6 ms·

I think what Apple is saying is that it's not the browser's job to ask consent for storing a cookie or for doing browser fingerprinting but a website's. As much

I think what Apple is saying is that it's not the browser's job to ask consent for storing a cookie or for doing browser fingerprinting but a website's. As much as I dislike IDFA, I think I must agree with their line of reasoning. Edit: Let me bring an analogy (GDPR applies to physical world too). Most cars have a visible VIN number like a phone has an IMEI (if you replace IDFA with IMEI mentally, which would be much worse if that was exposed to the apps). If you take a photo of the VIN and then track the car using this identifier in some way, you are [potentially] violating GDPR, not the car manufacturer.

_the_inflator 6y ago
Totally agree. This is why you don't shut down postal service, just because they could be (mis-)used to deliver drugs or parcel bombs.
- intricatedetail 6y ago
  But you should close it if they made it easy for that purpose.
  - smarx007 6y ago
    I think NOYB can make a good case for nuking apps that fail to ask for consent completely off the App Store if requested by any protection agency.
  - appleflaxen 6y ago
    how much easier could it possibly be to use it for that purpose?
    - kevsim 6y ago
      Special discounts?
    - krageon 6y ago
      Perhaps they actively subvert the ways in which those bombs are otherwise detected or they start offering blind pickup so everyone has plausible deniability. There are many ways in which a bomb delivery service could be more convenient than the post.
ddalex 6y ago
The consent MUST be received before storing cookies. As Apple stores the cookie without consent, they break the law, even if the cookie is never read by anybody without consent.
- smarx007 6y ago
  What you are saying is that if the websites fingerprints a Chrome browser instance without consent, Google is liable for that. > The consent MUST be received before storing cookies I don't think we have any disagreement about that. We are discussing who is liable for failing to follow GDPR here.
- prepend 6y ago
  Is consent required before setting a MAC address on a NIC? I don’t think it’s the NIC manufacturer’s duty to get consent because others fingerprint devices using the MAC address.
  - polytely 6y ago
    Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but I think things that are required for the functioning of the program/device/service are exempt
    - NovemberWhiskey 6y ago
      ... and how is Apple supposed to know whether the cookie that is essential or not? This is precisely why the onus is on the website owner.
      - ddalex 6y ago
        If the device can work without that ID (which Apple admits it can, since they say they never READ it), then obviously it's not essential
        krageon 6y ago
gostsamo 6y ago
However, the car number is mandated for legal reasons that are easy to explain. The user on the other hand gets no benefits, the society gets no benefits, and those who benefit are random people whose motives are unclear.
- pasiaj 6y ago
  I find that I benefit greatly from targeted advertising. A couple of years ago I realized that Spotify's recommendation algorithm provides me with a better selection of music than any other method ever has. Lately I've found ads targeted using advanced ML implementation have been of great value to me as well. I don't remember ever purchasing products from direct response marketing before, but this year I've purchased multiple high importance things that I would not otherwise been even aware of.
  - Nullabillity 6y ago
    If it was actually of value to you then you would have searched for it yourself. That you needed advertising to find it only shows the toxic effects of advertising (convincing you that you needed a product that you actually didn't, and/or incentivizing the lobotomization of organic search so that you would go based on the ads instead).
    - elhudy 6y ago
      I enjoy receiving targeted products or services which I wouldn't have otherwise known about. That isn't toxic; we live in a world with tens of millions of products being offered worldwide. Just because we don't come across them "organically" doesn't make their advertising toxic. I'm still an individual who makes a conscious purchase decision. >convincing you that you needed a product that you actually didn't What if it's convincing him that he needs a product that is actually of benefit to him, that he didn't know existed?
      - salawat 6y ago
        It's an issue of Push vs. Pull. I don't want crap pushed on me without consent. Once you have consent, (which is me doing a pull of what you're offering), then it's okay. I'm surprised with all the controversy over consent in the last year or so that Tech and Ad companies still don't understand this. Then again, the wisdom of Upton Sinclair applies. --It is difficult to get someone to understand what their paycheck is dependent on them not understanding

_the_inflator 6y ago

Totally agree. This is why you don't shut down postal service, just because they could be (mis-)used to deliver drugs or parcel bombs.

intricatedetail 6y ago
But you should close it if they made it easy for that purpose.
- smarx007 6y ago
  I think NOYB can make a good case for nuking apps that fail to ask for consent completely off the App Store if requested by any protection agency.
- appleflaxen 6y ago
  how much easier could it possibly be to use it for that purpose?
  - kevsim 6y ago
    Special discounts?
  - krageon 6y ago
    Perhaps they actively subvert the ways in which those bombs are otherwise detected or they start offering blind pickup so everyone has plausible deniability. There are many ways in which a bomb delivery service could be more convenient than the post.

ddalex 6y ago

The consent MUST be received before storing cookies. As Apple stores the cookie without consent, they break the law, even if the cookie is never read by anybody without consent.

smarx007 6y ago
What you are saying is that if the websites fingerprints a Chrome browser instance without consent, Google is liable for that. > The consent MUST be received before storing cookies I don't think we have any disagreement about that. We are discussing who is liable for failing to follow GDPR here.
prepend 6y ago
Is consent required before setting a MAC address on a NIC? I don’t think it’s the NIC manufacturer’s duty to get consent because others fingerprint devices using the MAC address.
- polytely 6y ago
  Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but I think things that are required for the functioning of the program/device/service are exempt
  - NovemberWhiskey 6y ago
    ... and how is Apple supposed to know whether the cookie that is essential or not? This is precisely why the onus is on the website owner.
    - ddalex 6y ago
      If the device can work without that ID (which Apple admits it can, since they say they never READ it), then obviously it's not essential
      - krageon 6y ago

gostsamo 6y ago

However, the car number is mandated for legal reasons that are easy to explain. The user on the other hand gets no benefits, the society gets no benefits, and those who benefit are random people whose motives are unclear.

pasiaj 6y ago
I find that I benefit greatly from targeted advertising. A couple of years ago I realized that Spotify's recommendation algorithm provides me with a better selection of music than any other method ever has. Lately I've found ads targeted using advanced ML implementation have been of great value to me as well. I don't remember ever purchasing products from direct response marketing before, but this year I've purchased multiple high importance things that I would not otherwise been even aware of.
- Nullabillity 6y ago
  If it was actually of value to you then you would have searched for it yourself. That you needed advertising to find it only shows the toxic effects of advertising (convincing you that you needed a product that you actually didn't, and/or incentivizing the lobotomization of organic search so that you would go based on the ads instead).
  - elhudy 6y ago
    I enjoy receiving targeted products or services which I wouldn't have otherwise known about. That isn't toxic; we live in a world with tens of millions of products being offered worldwide. Just because we don't come across them "organically" doesn't make their advertising toxic. I'm still an individual who makes a conscious purchase decision. >convincing you that you needed a product that you actually didn't What if it's convincing him that he needs a product that is actually of benefit to him, that he didn't know existed?
    - salawat 6y ago
      It's an issue of Push vs. Pull. I don't want crap pushed on me without consent. Once you have consent, (which is me doing a pull of what you're offering), then it's okay. I'm surprised with all the controversy over consent in the last year or so that Tech and Ad companies still don't understand this. Then again, the wisdom of Upton Sinclair applies. --It is difficult to get someone to understand what their paycheck is dependent on them not understanding