6 ms·

Apple's iPhone privacy changes signal desire to enter advertising -RBC

43 points by ghostpepper 5y ago

makapuf 5y ago
The article main point is that as apple has delivered privacy features, it MAY use that to enter online advertising. The article is full of conditional and does not specify how.
- dmz73 5y ago
  Facebook MAY sell your info for profit. But Apple never will. Google MAY use you info for profit but Apple never will. Apple removed all competition so they can charge me 5x the price and they will NEVER sell my info to profit, NEVER.
  - beckman466 5y ago
    yeah add to that the fact that icloud backups aren't e2e encrypted (no SV infrastructure services are). we need zero-knowledge systems now.
    - GeekyBear 5y ago
      They developed a system to do that. The Feds stepped in. https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/21/21075033/apple-icloud-end-to-end-encryption-scrapped-fbi-reuters-report https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/21/21075033/apple-icloud-end... Of course, you've always been able to do encrypted backups to your local computer.
      - beckman466 5y ago
        i'm referring also to the near zero-portability of a person's data. the multiple lock in mechanisms of most platforms. why can't i download a git archive of my google docs? the versioning feature only works on the proprietary web app - google's platform. these are all inter-related problems, and all strategies used on purpose to lock people in and make them dependent so as to be able to extract economic rents. https://tribunemag.co.uk/2019/01/abolish-silicon-valley https://tribunemag.co.uk/2019/01/abolish-silicon-valley
  - Closi 5y ago
    A more accurate statement would be that Facebook/Google do sell your info for profit and Apple haven’t yet (at least to the same degree). Track records are important.
    - beckman466 5y ago
      > and Apple haven’t yet (at least to the same degree) Do you consider Apple's participation in the NSA's PRISM program to be worse than selling info to advertisers? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants...
      - rahoulb 5y ago
        No. I'm not in the US, so I have no level of influence on the NSA. However, my Member of Parliament is tech-savvy (ex-developer although I don't know how good he was), he has a monthly surgery where anyone can raise issues with him or they can message him (or at least his office) directly. And he can (and has previously) raised privacy issues in Parliament and with members of the Privy Council (who have access to national security matters and regularly meet with agencies like the Security Service and GCHQ). Even if I didn't have this particular MP, it would be part of any MP's duties to report my concerns to Parliament - so there is some level (no matter how small) of accountability. I have no influence whatsoever with these private companies that gather and sell data on me.
    - ccouzens 5y ago
      Do they sell your data, or does your data allow them to profit by showing you more targeted ads?
      - Closi 5y ago
        They productise my data into targeted ads which they then sell, but I’m assuming that’s what OPs post meant by “selling data” considering the article doesn’t imply that Apple would literally sell customer information directly to another company (nor does this privacy change allow that).
vr46 5y ago
Speculation and conjecture, interesting but eh
tinus_hn 5y ago
Apple has entered advertising before with iAds. A bit odd Reuters doesn’t even mention that.
moogly 5y ago
The failed iAd network notwithstanding, haven't they already? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24109695 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24109695 (1 year ago, 75 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26019427 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26019427 (8 months ago, 0 comments)
GeekyBear 5y ago
The interesting thing about iAd was that it failed because Apple refused to sell out everyone's privacy. >According to advertisers, both Apple and Amazon have levels of detail about customers that would be extremely attractive to ad agencies, but refuse to hand it over, citing privacy concerns. In Apple's case, the sheer volume of information it has about its users frustrates advertisers because they can't access it. One unnamed source said that in terms of attractiveness to potential advertisers, Apple is "the best-looking girl at the party, forced to wear a bag over her head." https://www.infopackets.com/news/8939/advertisers-amazon-apple-user-data-gold-mine https://www.infopackets.com/news/8939/advertisers-amazon-app...
- hef19898 5y ago
  On other words it's a question of money (as in:do we make more by using said data ourselves vs. selling it) and a way to change course without loosing users (an uproar is OK, as long as churn is to high).
- api 5y ago
  Apple users need to be ready to leave the platform if they sell out, and to make this clear.
  - Lio 5y ago
    Things I'd want to consider at are 3rd party app support, privacy and security. Where to you think would be the right place to move to right now? Last time I asked I was told that Linux based phone software is still a bit work in progress and the Google stripped Android distros are both a bit DIY and also unverified privacy wise.
    - api 5y ago
      It’s tough. For laptops there are decent options but anything Android as you say is either half baked or much more of a privacy tire fire than Apple. Mobile has been profoundly user hostile in the slimiest possible ways for many years. It’s about surveillance and addiction. Apple has been the only moderately acceptable option, but I don’t trust them completely and I do suspect they will eventually sell out. The market for privacy focused phones is tiny both because most people don’t care and because they would have to be more expensive. They are not being subsidized by surveillance. I am so happy that the mobile paradigm has not been able to invade desktop very much. It’s horrible and dystopian and we at least need to keep it at bay.
shp0ngle 5y ago
This is such a weird article. As others mentioned here, Apple already entered advertising. It failed, because it does not want to sell users’ data like others do. Why would they enter into the same waters again? I’m fairly sure they also won’t restart Ping, music based social network.
- hungryforcodes 5y ago
  Sure it doesn't WANT to sell user's data, but does it collect it anyways? And if so -- why? For a privacy focused company, that is quite strange, I think.
  - avianlyric 5y ago
    I don’t think there’s evidence that Apple collects more data than it needs to. But obviously the potential to collect substantial more is there. Even what Apple does collect out of necessity (such as iTunes purchase history, Apple Pay transactions, Push Notifications (if the dev isn’t encrypting them) etc) would be incredibly valuable to advertisers.
    - hungryforcodes 5y ago
      Fair enough. The future will tell us.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
  You don't think they'd play that card if necessary?
- rchaud 5y ago
  Apple is heavily active in advertising. There are ads all over the App Store and Apple News.
lancesells 5y ago
I really hope Apple doesn't launch an ad network for the web but it won't surprise me. That would be the point where I would move on from their products and ecosystem. The App Store ads are atrocious enough when they already take 15-30% of the revenue. Plus those ads make for a bad user experience which Apple claims they are all about.
etempleton 5y ago
I once would say Apple will never re-enter advertising. I still don’t think they will, but their continued push to make a car makes me think that they have lost focus as a company. Instead I will say why they shouldn’t from a business perspective: 1. Apple is a premium brand. Ads aren’t premium. By beginning advertising as a service they destroy a key differentiator, erode trust, and ultimately open the door to a competitor. 2. Advertising as a Service at scale would require a whole new division of Apple with significant investment and resources. This takes away from other work. Other work would have to consider how advertising will fit into the product. There is an opportunity cost here. 3. As a company, Apple doesn’t have the stomach to be in the ad business. To make money on ads they would have to give creative freedom to advertisers to design their own ads and Apple will hate this. Advertisers will design ugly ads or write click bait headlines and they will constantly have to police this. Facebook tried to do this with their no text in photos rule and eventually just gave up. It is a never ending battle.
davmonk 5y ago
They are already in the advertising industry, am I right? How about the ads you see in the app store and other sections of the phone.

