7 ms·

People could click the checkboxes and give away their privacy, as panelists in these Google and Facebook research programs did. Some privacy advocates think th

People could click the checkboxes and give away their privacy, as panelists in these Google and Facebook research programs did. Some privacy advocates think that people shouldn’t have the freedom to do that, because they can make bad choices. They aren’t wrong that a locked down system like iOS is safer overall for users, as long as you’re ok with Apple controlling what content you can use.

wmf 8y ago
Maybe iOS could allow sideloading of normal apps but not VPNs or CA certificates.
- dymk 8y ago
  You've identified a partial list of apps which might be bad for user privacy. Could you produce an exhaustive list, though? And specific policy defining what would constitute a violating app?
- saagarjha 8y ago
  Apple already does this; you need to be part of the paid developer program to be able to sign VPN apps.
- curt15 8y ago
  Forcing VPNs to be installed only via the app store also means that an authoritarian state like China has a single source to clamp down on when they want to restrict citizens' access to information.
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    Which China has already done.
  - scarface74 8y ago
    You don’t need to “install” VPN apps at all. https://www.imore.com/how-configure-vpn-access-your-iphone-or-ipad https://www.imore.com/how-configure-vpn-access-your-iphone-o...
baroffoos 8y ago
Its probably a good idea for grandma to have a phone you can not possibly mess up with but it sucks for everyone else that there is no setting to escape bubblewrap mode. I love how linux distros are set up. I can easily find trusted software in the repos but nothing stops me from running anything I want if needed and I understand the risks of running stuff outside of those repos.
- eridius 8y ago
  > it sucks for everyone else that there is no setting to escape bubblewrap mode. Yes there is. It's called Android. I'm not being glib here, I'm totally serious. If you don't like the security restrictions that iOS has, then use Android.
  - mrep 8y ago
    I'm extremely free market but phones are used by practically everyone and 1 of the practically only 2 operating systems won't allow anyone whatsoever to distribute applications in any way outside of their totalitarian system. I get your point and I'm not for forcing Apple to allow free side loading apps yet (I have an android partially because of this reason) but it is infuriating that when I had an iphone, I could not use any apps not allowed by them and annoying that i don't have that ability if I ever want to go back to an Iphone (and a major blocker for going back to be honest now that phone upgrades don't mean much these days).
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - rlue 8y ago
    The Librem 5 is coming! (Slated for April)
  - chappi42 8y ago
    With Android you suffer privacy intrusions. Unfortunately the market has failed with the dominant iOS/Android options. Regulations to protect consumers are required imo. Apple and Google are too big and have no incentive to fix this on their side.
simion314 8y ago
Apple can do what they want, I am happy that now we have a good example to show people that iOS devices are more like a console and less like a computer. I would like at least GPL software to be allowed on the store.
- wukerplank 8y ago
  Just to clarify: It's not the GPL that is not allowed on the store, it's the GPL that forbids putting software licensed under it on the store.
  - simion314 8y ago
    GPL gives you rights, the store restricts your rights so is incompatible with GPL.
    - zbuf 8y ago
      Yup, and this is the GPL working as intended. The store doesn't allow you to redistribute the software, you must get your software from Apple. Seems to be the right thing long-term, though it prevents you having that piece of GPL software that you want today. Sad to see pieces of software relicensing so they weren't affected by such a clause, all because of the lure of being in the Mac app store.
  - sascha_sl 8y ago
    Yes; and what a lot of people omit is that if you have the full copyright to a GPL'd piece of software (because you don't accept contributions without extra license/assignment), you can publish it to the app store. Why do you think Wesnoth is on iOS?
    - saagarjha 8y ago
      > Yes; and what a lot of people omit is that if you have the full copyright to a GPL'd piece of software (because you don't accept contributions without extra license/assignment), you can publish it to the app store. In this case, you're effectively dual-licensing your software.
sascha_sl 8y ago
The problem isn't really bad choices, it's uninformed choices. People don't realize how little data is needed to extrapolate a lot. Then you usually get the "facebook is turning on my microphone without asking me" people. They just can't fathom that the precision with which they get ads could be the result of anything else.
- piyush_soni 8y ago
  >> The problem isn't really bad choices, it's uninformed choices So that, should be the job of the OS (Apple in this case), rather than limiting the user's choices of where he/she can install an app from.
  - bastawhiz 8y ago
    Apple might be a dictator, but so far they've proven to be mostly benevolent. I'm glad my mom doesn't have the ability to sell her privacy to Facebook via a shady VPN in exchange for gift cards. The problem is that mobile devices can say "This app changes your VPN settings and installs a root cert". The general public says "Whatever, I want my olive garden gift card." It could could maybe say "This app could see everything you do online", but it really needs to explain "This app can see very site you visit, every message you send, every porn link you click, etc". Until the OS can actually inform the user what they're trading, it's not choice, it's deception. And that brings us back to Apple. Until devices can do this for themselves, someone needs to be the gate keeper. Letting users willingly install some candy-themed clicker game that steals your contacts, location, and photos is _objectively bad_ in the same way that BonzaiBuddy and CometCursor were bad twenty years ago. Right now, the only answer we have to this problem is Apple and Google playing the role of the good guy and working towards better solutions.
    - piyush_soni 8y ago
      So why do you think Apple can't explain its permissions in a way majority of its users can understand (yes, including the clear cautionary messages that you wrote). Guess what, Android does that! When you install any third party keyboard on Android, it clearly tells you in plain text it can read everything you type, including credit card numbers etc. We just need the information about what can be the worst possibilities for each permission an app asks for. Apple doesn't want to do that. It wants control over everything.
signal11 8y ago
Another example of how flexibility can hurt a platform, from the Android world, is Samsung's Knox, which creates a very Command and Control "IT-friendly" layer for work purposes on Android, and in doing so kills the platform's usability because all apps from the mail client to the keyboard were selected by IT with no thought towards usability. We have Knox on work Android devices, but because our IT team also offer iOS, people just choose iOS, because it results in a nicer experience. Letting other people root your system to accomplish something is great for flexibility and gives you short-term wins. But it can result in massive damage to the platform if left unchecked -- kind of like how OEMs turned Windows into a hellish experience with pre-installed apps like WildTangent Games and the like. End-users won't blame the IT department or the OEM, they'll blame the platform. This is already happening on Android today. There's a reason Google's Pixel marketing hardly ever mentions "Android".

