9 ms·

>Is that "spyware"? Yes, absolutely. It uses energy and bandwidth I paid for to surreptitiously transmit my information for use which will solely benefit Face

>Is that "spyware"? Yes, absolutely. It uses energy and bandwidth I paid for to surreptitiously transmit my information for use which will solely benefit Facebook and the software developer.

cjhopman 6y ago
That definition is rather too broad. It makes basically everything spyware which dilutes the word too much to be useful.
- tossmeout 6y ago
  This is what happens to every charged label. 1. People realize the label is powerful. 2. They begin applying the label to as many things they don't like as they can get away with. 3. This changes the definition of the label, causing it to become some blanket umbrella term. 4. The label loses its power, because it now describes many lukewarm behaviors instead of just the worst offenses. For example, it's popular nowadays to say "everyone is racist." Well, if everyone is racist, is being labeled a racist really that bad? Not compared to what it used to imply about you.
- Nicksil 6y ago
  >That definition is rather too broad. It makes basically everything spyware which dilutes the word too much to be useful. I don't agree. I was very specific in stating that the practice of consuming a user's resources to transmit their information, without their explicit consent, nor an indication of the activity, for the sole benefit of Facebook and the software developer, can absolutely be considered spyware.
- cosmojg 6y ago
  Nowadays, lots of things are spyware. It's important that we acknowledge this fact. Back when the Internet had a more technical userbase, the shady nonsense software tries to pull nowadays would not have flown at all. Those people would be outraged, and they'd absolutely agree that things like Facebook, Spotify, and Windows 10 meet the definition of spyware. But slowly, the Internet population grew to include the masses, and it turns out most people don't care whatsoever about what their software is doing or how it works so long as it gets the job done, whether that's communicating with relatives, playing music, or providing a platform for other applications.
blackflame7000 6y ago
And you since you installed the app for some purpose.
bzb3 6y ago
If the software developer didn't get anything off you they wouldn't make the software available to you in the first place.
- ethanbond 6y ago
  Fuck, I've been paying for Spotify as an act of charity?
  - mynameisvlad 6y ago
    Spotify is actually using Facebook for login, though, so they don't necessarily use App Ads. The original commenter only said that it's the reason most (but not all) apps use the SDK.
    - ethanbond 6y ago
      Ah. I'm thankful for the opportunity, err... requirement to trade my privacy for others to have one fewer password to deal with. And of course for Facebook to have more personal data to munch on.
      - mynameisvlad 6y ago
        I'm not really sure what the problem is here. You are perfectly free to not use Spotify, or any other app that chooses to utilize Facebook login or other components of the Facebook SDK. Spotify made their choice to use the SDK for whatever gains they get out of it, and as a customer you can choose to not use their service or app if you disagree with that. There's even comments in this HN thread that point you on how to do it on Android if you're so inclined.
        ethbro 6y ago
        As with all things Facebook, the truth is that they're opaque as mud about what they do with data. I'd give more credence to "the market is making an informed choice" hypothesis if consumers were, in fact, informed.
sunsetMurk 6y ago
> will solely benefit Facebook and the software developer. I mostly agree. But, in some(most) also the user by encouraging the developer to release updates and launch new features.
- nofunsir 6y ago
  release forced updates and launch no new features, but "general bug fixes and performance enhancements."
  - rescbr 6y ago
    I’ve got tons of apps in my App Store’s update queue, some that I haven’t updated for a couple months and they still work perfectly. Uber is one that comes to mind. They keep changing the UI while I keep using the same version from ages ago. I don’t bother updating anymore, it’s just noise.
    - nsomaru 6y ago
      What about security?
      - rescbr 6y ago
        I do update banking and critical apps (say, VPN clients, PDF reader), though. In the consumer app cases, either I'm hitting somebody's backend with wrong data, which fails and so I update the app, or more frequently, those whiny apps with almost daily updates are just a WebView shell to some website. Otherwise, what a hacked iOS sandboxed app can do? If there's an exploit to escape the sandbox, like in the WhatsApp case, we have a way larger issue and I wouldn't expect a random hacker to waste such an exploit that could be better targeted at Jeff Bezos or so. Other exploits are for system apps (Mail, Safari, etc) and are handled by OS updates.
ignoramous 6y ago
> Is that "spyware"? >> Yes, absolutely. Much much worse: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19595478 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19595478
baddox 6y ago
It's difficult to argue about whether it's "surreptitious." It's certainly no secret. I think this is why you need organizations (perhaps government or otherwise) to establish standards for what is and isn't acceptable, so we don't have to quibble over words like "surreptitiously."
- scarface74 6y ago
  Having a government full of technical lot illiterate politicians regulating digital advertisement - what could possibly go wrong.
  - Nextgrid 6y ago
    I am not sure whether there could be anything worse than the current situation of a free-for-all with customers' data.
    - RussianCow 6y ago
      There absolutely could, if the new legislation were easy enough to circumvent for large companies but expensive to implement for everyone else, giving big players an even bigger advantage as far as data goes.
    - scarface74 6y ago
      Maybe the government having access to all of your data....
