7 ms·

> This is going to be a big mess. PayTM as a company isn’t known for respecting user privacy. Controversial opinion here, but this is part of the reason I like

> This is going to be a big mess. PayTM as a company isn’t known for respecting user privacy. Controversial opinion here, but this is part of the reason I like that Apple makes (practically) all purchases run through them. They don’t sell my information, and they have an incentive to not change that.

higerordermap 6y ago
Yeah, but apple devices are affordable for 0.1% of Indians. Also, Android is not to be blamed here. The openness is why privacy-minded people can use F-Droid.
- sgt 6y ago
  As someone in Kenya pointed out to me once, I asked someone (at Safaricom, their biggest tech company) why Kenyans seemed to prefer Android. He laughed and said: We don't prefer Android, it's what we can afford. I suppose coming from my first world bubble of friends of family it's reality check.
  - smabie 6y ago
    I've spent a lot of time in Tanzania and Kenya and when someone makes some money, the first thing they buy is an iPhone.
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  Fair enough. But my comment was directed more just in general due to Epic v. Apple.
monokh 6y ago
On the flip side, they become the central honey pot for every apple user ever. Most of whom sit generally further along the wealthy/important person scale. Incredibly high incentives there for exploit. The high stakes should translate to proportionate attention? One can only hope.
reader_mode 6y ago
What exactly is the cost of having my store activity sold to someone ? 30% cut is a very real one
- ffpip 6y ago
  It's not about selling your store activity. The apps on these stores do not comply with basic guideline like having a privacy policy, not forcing users to give access to all permissions, etc.
  - oauea 6y ago
    So just don't install them. You can make these decisions yourself, you don't need Apple to make them for you.
    - malka 6y ago
      But I want to install them. Forcing them to go trhough Apple forces them to follow certain guideline. I like the fact that there is no alternative for those who do not want to follow those guidelines.
    - ffpip 6y ago
      I think you are underestimating the Indian govt's determination to force anything on citizens in the name of patriotism. If this store is actually true, a law will definitely be passed to make sure this app is preinstalled with root access for updates.
      - oauea 6y ago
        This thread is talking about apps with poor/no privacy policies on alternative stores.
      - kelnos 6y ago
        This has nothing to do with Apple, specifically, though. This is an argument for citizens to get more involved in their government process, and to avoid being suckered by government fear-mongering that results in citizen's accepting ridiculous intrusions into their lives. Apple deciding to allow or not allow third-party app stores is irrelevant in the face of a government that has decided to pass a law that requires a particular app to be on all phones. If that law is passed, that app will end up on phones, regardless. The only alternative is that Apple would give up a market consisting the second-most populous country in the world, which isn't likely.
devdas 6y ago
That is a threat to those not subject to US law.
- freeone3000 6y ago
  It is more of a threat to those that are.
webmobdev 6y ago
> but this is part of the reason I like that Apple makes (practically) all purchases run through them. I vehemently disagree - in the name of "protecting privacy" Apple has been fooling users to believe that only Apple can be trusted with user data, and the biggest lie they sell is that they don't do anything with your data, unlike other corporates. From crippling Safari by allowing full cookies by default, and claiming to block trackers and browser fingerprinting (which a Google study itself has busted), to collecting user data in "anonymised" form Apple has been disingenuously mining its user's data with users given no choice.
- srtjstjsj 6y ago
  Do you have evidence of anything being mined?
  - shajznnckfke 6y ago
    Apple’s careers page has job listings indicating they are using an industry standard data warehousing, ETL, star schema etc. user analytics stack for something. I don’t think any specific claims they made about privacy are false (they have many different products and services), but they are definitely doing some kind of data mining.
    - threeseed 6y ago
      Apple does product analytics. Whenever you install/update iOS/OSX they specifically ask you if you want to send anonymised data to Apple which details how you are using the OS. They couldn't be more upfront and clear about it. And when I was working at Apple years ago they were using a very old and clunky SAP system for all of their customer purchases. It would be pretty common sense to ETL this to a data lake in order to do reports e.g. which apps are popular.
- threeseed 6y ago
  Very strange to call Apple out as being a liar and can't be trusted with user data because of Safari's cookie and tracker policy. Because of all the browsers they have led the way in reducing the ability for advertisers to track you.
hhjinks 6y ago
That's not an argument for Apple forcing everyone else out. You can still choose to just interface with Apple services, even if other app stores or payment services are available.
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  As this article shows, that may not be possible in all cases
kelnos 6y ago
> Controversial opinion here, but this is part of the reason I like that Apple makes (practically) all purchases run through them. They don’t sell my information, and they have an incentive to not change that. I'm sympathetic to this, because I do think it's great that Apple values user privacy. But I think it's unfortunate that the perception is that the only way to get that privacy is to use a heavily locked-down device that the user doesn't actually have control over, and that the entity protecting your privacy has to impose strict restrictions on what you can do with that device. Obviously Google will never be a good example of a company that protects user data and user privacy; their entire business model depends on the opposite. But that doesn't mean that the concept of a company selling a premium product that protects user privacy by default couldn't also allow users to do whatever they want with their device.
- flyinglizard 6y ago
  The problem with open devices is that at some point someone is going to undercut you by providing a "free" product and then we're back in square one of trading user data - and in the process you created a fragmentation hell. Nah, give me expensive, locked down products (as long as they work). Clearly its something the consumers want, hence Apple's monstrous pile of cash.
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    > The problem with open devices is that at some point someone is going to undercut you by providing a "free" product and then we're back in square one of trading user data Except that the stores have to compete with each other, so who is going to choose the one with all the apps that trade user data? Certainly not the users who are allegedly patronizing Apple only because they don't want that. > and in the process you created a fragmentation hell. I don't understand what this is supposed to be about. Is it "fragmentation" that you can get books from a book store and a library and online and a thrift store? How is that a problem? If the books in the thrift store are torn up and written in, why not just buy from a different one? > Clearly its something the consumers want, hence Apple's monstrous pile of cash. People keep saying this, but the fact that you have no alternatives to Apple's store on their devices is precisely why you can't prove it that way. We have no data on how many people are buying their devices for the store vs. despite the store and for the hardware or the OS or iMessage etc.
lukeplato 6y ago
I don't see where in the article they say that PayTM would be processing payments. From what I read, it just says that PayTM was in violation of store policy. I think the parent poster was implying that PayTM shouldn't be hosted on the app store because their violations needed to fixed.
diebeforei485 6y ago
Apple also makes it easy to unsubscribe to any app's subscription. You don't have to call some number and wait on hold.
cocoa19 6y ago
Thought experiment. Imagine that MasterCard charged 30% of every purchase at the groceriy store, restaurant, pay gas or shop online. Or... what if Windows charged software developers 30% of sales of any product. And Microsoft wouldn't let you give away free software, in the name of "privacy" whatever that means for Apple.