wmf 8y ago

Maybe iOS could allow sideloading of normal apps but not VPNs or CA certificates.

dymk 8y ago
You've identified a partial list of apps which might be bad for user privacy. Could you produce an exhaustive list, though? And specific policy defining what would constitute a violating app?
saagarjha 8y ago
Apple already does this; you need to be part of the paid developer program to be able to sign VPN apps.
curt15 8y ago
Forcing VPNs to be installed only via the app store also means that an authoritarian state like China has a single source to clamp down on when they want to restrict citizens' access to information.
- saagarjha 8y ago
  Which China has already done.
- scarface74 8y ago
  You don’t need to “install” VPN apps at all. https://www.imore.com/how-configure-vpn-access-your-iphone-or-ipad https://www.imore.com/how-configure-vpn-access-your-iphone-o...

baroffoos 8y ago

Its probably a good idea for grandma to have a phone you can not possibly mess up with but it sucks for everyone else that there is no setting to escape bubblewrap mode. I love how linux distros are set up. I can easily find trusted software in the repos but nothing stops me from running anything I want if needed and I understand the risks of running stuff outside of those repos.

eridius 8y ago
> it sucks for everyone else that there is no setting to escape bubblewrap mode. Yes there is. It's called Android. I'm not being glib here, I'm totally serious. If you don't like the security restrictions that iOS has, then use Android.
- mrep 8y ago
  I'm extremely free market but phones are used by practically everyone and 1 of the practically only 2 operating systems won't allow anyone whatsoever to distribute applications in any way outside of their totalitarian system. I get your point and I'm not for forcing Apple to allow free side loading apps yet (I have an android partially because of this reason) but it is infuriating that when I had an iphone, I could not use any apps not allowed by them and annoying that i don't have that ability if I ever want to go back to an Iphone (and a major blocker for going back to be honest now that phone upgrades don't mean much these days).
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- rlue 8y ago
  The Librem 5 is coming! (Slated for April)
- chappi42 8y ago
  With Android you suffer privacy intrusions. Unfortunately the market has failed with the dominant iOS/Android options. Regulations to protect consumers are required imo. Apple and Google are too big and have no incentive to fix this on their side.