43 points by ghostpepper 5y ago

The article main point is that as apple has delivered privacy features, it MAY use that to enter online advertising. The article is full of conditional and does not specify how.

dmz73 5y ago
Facebook MAY sell your info for profit. But Apple never will. Google MAY use you info for profit but Apple never will. Apple removed all competition so they can charge me 5x the price and they will NEVER sell my info to profit, NEVER.
- beckman466 5y ago
  yeah add to that the fact that icloud backups aren't e2e encrypted (no SV infrastructure services are). we need zero-knowledge systems now.
  - GeekyBear 5y ago
    They developed a system to do that. The Feds stepped in. https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/21/21075033/apple-icloud-end-to-end-encryption-scrapped-fbi-reuters-report https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/21/21075033/apple-icloud-end... Of course, you've always been able to do encrypted backups to your local computer.
    - beckman466 5y ago
      i'm referring also to the near zero-portability of a person's data. the multiple lock in mechanisms of most platforms. why can't i download a git archive of my google docs? the versioning feature only works on the proprietary web app - google's platform. these are all inter-related problems, and all strategies used on purpose to lock people in and make them dependent so as to be able to extract economic rents. https://tribunemag.co.uk/2019/01/abolish-silicon-valley https://tribunemag.co.uk/2019/01/abolish-silicon-valley
- Closi 5y ago
  A more accurate statement would be that Facebook/Google do sell your info for profit and Apple haven’t yet (at least to the same degree). Track records are important.
  - beckman466 5y ago
    > and Apple haven’t yet (at least to the same degree) Do you consider Apple's participation in the NSA's PRISM program to be worse than selling info to advertisers? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants-nsa-data https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/06/us-tech-giants...
    - rahoulb 5y ago
      No. I'm not in the US, so I have no level of influence on the NSA. However, my Member of Parliament is tech-savvy (ex-developer although I don't know how good he was), he has a monthly surgery where anyone can raise issues with him or they can message him (or at least his office) directly. And he can (and has previously) raised privacy issues in Parliament and with members of the Privy Council (who have access to national security matters and regularly meet with agencies like the Security Service and GCHQ). Even if I didn't have this particular MP, it would be part of any MP's duties to report my concerns to Parliament - so there is some level (no matter how small) of accountability. I have no influence whatsoever with these private companies that gather and sell data on me.
  - ccouzens 5y ago
    Do they sell your data, or does your data allow them to profit by showing you more targeted ads?
    - Closi 5y ago
      They productise my data into targeted ads which they then sell, but I’m assuming that’s what OPs post meant by “selling data” considering the article doesn’t imply that Apple would literally sell customer information directly to another company (nor does this privacy change allow that).

