8 ms·

The Reuters report on this is much more detailed: https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-slams-metas-numerous-interoperability-requests-2024-12-18/ https://ww

by oefrha 2y ago

The Reuters report on this is much more detailed: https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-slams-metas-numerous-interoperability-requests-2024-12-18/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-slams-metas-numerou... And yes, Meta isn’t denying requesting everything under the sun. Their only retort is Apple’s privacy concerns are anticompetitive excuses. Two things can be true: Apple is only protecting their own interests, and Meta is a terrible would-be guardian of all the data they’re requesting.

tempodox 2y ago
The rename from Facebook didn't change the base nature of that company. Their product is selling user data. All their other “products” are just suction pipes for hoovering up that data.
- paldepind2 2y ago
  > All their other “products” are just suction pipes for hoovering up that data. I don't think that's true for their VR/MR hardware. That's Meta's attempt to get a product that is _not_ like that, but which instead gets them in a position similar to where Google and Apple are for phones. I.e., where they own the platform and can profit off of that.
  - mort96 2y ago
    Dude they tried to force you to log in with your Facebook account to use your hardware. Everything made by that wretched company is tainted.
    - HWR_14 2y ago
      Did they back off of that? I have an older oculus I can dig out if I can safely walk its data off from Meta
      - plagiarist 2y ago
        The last time I complained about this someone mentioned they "only" force a Meta account and not a whole Facebook identity. That's a distinction without a difference to me. I will not be purchasing hardware that requires a cloud account. Especially not a peripheral.
        aoanevdus 2y ago
        Xbox is pretty popular while requiring a Microsoft account.
        redleader55 2y ago
        Since we are in this thread - Apple requires you to use an Apple account on laptops, phones, watches, tablets, etc.
    - paldepind2 2y ago
      That's true, but then, I'm not saying that the Quest is an offline-only device without cloud features. I'm saying that Meta didn't invest $63 billion just to create a "suction pipe for hoovering up that data". They have much bigger ambitions than that.
      - mort96 2y ago
        If they have other ambitions, those ambitions haven't materialised yet. Selling decent hardware at a loss and profiting from hoovering up user data is all Facebook has accomplished with the Quest so far from what I can see.
  - ADeerAppeared 2y ago
    > I don't think that's true for their VR/MR hardware. They literally record the cameras and 'screen', then send it off to their servers. The VR hardware absolutely spies on you. Even if you tell it not to, it still shows up in the mobile app.
    - paldepind2 2y ago
      And in what way are they then selling that data (which is what the person I replied to talked about)? Just the fact that the data is being sent to a server doesn't mean much. Tons of modern products relies on literally recording your data and sending it off to a server.
    - TiredOfLife 2y ago
      They literally don't.
  - tempodox 2y ago
    Owning the platform + selling user data = double the profits. You seriously think they will pass on this golden opportunity?
  - bun_at_work 2y ago
    That's true - their revenue from VR/MR hardware is less than 2.5% of revenue though. Meanwhile, ads make up the other 97.5% of their revenue. 97.5% of everything Meta does is to hoover the data and sell it. It's effectively their entire business, while VR/MR stuff is a little side project.
zaptheimpaler 2y ago
Also Apple's own apps request permissions the same way third party apps do
- oefrha 2y ago
  They certainly don’t. We’re talking about apps like Phone, Messages, Photos, Files and system stuff like app tracking (Screen Time etc.).
  - JKCalhoun 2y ago
    When you first set up an iPhone (and other hardware like AirPods, for example) you are asked whether to share anonymized usage data with Apple. Saying "No" at that screen turns off a whole swath of data collection. I wonder what specific examples you are aware of that are not disabled in this manner?
    - oefrha 2y ago
      No one's talking about "anonymous usage data". The topic at question is primary data available to first party apps (even if they remain on device), often synced to iCloud and available to say, Siri. I'm sure I accepted a bunch of EULAs when turning on iCloud and Siri, but Facebook will argue they've shown you their EULA too. That's not "request permissions the same way third party apps do", and some of the data can't even be requested through normal permission prompts, which is why Meta is forcing Apple's hand with the EU stuff.
      - F7F7F7 2y ago
        This argument is silly and goes well beyond the spirit of the EU law. As if Meta has to suddenly show Apple all of its goods now too. Giving Apple access to all Facebook or Instagram data and letting them decide where to draw the line. Stop letting the distaste for Apple effect reason and sanity.
        luckylion 2y ago
crest 2y ago
Apple shouldn't be allowed to lock down APIs between system components to give themselves a competitive advantage, but that doesn't mean Meta should be allowed decide if they're getting that access. Let Apple offer users the option: allow once, allow permanently, refuse, or fake empty responses without telling the app.
- gwbas1c 2y ago
  > Let Apple offer users the option That's easy to say, and much more difficult to implement than it sounds. Careful: There's a lot of nuance in how these kinds of options are presented to the user. Depending on how they're designed, "the general public" will default to yes or no; or get frustrated / overwhelmed with pedantic permission dialogs. Thus, part of "Let Apple offer users the option" is a commitment to studying how that option is presented, and the overall implications of such an option.
  - nathanaldensr 2y ago
    The thing is, at some point users must become comfortable with "pedantic permission dialogs." Users must take responsibility for knowing how software works and the motivations of its creators. Trying to outsource those decisions to corporations and government simply isn't working. Since computer users (I include phone users in that definition) can no longer trust software developers (Apple, Meta, etc.) to be ethically trustworthy (think: high-trust society devolving to low-trust society), users must take this burden upon themselves; if they refuse to, then the battle is already lost no matter what globogiantmegacorp "wins."
    - riversflow 2y ago
      > Trying to outsource those decisions to corporations and government simply isn't working I don’t follow. What is wrong with the status quo?
      - inetknght 2y ago
        > What is wrong with the status quo? Businesses are deciding who lives and who dies, instead of people being allowed to have their own choice in the matter. These businesses make decisions based on data stolen from users. If the data were on paper in a person's home, it would be considered private and inaccessible. Why should a company decide that they should have access to your every move and every data, just because you purchased something from them? Why should a company decide what you're allowed to do with your device? A business shouldn't be permitted to decide these decisions for you without your fully informed consent. That's what's wrong with the status quo.
mgraczyk 2y ago
> Meta is a terrible would-be guardian of all the data they’re requesting. Do you have any examples of Meta misusing this sort of data in the last 7 years?