simion314 8y ago

Apple can do what they want, I am happy that now we have a good example to show people that iOS devices are more like a console and less like a computer. I would like at least GPL software to be allowed on the store.

wukerplank 8y ago
Just to clarify: It's not the GPL that is not allowed on the store, it's the GPL that forbids putting software licensed under it on the store.
- simion314 8y ago
  GPL gives you rights, the store restricts your rights so is incompatible with GPL.
  - zbuf 8y ago
    Yup, and this is the GPL working as intended. The store doesn't allow you to redistribute the software, you must get your software from Apple. Seems to be the right thing long-term, though it prevents you having that piece of GPL software that you want today. Sad to see pieces of software relicensing so they weren't affected by such a clause, all because of the lure of being in the Mac app store.
- sascha_sl 8y ago
  Yes; and what a lot of people omit is that if you have the full copyright to a GPL'd piece of software (because you don't accept contributions without extra license/assignment), you can publish it to the app store. Why do you think Wesnoth is on iOS?
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    > Yes; and what a lot of people omit is that if you have the full copyright to a GPL'd piece of software (because you don't accept contributions without extra license/assignment), you can publish it to the app store. In this case, you're effectively dual-licensing your software.

sascha_sl 8y ago

The problem isn't really bad choices, it's uninformed choices. People don't realize how little data is needed to extrapolate a lot. Then you usually get the "facebook is turning on my microphone without asking me" people. They just can't fathom that the precision with which they get ads could be the result of anything else.

piyush_soni 8y ago
>> The problem isn't really bad choices, it's uninformed choices So that, should be the job of the OS (Apple in this case), rather than limiting the user's choices of where he/she can install an app from.
- bastawhiz 8y ago
  Apple might be a dictator, but so far they've proven to be mostly benevolent. I'm glad my mom doesn't have the ability to sell her privacy to Facebook via a shady VPN in exchange for gift cards. The problem is that mobile devices can say "This app changes your VPN settings and installs a root cert". The general public says "Whatever, I want my olive garden gift card." It could could maybe say "This app could see everything you do online", but it really needs to explain "This app can see very site you visit, every message you send, every porn link you click, etc". Until the OS can actually inform the user what they're trading, it's not choice, it's deception. And that brings us back to Apple. Until devices can do this for themselves, someone needs to be the gate keeper. Letting users willingly install some candy-themed clicker game that steals your contacts, location, and photos is _objectively bad_ in the same way that BonzaiBuddy and CometCursor were bad twenty years ago. Right now, the only answer we have to this problem is Apple and Google playing the role of the good guy and working towards better solutions.
  - piyush_soni 8y ago
    So why do you think Apple can't explain its permissions in a way majority of its users can understand (yes, including the clear cautionary messages that you wrote). Guess what, Android does that! When you install any third party keyboard on Android, it clearly tells you in plain text it can read everything you type, including credit card numbers etc. We just need the information about what can be the worst possibilities for each permission an app asks for. Apple doesn't want to do that. It wants control over everything.

signal11 8y ago

Another example of how flexibility can hurt a platform, from the Android world, is Samsung's Knox, which creates a very Command and Control "IT-friendly" layer for work purposes on Android, and in doing so kills the platform's usability because all apps from the mail client to the keyboard were selected by IT with no thought towards usability. We have Knox on work Android devices, but because our IT team also offer iOS, people just choose iOS, because it results in a nicer experience. Letting other people root your system to accomplish something is great for flexibility and gives you short-term wins. But it can result in massive damage to the platform if left unchecked -- kind of like how OEMs turned Windows into a hellish experience with pre-installed apps like WildTangent Games and the like. End-users won't blame the IT department or the OEM, they'll blame the platform. This is already happening on Android today. There's a reason Google's Pixel marketing hardly ever mentions "Android".