vr46 5y ago

Speculation and conjecture, interesting but eh

tinus_hn 5y ago

Apple has entered advertising before with iAds. A bit odd Reuters doesn’t even mention that.

moogly 5y ago

The failed iAd network notwithstanding, haven't they already? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24109695 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24109695 (1 year ago, 75 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26019427 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26019427 (8 months ago, 0 comments)

GeekyBear 5y ago

The interesting thing about iAd was that it failed because Apple refused to sell out everyone's privacy. >According to advertisers, both Apple and Amazon have levels of detail about customers that would be extremely attractive to ad agencies, but refuse to hand it over, citing privacy concerns. In Apple's case, the sheer volume of information it has about its users frustrates advertisers because they can't access it. One unnamed source said that in terms of attractiveness to potential advertisers, Apple is "the best-looking girl at the party, forced to wear a bag over her head." https://www.infopackets.com/news/8939/advertisers-amazon-apple-user-data-gold-mine https://www.infopackets.com/news/8939/advertisers-amazon-app...

hef19898 5y ago
On other words it's a question of money (as in:do we make more by using said data ourselves vs. selling it) and a way to change course without loosing users (an uproar is OK, as long as churn is to high).
api 5y ago
Apple users need to be ready to leave the platform if they sell out, and to make this clear.
- Lio 5y ago
  Things I'd want to consider at are 3rd party app support, privacy and security. Where to you think would be the right place to move to right now? Last time I asked I was told that Linux based phone software is still a bit work in progress and the Google stripped Android distros are both a bit DIY and also unverified privacy wise.
  - api 5y ago
    It’s tough. For laptops there are decent options but anything Android as you say is either half baked or much more of a privacy tire fire than Apple. Mobile has been profoundly user hostile in the slimiest possible ways for many years. It’s about surveillance and addiction. Apple has been the only moderately acceptable option, but I don’t trust them completely and I do suspect they will eventually sell out. The market for privacy focused phones is tiny both because most people don’t care and because they would have to be more expensive. They are not being subsidized by surveillance. I am so happy that the mobile paradigm has not been able to invade desktop very much. It’s horrible and dystopian and we at least need to keep it at bay.

shp0ngle 5y ago

This is such a weird article. As others mentioned here, Apple already entered advertising. It failed, because it does not want to sell users’ data like others do. Why would they enter into the same waters again? I’m fairly sure they also won’t restart Ping, music based social network.

hungryforcodes 5y ago
Sure it doesn't WANT to sell user's data, but does it collect it anyways? And if so -- why? For a privacy focused company, that is quite strange, I think.
- avianlyric 5y ago
  I don’t think there’s evidence that Apple collects more data than it needs to. But obviously the potential to collect substantial more is there. Even what Apple does collect out of necessity (such as iTunes purchase history, Apple Pay transactions, Push Notifications (if the dev isn’t encrypting them) etc) would be incredibly valuable to advertisers.
  - hungryforcodes 5y ago
    Fair enough. The future will tell us.
2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
You don't think they'd play that card if necessary?
rchaud 5y ago
Apple is heavily active in advertising. There are ads all over the App Store and Apple News.

lancesells 5y ago

I really hope Apple doesn't launch an ad network for the web but it won't surprise me. That would be the point where I would move on from their products and ecosystem. The App Store ads are atrocious enough when they already take 15-30% of the revenue. Plus those ads make for a bad user experience which Apple claims they are all about.

etempleton 5y ago

I once would say Apple will never re-enter advertising. I still don’t think they will, but their continued push to make a car makes me think that they have lost focus as a company. Instead I will say why they shouldn’t from a business perspective: 1. Apple is a premium brand. Ads aren’t premium. By beginning advertising as a service they destroy a key differentiator, erode trust, and ultimately open the door to a competitor. 2. Advertising as a Service at scale would require a whole new division of Apple with significant investment and resources. This takes away from other work. Other work would have to consider how advertising will fit into the product. There is an opportunity cost here. 3. As a company, Apple doesn’t have the stomach to be in the ad business. To make money on ads they would have to give creative freedom to advertisers to design their own ads and Apple will hate this. Advertisers will design ugly ads or write click bait headlines and they will constantly have to police this. Facebook tried to do this with their no text in photos rule and eventually just gave up. It is a never ending battle.

davmonk 5y ago

They are already in the advertising industry, am I right? How about the ads you see in the app store and other sections of the phone.