3 ms·
I think the line is “does this harm a human who does not consent.” Regulating autonomous vehicles? Apple being able to reject apps that steal user data? Both wi
by btown 6y ago
I think the line is “does this harm a human who does not consent.” Regulating autonomous vehicles? Apple being able to reject apps that steal user data? Both within reason.
But rejecting simply because it lets someone pay in an alternate manner crosses a line.
- jszymborski 6y agoWhile I'm inclined to agree with the spirit of your argument, I believe Apple makes the argument that their payment gateway enforcement is in fact in line with that “does this harm a human who does not consent” test. The argument goes, if I'm not mistaken, that by enforcing their payment gateway, they're assuring that users aren't handing over credit card info and other PPI in an insecure manner. Whether you buy that or not is up to you, but this is definitely a defence I've heard.
- erklik 6y ago> The argument goes, if I'm not mistaken, that by enforcing their payment gateway, they're assuring that users aren't handing over credit card info and other PPI in an insecure manner. Doesn't Apple specifically have a deal with Amazon to ignore the 30% cut for them?
- drpebcak 6y agoI believe they only consider ‘digital goods’ to be in-app purchases. For instance you can’t buy kindle books or streaming video content through the amazon app(s).