4 ms·
Absolutely. I'd add that we also need a privacy-preserving way to see that contacts have accounts on a given social app (aka contact matching). A standard patt
by npunt 3y ago
Absolutely. I'd add that we also need a privacy-preserving way to see that contacts have accounts on a given social app (aka contact matching).
A standard pattern for social apps is to ask for access to your contacts to see if anyone you know is on their app. This is important to creating a healthy and diverse ecosystem of social software, because these apps are really up against the natural network effects of existing offerings.
Contact matching is the best shot app creators have at bootstrapping new social offerings, but right now the experience sucks. Just to see if you like a new social app you have to either a) give up lots of private data in perpetuity to an entity you don't know, or b) have a subpar experience of manually finding people.
One solution may be for Apple to offer an API that helps social apps match users. Apple acts as the escrow system to match contacts so that the apps never have access to private contact data, and the apps just get notice when there's a new contact match to offer the user.
On the user side, the user has a simple privacy setting that says 'find matches once' or 'always look for new matches when app is open'. Users may also toggle whether they wish to be discoverable by others.
In a world with this feature, we get to try new social apps without concern, and apps only have access to an anonymized user ID for our contacts that are also using the app.
- s3p 3y agoHopefully Apple listens and implements something like this. They've already shown that they'll bend to their users even if it means screwing over developers and other large companies. App tracking transparency and precision location [1] come to mind. [1] https://9to5mac.com/2020/08/12/ios-14-precise-location/ https://9to5mac.com/2020/08/12/ios-14-precise-location/
- callalex 3y agoThey totally screwed up the location thing to the point of uselessness because they report what the user selects to the app, and scummy apps just disable themselves until you grant the permission they want.
- phs318u 3y agoThe choice to use a scummy app (and you should know if it's doing this that it's scummy), is still a choice.
- lencastre 3y agoUnfortunately apps which don’t pass the smell test get deleted. Ridiculous requirements such as permanent precise GPS location and access to health and motion and my credit card purchase history are too much man.
- callalex 3y agoThe situation is more nuanced than that. For example, I have some security cameras installed around my home where the app has updated itself and now requires continuous precise location tracking. That was not the case when I purchased them and set them up, or I would have returned them and left a bad review. I guess you could say I deserve it for not using hardware based on open standards, but now my only options are to generate masses of ewaste and spend hundreds of dollars more, or just bend over and take it. My OS could work harder to protect me here.
- anileated 3y agoIt’s not “developers and other large companies”. Small indie developers are the majority of developers in Apple’s ecosystem. If they are to be screwed over as well (for example, with the upcoming sideloading feature unlocking piracy for everyone), it doesn’t seem fantastic. Sometimes bending to the user is to the detriment of developers who create the ecosystem your users appreciate in the first place.
- flangola7 3y agoSideloading feature? That's a good thing, users should always be the one in control and the EU will mandate this very soon. iOS is the singular OS in the world where the user's freedom is curtailed in such a heavy handed manner.
- pjmlp 3y agoNope, there are plenty of other operating systems with user restrictions, feature phones, game consoles, embedded OS.
- flangola7 3y agoThere are three dominant desktop and two mobile operating systems, only 1 out of those 5 is locked down to where even applications are handcuffed. I'm not talking about embedded industrial systems I'm talking about everyday general purpose devices. You know this and I know this.
- diebeforei485 3y agoMuch simpler would simply be the ability to exclude certain contacts (your doctor, therapist, or teacher etc). Additionally, it would be great to not share metadata about contacts (ie, don't share that I have this person listed as my sister). It's quite difficult to have a privacy preserving API system that's on-device because people could pre-compute a rainbow table (phone numbers are only 10-ish digits long). If the API is provided by Apple using their servers, this might work.