  - Analemma_ 6y ago
    Then that's the fault of companies who fucked up self-regulation so badly that the government has to step in. If they had behaved, this wouldn't be necessary.
  - Nicksil 6y ago
    >Having a government full of technical lot illiterate politicians regulating digital advertisement - what could possibly go wrong. I'm not sure that argument works. If we expand a bit, It wouldn't be difficult to find that governments are mostly comprised of <industry> illiterate politicians. There is no need for a government to be comprised of digital advertisement industry specialists in order to pass meaningful industry regulation.
opportune 6y ago
Devil's advocate: you could always not run those apps. Although for non-technical users it would be challenging to determine if the apps were transmitting that info, it's possible for technical users to detect it (assuming the info goes to an obviously-facebook url and isn't piped through e.g. spotify) Additionally I don't think there is anything wrong with client-side analytics in general since it's basically the only way to monitor performance/usage in production. And this type of thing is hard to discern from the more benign case
- Nicksil 6y ago
  >Devil's advocate: you could always not run those apps. Although for non-technical users it would be challenging to determine if the apps were transmitting that info, it's possible for technical users to detect it (assuming the info goes to an obviously-facebook url and isn't piped through e.g. spotify) But therein lies the rub: the overwhelming majority of users of software are not like you and me and have no idea what's going on behind the curtains. >Additionally I don't think there is anything wrong with client-side analytics in general since it's basically the only way to monitor performance/usage in production. And this type of thing is hard to discern from the more benign case I hear this argument a lot and I empathize with the idea that having such information can aid in the development process. However, the argument asserting that some data may be useful to the developer so the developer is thus entitled to it, doesn't wash. Regardless of the ubiquity of this behavior in today's software development industry, the fact remains that this process consumes the user's resources without their knowing or say in the matter and it's not OK.
  - lonelappde 6y ago
    The resources are trivial. If you don't like it you don't have to use the app that you chose to install.
    - saagarjha 6y ago
      > The resources are trivial. I think I as a user should get to decide that.
api 6y ago
That is the entire business model of mobile.
- millstone 6y ago
  Spotify is a paid product.
marmada 6y ago
I feel like I'm in the minority here -- but I don't understand the problem. Software developers want to know whether their existing marketing methods are effective. The FB SDK helps with this. You always have the choice to not install the app (if you don't want to). This also helps developers make sure their marketing is effective and reaching the right people, which seems like a win-win to me.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  It is not clear to users which apps use the Facebook SDK, so they can’t avoid them even if they wanted to. And so many do include it that it’s hard to find alternative apps…
- smacktoward 6y ago
  “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” - Upton Sinclair (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upton_Sinclair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upton_Sinclair)
  - dang 6y ago
    It's probably time to retire Upton to the Internet Hall of Fame next to Betteridge.
- Barrin92 6y ago
  >The FB SDK helps with this. You always have the choice to not install the app (if you don't want to). up until now I wasn't even aware of the facebook sdk or that say, spotify is sharing my data with facebook even if I don't use their login option so it's pretty hard to make a informed decision. Is this even legal under GDPR?
  - petre 6y ago
    > Is this even legal under GDPR? I guess you could always complain about it to your country's data protection watchdog and then we'll all find out?
  - 6y ago
mayank 6y ago
In that sense, any sort of client-originated telemetry is spyware. And there’s an awful lot of that, starting with ICMP.
- m463 6y ago
  Don't be an apologist. Any technical person here could show you how to write polite and respectful software.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
anon102010 6y ago
There are other ways to target / close the circle. App developers can share emails of new installs with facebook for cross match and more options. Would this feel better?
- Nicksil 6y ago
  >There are other ways to target / close the circle. App developers can share emails of new installs with facebook for cross match and more options. Would this feel better? Of course not because it describes the same behavior.
nine_k 6y ago
I can see a difference between paid and free-to-play apps. If I pay for the service, I can expect that the service is taking nothing more from me than the payments I make. Our contract is explicit. If it's a free-as-in-beer service, then the user must realize that the business which is offering the service expects to get something for its purposes from the user, such as user's eyeballs and user's computing resources.
alharith 6y ago
So do you argue then that looking at highway banner ads caused you to deplete your glucose stores in your cells derived from the food you paid for?
yashdeeph709 6y ago
> Is that "spyware"? No You know its being used then you install the app. You have a choice. Either don't use Spotify and go to some shitty open source music app or give your data.
skrebbel 6y ago
> Yes, absolutely. I support you in your courageous fight against nuance.
dan15 6y ago
Do you feel the same about Google Analytics? Its data collection is very similar.
jquave 6y ago
If it benefits the software developer and this is what allows their business to work, then that benefits you. If it didn't then you wouldn't have the app.

