3 ms·

it's not a big deal, it just highlights that Google has stalled over 2 months on pushing out updates for its flagship apps, because it seems they don't want to

by spenvo 6y ago

it's not a big deal, it just highlights that Google has stalled over 2 months on pushing out updates for its flagship apps, because it seems they don't want to add iOS privacy "nutrition" labels. Like Facebook did (and suffered some[0] pushback[1] for). Edit: interesting that this is getting downvoted. [0] - https://twitter.com/tomwarren/status/1339174301564604418 https://twitter.com/tomwarren/status/1339174301564604418 [1] - https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1347165127036977153 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1347165127036977153

minikites 6y ago
Over two months? This policy was announced last June, they've had almost eight.
- jeromegv 6y ago
  Deadline to force apps to use it was 2 months ago.
  - minikites 6y ago
    All the more reason they should have used the six months prior.
- fy20 6y ago
  This seems the norm for tech companies and more restrictive privacy policies. GDPR was originally announced in 2012, in 2016 it was adopted by the EC. After that member states had two years to adopt it into law, after which enforcement would start. Most companies didn't bother doing anything about it until 2018, and even today a lot of non-EU companies restrict or block access to EU customers, saying it's too hard to only use personal data for purposes they have been given permission for.
greggman3 6y ago
My guess is you're being downvoted because you claimed Google doesn't want to add iOS privacy "nutrition" labels with absolutely no evidence to back you up. As HN's guidelines say, always assume the best intensions. It's just as likely they just haven't shipped the new versions of the apps yet for many other technical reasons. Given the labels are a requirement and Google hasn't announced a lawsuit, there's no reason to believe they have any intention to not add them.
- tonyedgecombe 6y ago
  As HN's guidelines say, always assume the best intensions. I think that refers to other posters comments. Taking potshots at faceless corporations is OK.
  - greggman3 6y ago
    No, because I've gotten comments from dang for taking potshots at faceless corporations.

by spenvo 6y ago

minikites 6y ago

Over two months? This policy was announced last June, they've had almost eight.

jeromegv 6y ago
Deadline to force apps to use it was 2 months ago.
- minikites 6y ago
  All the more reason they should have used the six months prior.
fy20 6y ago
This seems the norm for tech companies and more restrictive privacy policies. GDPR was originally announced in 2012, in 2016 it was adopted by the EC. After that member states had two years to adopt it into law, after which enforcement would start. Most companies didn't bother doing anything about it until 2018, and even today a lot of non-EU companies restrict or block access to EU customers, saying it's too hard to only use personal data for purposes they have been given permission for.

greggman3 6y ago

My guess is you're being downvoted because you claimed Google doesn't want to add iOS privacy "nutrition" labels with absolutely no evidence to back you up. As HN's guidelines say, always assume the best intensions. It's just as likely they just haven't shipped the new versions of the apps yet for many other technical reasons. Given the labels are a requirement and Google hasn't announced a lawsuit, there's no reason to believe they have any intention to not add them.

tonyedgecombe 6y ago
As HN's guidelines say, always assume the best intensions. I think that refers to other posters comments. Taking potshots at faceless corporations is OK.
- greggman3 6y ago
  No, because I've gotten comments from dang for taking potshots at faceless corporations.