3 ms·

Nnnnnope. If you opt to purchase it via the Mac App Store, that's between you & Apple—it happens entirely apart from the app.

by s3cur3 6y ago

lern_too_spel 6y ago
If there is no other way to get the app, the end user loss in privacy is exactly the same.
- s3cur3 6y ago
  If someone would like to arrange a back-alley cash deal, I'm happy to provide a binary on a CD-ROM. But if I'm accepting money over the internet, a third party is necessarily going to be involved, because I'm not a bank and I can't process payments myself. It's kind of a bizarre criticism to say that Mac software is sold via the Mac App Store...
  - lern_too_spel 6y ago
    You could provide it for free. By charging for it, you made a choice to reduce your users' privacy. It doesn't make sense to say that you don't collect any information because you require information to be collected from the user. This is simply a statement of fact.
    - sonotmyname 6y ago
      You started this intentionally inflammatory argument with the following unsupported statement: “ Your app shares a lot of data with a third party” You then proceeded to move the goalposts so far that now we’re talking about wether or not an app is free? Listen, if you’re going to start an open-source/libre/data wants to be free argument, that’s your right, but don’t start it with fake accusations of privacy violations.
      - lern_too_spel 6y ago
        > You then proceeded to move the goalposts so far that now we’re talking about wether or not an app is free? I didn't move the goalposts. The goalposts were always about data collection. > fake accusations of privacy violations. There is a real privacy violation going on here. The author has simply externalized it from his app's code. My point was that privacy can be violated outside the app itself and in the ecosystem where it is consumed. A publisher who cares about that, like GGP claimed to in the original comment I replied to, would work to mitigate that data collection as well. To take the argument to the logical next step, it's like saying you can get my app, which doesn't collect any information at all, for free; however, to get it, you have to link your Twitter and Facebook accounts to the store website and share that you downloaded the app on those platforms.

Nnnnnope. If you opt to purchase it via the Mac App Store, that's between you & Apple—it happens entirely apart from the app.

by s3cur3 6y ago

Nnnnnope. If you opt to purchase it via the Mac App Store, that's between you & Apple—it happens entirely apart from the app.

lern_too_spel 6y ago

If there is no other way to get the app, the end user loss in privacy is exactly the same.

s3cur3 6y ago
If someone would like to arrange a back-alley cash deal, I'm happy to provide a binary on a CD-ROM. But if I'm accepting money over the internet, a third party is necessarily going to be involved, because I'm not a bank and I can't process payments myself. It's kind of a bizarre criticism to say that Mac software is sold via the Mac App Store...
- lern_too_spel 6y ago
  You could provide it for free. By charging for it, you made a choice to reduce your users' privacy. It doesn't make sense to say that you don't collect any information because you require information to be collected from the user. This is simply a statement of fact.
  - sonotmyname 6y ago
    You started this intentionally inflammatory argument with the following unsupported statement: “ Your app shares a lot of data with a third party” You then proceeded to move the goalposts so far that now we’re talking about wether or not an app is free? Listen, if you’re going to start an open-source/libre/data wants to be free argument, that’s your right, but don’t start it with fake accusations of privacy violations.
    - lern_too_spel 6y ago
      > You then proceeded to move the goalposts so far that now we’re talking about wether or not an app is free? I didn't move the goalposts. The goalposts were always about data collection. > fake accusations of privacy violations. There is a real privacy violation going on here. The author has simply externalized it from his app's code. My point was that privacy can be violated outside the app itself and in the ecosystem where it is consumed. A publisher who cares about that, like GGP claimed to in the original comment I replied to, would work to mitigate that data collection as well. To take the argument to the logical next step, it's like saying you can get my app, which doesn't collect any information at all, for free; however, to get it, you have to link your Twitter and Facebook accounts to the store website and share that you downloaded the app on those platforms.