by oefrha 2y ago

tempodox 2y ago

The rename from Facebook didn't change the base nature of that company. Their product is selling user data. All their other “products” are just suction pipes for hoovering up that data.

paldepind2 2y ago
> All their other “products” are just suction pipes for hoovering up that data. I don't think that's true for their VR/MR hardware. That's Meta's attempt to get a product that is _not_ like that, but which instead gets them in a position similar to where Google and Apple are for phones. I.e., where they own the platform and can profit off of that.
- mort96 2y ago
  Dude they tried to force you to log in with your Facebook account to use your hardware. Everything made by that wretched company is tainted.
  - HWR_14 2y ago
    Did they back off of that? I have an older oculus I can dig out if I can safely walk its data off from Meta
    - plagiarist 2y ago
      The last time I complained about this someone mentioned they "only" force a Meta account and not a whole Facebook identity. That's a distinction without a difference to me. I will not be purchasing hardware that requires a cloud account. Especially not a peripheral.
      - aoanevdus 2y ago
        Xbox is pretty popular while requiring a Microsoft account.
      - redleader55 2y ago
        Since we are in this thread - Apple requires you to use an Apple account on laptops, phones, watches, tablets, etc.
  - paldepind2 2y ago
    That's true, but then, I'm not saying that the Quest is an offline-only device without cloud features. I'm saying that Meta didn't invest $63 billion just to create a "suction pipe for hoovering up that data". They have much bigger ambitions than that.
    - mort96 2y ago
      If they have other ambitions, those ambitions haven't materialised yet. Selling decent hardware at a loss and profiting from hoovering up user data is all Facebook has accomplished with the Quest so far from what I can see.
- ADeerAppeared 2y ago
  > I don't think that's true for their VR/MR hardware. They literally record the cameras and 'screen', then send it off to their servers. The VR hardware absolutely spies on you. Even if you tell it not to, it still shows up in the mobile app.
  - paldepind2 2y ago
    And in what way are they then selling that data (which is what the person I replied to talked about)? Just the fact that the data is being sent to a server doesn't mean much. Tons of modern products relies on literally recording your data and sending it off to a server.
  - TiredOfLife 2y ago
    They literally don't.
- tempodox 2y ago
  Owning the platform + selling user data = double the profits. You seriously think they will pass on this golden opportunity?
- bun_at_work 2y ago
  That's true - their revenue from VR/MR hardware is less than 2.5% of revenue though. Meanwhile, ads make up the other 97.5% of their revenue. 97.5% of everything Meta does is to hoover the data and sell it. It's effectively their entire business, while VR/MR stuff is a little side project.

