietri 8y ago

This stuff makes my blood boil. However much I appreciate free markets in general (which is quite a bit) I don't think vulnerable users should be sacrificed on an ideological altar. Good for Apple stepping up here.

briandear 8y ago
Actually both of your positions aren’t contradictory. Free markets are predicated on free flows of information: fully informing people of what they are potentially buying or agreeing to is not inconsistent with free markets. I’d argue that misleading information is really not a free market thing at all, quite the contrary. If your app is worth the money, you should gladly accept the price. The fact that some apps use “tricks” means that their app isn’t worth what is being asked.
- wpietri 8y ago
  I'd personally agree, but a great many people who claim to be for free markets are in practice for unregulated markets. Their theory is that the invisible hand will optimize all things. To me that sounds more like an invisible magic sparkle pony. Having worked for financial traders, I got to see up close that some of our most effective markets are very tightly regulated, and for good reason. If a market participant can trust the deals on offer, trades are fast and frequent, and sellers compete on dimensions like price and quality. But if a seller can do well by scamming, that not only harms the people they trade with, but the market itself, in that trust is reduced. That raises costs for all buyers (because they have to do more verification work before each trade), and puts a burden on all sellers (because they have to work harder to prove they're not evil). It also reduces turnover, as increased risk means fewer deals done. So for me the question is how we get a free flow of accurate information. I think the obvious answer is tight regulation with a willingness to sanction deceptive actors. But for a lot of people, and they seem especially common here, that kind of regulation is anathema, as to them it's the opposite of "free".