4 ms·
> The problem is people want "total privacy" but also want everything free. Advertising pays for the latter but people decry both. IDFA is there for advertisers
by croon 6y ago
> The problem is people want "total privacy" but also want everything free. Advertising pays for the latter but people decry both. IDFA is there for advertisers to use without being able to explicitly identify the user but still provide some measure of knowledge to present ads more than random. Once it's no longer opt out, I doubt anyone turns it on.
Do advertisers pay Apple for the use of IDFA?
Do I pay Apple for the phone?
You are saying people should pay for stuff OR get their data sold.
Where can I get my free iPhone?
- danaris 6y agoYou paid for your computer, too, and Facebook, Google, and many other companies track that. It's not about the price of the phone. It's about the price of the services you get online—everything from Facebook to HackerNews. Some of these free websites are subsidized by other means (like YCombinator itself). Some are funded by subscription, with a partial paywall that lets you access a portion of their content free. Others are funded by gathering your data and selling it to advertisers. Stop treating Apple as if they're the ones who should be responsible for everything under the sun, just because they make iPhones (and truckloads of money).
- spdionis 6y agoSeems like we should outlaw or severely limit one of those business models.
- croon 6y ago> You paid for your computer, too, and Facebook, Google, and many other companies track that. To my knowledge neither Gigabyte or Intel (though TPM etc has other issues) pre-installed ad tracking in my system that I can't remove. It's entirely about the price of the phone, if the thing I paid for is tracking me for ads. Whether I use free web services that sell my data on my computer or not is, while interesting, a completely separate issue.