higerordermap 6y ago

Yeah, but apple devices are affordable for 0.1% of Indians. Also, Android is not to be blamed here. The openness is why privacy-minded people can use F-Droid.

sgt 6y ago
As someone in Kenya pointed out to me once, I asked someone (at Safaricom, their biggest tech company) why Kenyans seemed to prefer Android. He laughed and said: We don't prefer Android, it's what we can afford. I suppose coming from my first world bubble of friends of family it's reality check.
- smabie 6y ago
  I've spent a lot of time in Tanzania and Kenya and when someone makes some money, the first thing they buy is an iPhone.
colejohnson66 6y ago
Fair enough. But my comment was directed more just in general due to Epic v. Apple.

monokh 6y ago

On the flip side, they become the central honey pot for every apple user ever. Most of whom sit generally further along the wealthy/important person scale. Incredibly high incentives there for exploit. The high stakes should translate to proportionate attention? One can only hope.

reader_mode 6y ago

What exactly is the cost of having my store activity sold to someone ? 30% cut is a very real one

ffpip 6y ago
It's not about selling your store activity. The apps on these stores do not comply with basic guideline like having a privacy policy, not forcing users to give access to all permissions, etc.
- oauea 6y ago
  So just don't install them. You can make these decisions yourself, you don't need Apple to make them for you.
  - malka 6y ago
    But I want to install them. Forcing them to go trhough Apple forces them to follow certain guideline. I like the fact that there is no alternative for those who do not want to follow those guidelines.
  - ffpip 6y ago
    I think you are underestimating the Indian govt's determination to force anything on citizens in the name of patriotism. If this store is actually true, a law will definitely be passed to make sure this app is preinstalled with root access for updates.
    - oauea 6y ago
      This thread is talking about apps with poor/no privacy policies on alternative stores.
    - kelnos 6y ago
      This has nothing to do with Apple, specifically, though. This is an argument for citizens to get more involved in their government process, and to avoid being suckered by government fear-mongering that results in citizen's accepting ridiculous intrusions into their lives. Apple deciding to allow or not allow third-party app stores is irrelevant in the face of a government that has decided to pass a law that requires a particular app to be on all phones. If that law is passed, that app will end up on phones, regardless. The only alternative is that Apple would give up a market consisting the second-most populous country in the world, which isn't likely.

