2 ms·

"there is an "asymmetry" in which user consent for Apple's own data collection is obtained with a single pop-up, but other publishers are "required to obtain do

"there is an "asymmetry" in which user consent for Apple's own data collection is obtained with a single pop-up, but other publishers are "required to obtain double consent from users for tracking on third-party sites and applications." more @ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24109695 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24109695 (via https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2020/08/07/apple-ad-network-gets-special-privileges-that-facebook-google-wont-on-ios14/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoetsier/2020/08/07/apple-a...) EDIT: Throttled, so reply can go here: > My previous comment directly addresses the "asymmetry" aspect. Apologies, you asked what the asymmetry was and I guess I'm still rather confused even after reviewing the thread. I think I've had too much caffeine...or not enough? :) > The obvious solution would be to combine the two, by allowing the ATT prompt to be used as consent for the purposes of GDPR. Why didn't French regulators go with this solution and decide to fine Apple instead? I've been involved in regulatory stuff before and it's considered overreach, generally, when the government does UX design for you. Hopefully, that's a solution Apple can consider, it's a great idea on your end, excellent for users and competition.

gruez 2y ago
My previous comment directly addresses the "asymmetry" aspect. >The obvious solution would be to combine the two, by allowing the ATT prompt to be used as consent for the purposes of GDPR. Why didn't French regulators go with this solution and decide to fine Apple instead? edit: >Apologies, you asked what the asymmetry was and I guess I'm still rather confused even after reviewing the thread. I think I've had too much caffeine...or not enough? :) The point is, I can see where the "asymmetry" is, but I don't understand why they went decided to fine Apple rather than do something on their side (ie. rework the idea of consent in GDPR to allow for reusing the ATT prompt) to fix the "asymmetry". I think most people would agree that the ATT prompt from iOS must stay, and it's better to address the "asymmetry" by making third party apps more streamlined, than by making iOS worse[1]. That would be entirely within the French regulators' remit. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron
- umbra07 2y ago
  > but I don't understand why they went decided You're assuming the regulators have no other motivations besides increasing consumer privacy?

gruez 2y ago

My previous comment directly addresses the "asymmetry" aspect. >The obvious solution would be to combine the two, by allowing the ATT prompt to be used as consent for the purposes of GDPR. Why didn't French regulators go with this solution and decide to fine Apple instead? edit: >Apologies, you asked what the asymmetry was and I guess I'm still rather confused even after reviewing the thread. I think I've had too much caffeine...or not enough? :) The point is, I can see where the "asymmetry" is, but I don't understand why they went decided to fine Apple rather than do something on their side (ie. rework the idea of consent in GDPR to allow for reusing the ATT prompt) to fix the "asymmetry". I think most people would agree that the ATT prompt from iOS must stay, and it's better to address the "asymmetry" by making third party apps more streamlined, than by making iOS worse[1]. That would be entirely within the French regulators' remit. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron

umbra07 2y ago
> but I don't understand why they went decided You're assuming the regulators have no other motivations besides increasing consumer privacy?