>Is that "spyware"? Yes, absolutely. It uses energy and bandwidth I paid for to surreptitiously transmit my information for use which will solely benefit Facebook and the software developer.

cjhopman 6y ago

That definition is rather too broad. It makes basically everything spyware which dilutes the word too much to be useful.

tossmeout 6y ago
This is what happens to every charged label. 1. People realize the label is powerful. 2. They begin applying the label to as many things they don't like as they can get away with. 3. This changes the definition of the label, causing it to become some blanket umbrella term. 4. The label loses its power, because it now describes many lukewarm behaviors instead of just the worst offenses. For example, it's popular nowadays to say "everyone is racist." Well, if everyone is racist, is being labeled a racist really that bad? Not compared to what it used to imply about you.
Nicksil 6y ago
>That definition is rather too broad. It makes basically everything spyware which dilutes the word too much to be useful. I don't agree. I was very specific in stating that the practice of consuming a user's resources to transmit their information, without their explicit consent, nor an indication of the activity, for the sole benefit of Facebook and the software developer, can absolutely be considered spyware.
cosmojg 6y ago
Nowadays, lots of things are spyware. It's important that we acknowledge this fact. Back when the Internet had a more technical userbase, the shady nonsense software tries to pull nowadays would not have flown at all. Those people would be outraged, and they'd absolutely agree that things like Facebook, Spotify, and Windows 10 meet the definition of spyware. But slowly, the Internet population grew to include the masses, and it turns out most people don't care whatsoever about what their software is doing or how it works so long as it gets the job done, whether that's communicating with relatives, playing music, or providing a platform for other applications.

blackflame7000 6y ago

And you since you installed the app for some purpose.

bzb3 6y ago

If the software developer didn't get anything off you they wouldn't make the software available to you in the first place.