devdas 6y ago

That is a threat to those not subject to US law.

freeone3000 6y ago
It is more of a threat to those that are.

webmobdev 6y ago

> but this is part of the reason I like that Apple makes (practically) all purchases run through them. I vehemently disagree - in the name of "protecting privacy" Apple has been fooling users to believe that only Apple can be trusted with user data, and the biggest lie they sell is that they don't do anything with your data, unlike other corporates. From crippling Safari by allowing full cookies by default, and claiming to block trackers and browser fingerprinting (which a Google study itself has busted), to collecting user data in "anonymised" form Apple has been disingenuously mining its user's data with users given no choice.

srtjstjsj 6y ago
Do you have evidence of anything being mined?
- shajznnckfke 6y ago
  Apple’s careers page has job listings indicating they are using an industry standard data warehousing, ETL, star schema etc. user analytics stack for something. I don’t think any specific claims they made about privacy are false (they have many different products and services), but they are definitely doing some kind of data mining.
  - threeseed 6y ago
    Apple does product analytics. Whenever you install/update iOS/OSX they specifically ask you if you want to send anonymised data to Apple which details how you are using the OS. They couldn't be more upfront and clear about it. And when I was working at Apple years ago they were using a very old and clunky SAP system for all of their customer purchases. It would be pretty common sense to ETL this to a data lake in order to do reports e.g. which apps are popular.
threeseed 6y ago
Very strange to call Apple out as being a liar and can't be trusted with user data because of Safari's cookie and tracker policy. Because of all the browsers they have led the way in reducing the ability for advertisers to track you.

hhjinks 6y ago

That's not an argument for Apple forcing everyone else out. You can still choose to just interface with Apple services, even if other app stores or payment services are available.

colejohnson66 6y ago
As this article shows, that may not be possible in all cases

kelnos 6y ago

> Controversial opinion here, but this is part of the reason I like that Apple makes (practically) all purchases run through them. They don’t sell my information, and they have an incentive to not change that. I'm sympathetic to this, because I do think it's great that Apple values user privacy. But I think it's unfortunate that the perception is that the only way to get that privacy is to use a heavily locked-down device that the user doesn't actually have control over, and that the entity protecting your privacy has to impose strict restrictions on what you can do with that device. Obviously Google will never be a good example of a company that protects user data and user privacy; their entire business model depends on the opposite. But that doesn't mean that the concept of a company selling a premium product that protects user privacy by default couldn't also allow users to do whatever they want with their device.

flyinglizard 6y ago
The problem with open devices is that at some point someone is going to undercut you by providing a "free" product and then we're back in square one of trading user data - and in the process you created a fragmentation hell. Nah, give me expensive, locked down products (as long as they work). Clearly its something the consumers want, hence Apple's monstrous pile of cash.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  > The problem with open devices is that at some point someone is going to undercut you by providing a "free" product and then we're back in square one of trading user data Except that the stores have to compete with each other, so who is going to choose the one with all the apps that trade user data? Certainly not the users who are allegedly patronizing Apple only because they don't want that. > and in the process you created a fragmentation hell. I don't understand what this is supposed to be about. Is it "fragmentation" that you can get books from a book store and a library and online and a thrift store? How is that a problem? If the books in the thrift store are torn up and written in, why not just buy from a different one? > Clearly its something the consumers want, hence Apple's monstrous pile of cash. People keep saying this, but the fact that you have no alternatives to Apple's store on their devices is precisely why you can't prove it that way. We have no data on how many people are buying their devices for the store vs. despite the store and for the hardware or the OS or iMessage etc.

lukeplato 6y ago

I don't see where in the article they say that PayTM would be processing payments. From what I read, it just says that PayTM was in violation of store policy. I think the parent poster was implying that PayTM shouldn't be hosted on the app store because their violations needed to fixed.

diebeforei485 6y ago

Apple also makes it easy to unsubscribe to any app's subscription. You don't have to call some number and wait on hold.

cocoa19 6y ago

Thought experiment. Imagine that MasterCard charged 30% of every purchase at the groceriy store, restaurant, pay gas or shop online. Or... what if Windows charged software developers 30% of sales of any product. And Microsoft wouldn't let you give away free software, in the name of "privacy" whatever that means for Apple.