zaptheimpaler 2y ago

Also Apple's own apps request permissions the same way third party apps do

oefrha 2y ago
They certainly don’t. We’re talking about apps like Phone, Messages, Photos, Files and system stuff like app tracking (Screen Time etc.).
- JKCalhoun 2y ago
  When you first set up an iPhone (and other hardware like AirPods, for example) you are asked whether to share anonymized usage data with Apple. Saying "No" at that screen turns off a whole swath of data collection. I wonder what specific examples you are aware of that are not disabled in this manner?
  - oefrha 2y ago
    No one's talking about "anonymous usage data". The topic at question is primary data available to first party apps (even if they remain on device), often synced to iCloud and available to say, Siri. I'm sure I accepted a bunch of EULAs when turning on iCloud and Siri, but Facebook will argue they've shown you their EULA too. That's not "request permissions the same way third party apps do", and some of the data can't even be requested through normal permission prompts, which is why Meta is forcing Apple's hand with the EU stuff.
    - F7F7F7 2y ago
      This argument is silly and goes well beyond the spirit of the EU law. As if Meta has to suddenly show Apple all of its goods now too. Giving Apple access to all Facebook or Instagram data and letting them decide where to draw the line. Stop letting the distaste for Apple effect reason and sanity.
      - luckylion 2y ago

crest 2y ago

Apple shouldn't be allowed to lock down APIs between system components to give themselves a competitive advantage, but that doesn't mean Meta should be allowed decide if they're getting that access. Let Apple offer users the option: allow once, allow permanently, refuse, or fake empty responses without telling the app.

gwbas1c 2y ago
> Let Apple offer users the option That's easy to say, and much more difficult to implement than it sounds. Careful: There's a lot of nuance in how these kinds of options are presented to the user. Depending on how they're designed, "the general public" will default to yes or no; or get frustrated / overwhelmed with pedantic permission dialogs. Thus, part of "Let Apple offer users the option" is a commitment to studying how that option is presented, and the overall implications of such an option.
- nathanaldensr 2y ago
  The thing is, at some point users must become comfortable with "pedantic permission dialogs." Users must take responsibility for knowing how software works and the motivations of its creators. Trying to outsource those decisions to corporations and government simply isn't working. Since computer users (I include phone users in that definition) can no longer trust software developers (Apple, Meta, etc.) to be ethically trustworthy (think: high-trust society devolving to low-trust society), users must take this burden upon themselves; if they refuse to, then the battle is already lost no matter what globogiantmegacorp "wins."
  - riversflow 2y ago
    > Trying to outsource those decisions to corporations and government simply isn't working I don’t follow. What is wrong with the status quo?
    - inetknght 2y ago
      > What is wrong with the status quo? Businesses are deciding who lives and who dies, instead of people being allowed to have their own choice in the matter. These businesses make decisions based on data stolen from users. If the data were on paper in a person's home, it would be considered private and inaccessible. Why should a company decide that they should have access to your every move and every data, just because you purchased something from them? Why should a company decide what you're allowed to do with your device? A business shouldn't be permitted to decide these decisions for you without your fully informed consent. That's what's wrong with the status quo.

mgraczyk 2y ago

> Meta is a terrible would-be guardian of all the data they’re requesting. Do you have any examples of Meta misusing this sort of data in the last 7 years?