ethanbond 6y ago
Fuck, I've been paying for Spotify as an act of charity?
- mynameisvlad 6y ago
  Spotify is actually using Facebook for login, though, so they don't necessarily use App Ads. The original commenter only said that it's the reason most (but not all) apps use the SDK.
  - ethanbond 6y ago
    Ah. I'm thankful for the opportunity, err... requirement to trade my privacy for others to have one fewer password to deal with. And of course for Facebook to have more personal data to munch on.
    - mynameisvlad 6y ago
      I'm not really sure what the problem is here. You are perfectly free to not use Spotify, or any other app that chooses to utilize Facebook login or other components of the Facebook SDK. Spotify made their choice to use the SDK for whatever gains they get out of it, and as a customer you can choose to not use their service or app if you disagree with that. There's even comments in this HN thread that point you on how to do it on Android if you're so inclined.
      - ethbro 6y ago
        As with all things Facebook, the truth is that they're opaque as mud about what they do with data. I'd give more credence to "the market is making an informed choice" hypothesis if consumers were, in fact, informed.

sunsetMurk 6y ago

> will solely benefit Facebook and the software developer. I mostly agree. But, in some(most) also the user by encouraging the developer to release updates and launch new features.

nofunsir 6y ago
release forced updates and launch no new features, but "general bug fixes and performance enhancements."
- rescbr 6y ago
  I’ve got tons of apps in my App Store’s update queue, some that I haven’t updated for a couple months and they still work perfectly. Uber is one that comes to mind. They keep changing the UI while I keep using the same version from ages ago. I don’t bother updating anymore, it’s just noise.
  - nsomaru 6y ago
    What about security?
    - rescbr 6y ago
      I do update banking and critical apps (say, VPN clients, PDF reader), though. In the consumer app cases, either I'm hitting somebody's backend with wrong data, which fails and so I update the app, or more frequently, those whiny apps with almost daily updates are just a WebView shell to some website. Otherwise, what a hacked iOS sandboxed app can do? If there's an exploit to escape the sandbox, like in the WhatsApp case, we have a way larger issue and I wouldn't expect a random hacker to waste such an exploit that could be better targeted at Jeff Bezos or so. Other exploits are for system apps (Mail, Safari, etc) and are handled by OS updates.

ignoramous 6y ago

> Is that "spyware"? >> Yes, absolutely. Much much worse: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19595478 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19595478

baddox 6y ago

It's difficult to argue about whether it's "surreptitious." It's certainly no secret. I think this is why you need organizations (perhaps government or otherwise) to establish standards for what is and isn't acceptable, so we don't have to quibble over words like "surreptitiously."

scarface74 6y ago
Having a government full of technical lot illiterate politicians regulating digital advertisement - what could possibly go wrong.
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  I am not sure whether there could be anything worse than the current situation of a free-for-all with customers' data.
  - RussianCow 6y ago
    There absolutely could, if the new legislation were easy enough to circumvent for large companies but expensive to implement for everyone else, giving big players an even bigger advantage as far as data goes.
  - scarface74 6y ago
    Maybe the government having access to all of your data....
- Analemma_ 6y ago
  Then that's the fault of companies who fucked up self-regulation so badly that the government has to step in. If they had behaved, this wouldn't be necessary.
- Nicksil 6y ago
  >Having a government full of technical lot illiterate politicians regulating digital advertisement - what could possibly go wrong. I'm not sure that argument works. If we expand a bit, It wouldn't be difficult to find that governments are mostly comprised of <industry> illiterate politicians. There is no need for a government to be comprised of digital advertisement industry specialists in order to pass meaningful industry regulation.

opportune 6y ago

Devil's advocate: you could always not run those apps. Although for non-technical users it would be challenging to determine if the apps were transmitting that info, it's possible for technical users to detect it (assuming the info goes to an obviously-facebook url and isn't piped through e.g. spotify) Additionally I don't think there is anything wrong with client-side analytics in general since it's basically the only way to monitor performance/usage in production. And this type of thing is hard to discern from the more benign case

Nicksil 6y ago
>Devil's advocate: you could always not run those apps. Although for non-technical users it would be challenging to determine if the apps were transmitting that info, it's possible for technical users to detect it (assuming the info goes to an obviously-facebook url and isn't piped through e.g. spotify) But therein lies the rub: the overwhelming majority of users of software are not like you and me and have no idea what's going on behind the curtains. >Additionally I don't think there is anything wrong with client-side analytics in general since it's basically the only way to monitor performance/usage in production. And this type of thing is hard to discern from the more benign case I hear this argument a lot and I empathize with the idea that having such information can aid in the development process. However, the argument asserting that some data may be useful to the developer so the developer is thus entitled to it, doesn't wash. Regardless of the ubiquity of this behavior in today's software development industry, the fact remains that this process consumes the user's resources without their knowing or say in the matter and it's not OK.
- lonelappde 6y ago
  The resources are trivial. If you don't like it you don't have to use the app that you chose to install.
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    > The resources are trivial. I think I as a user should get to decide that.

api 6y ago

That is the entire business model of mobile.

millstone 6y ago
Spotify is a paid product.

marmada 6y ago

I feel like I'm in the minority here -- but I don't understand the problem. Software developers want to know whether their existing marketing methods are effective. The FB SDK helps with this. You always have the choice to not install the app (if you don't want to). This also helps developers make sure their marketing is effective and reaching the right people, which seems like a win-win to me.

saagarjha 6y ago
It is not clear to users which apps use the Facebook SDK, so they can’t avoid them even if they wanted to. And so many do include it that it’s hard to find alternative apps…
smacktoward 6y ago
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.” - Upton Sinclair (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upton_Sinclair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upton_Sinclair)
- dang 6y ago
  It's probably time to retire Upton to the Internet Hall of Fame next to Betteridge.
Barrin92 6y ago
>The FB SDK helps with this. You always have the choice to not install the app (if you don't want to). up until now I wasn't even aware of the facebook sdk or that say, spotify is sharing my data with facebook even if I don't use their login option so it's pretty hard to make a informed decision. Is this even legal under GDPR?
- petre 6y ago
  > Is this even legal under GDPR? I guess you could always complain about it to your country's data protection watchdog and then we'll all find out?
- 6y ago

mayank 6y ago

In that sense, any sort of client-originated telemetry is spyware. And there’s an awful lot of that, starting with ICMP.

m463 6y ago
Don't be an apologist. Any technical person here could show you how to write polite and respectful software.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

anon102010 6y ago

There are other ways to target / close the circle. App developers can share emails of new installs with facebook for cross match and more options. Would this feel better?

Nicksil 6y ago
>There are other ways to target / close the circle. App developers can share emails of new installs with facebook for cross match and more options. Would this feel better? Of course not because it describes the same behavior.

nine_k 6y ago

I can see a difference between paid and free-to-play apps. If I pay for the service, I can expect that the service is taking nothing more from me than the payments I make. Our contract is explicit. If it's a free-as-in-beer service, then the user must realize that the business which is offering the service expects to get something for its purposes from the user, such as user's eyeballs and user's computing resources.

alharith 6y ago

So do you argue then that looking at highway banner ads caused you to deplete your glucose stores in your cells derived from the food you paid for?

yashdeeph709 6y ago

> Is that "spyware"? No You know its being used then you install the app. You have a choice. Either don't use Spotify and go to some shitty open source music app or give your data.

skrebbel 6y ago

> Yes, absolutely. I support you in your courageous fight against nuance.

dan15 6y ago

Do you feel the same about Google Analytics? Its data collection is very similar.

jquave 6y ago

If it benefits the software developer and this is what allows their business to work, then that benefits you. If it didn't then you wouldn't have the app.