In a better functioning world, I'd have hoped this kind of thing would have been driven by sensible legislation across the entire industry, rather than relying on the good intentions of Apple and the success of the App Store to push the change.
In a better functioning world, I'd have hoped this kind of thing would have been driven by sensible legislation across the entire industry, rather than relying on the good intentions of Apple and the success of the App Store to push the change.
Recently I watched the movie "The Captain", where a private in the military finds an officer's uniform and uses it to fraudulently assert authority. (It's a true story)
He meets all kinds of people, and all kinds of thing happen that shouldn't happen. It's obvious that some of the people he meets doubt his authenticity but "go with it" because his actions are aligned with their self-interests.
I took away from this one thing: it's easier for people to just "go with it" than stand up and say no. And moreso when you profit from it.
That's what I think is behind the whole privacy thing.
That said, I hope a privacy market opportunity attracts the attention of some unconflicted players.
"Industry" policing itself would be Google and Facebook changing their business model of their own accord to the detriment of their current business.
Apple is not the "industry" in this case, Apple is their regulator.
I imagine you’ve noticed, but in the real world, Congress is not capable of writing sensible tech legislation. So we may get legislation, but if we do, it won’t be sensible.
So as much as I would also appreciate some sensible tech regulations (the endless adhesion contracts on websites and apps really need to be reigned in), I’m hoping congress stays away from this.
These are the guys behind DMCA, CFAA, and other great hits. If anyone could screw this up, it would be them.
One of the mainstays of capitalism is that competition should generate better, fairer options given sufficient competition and time. Part of the allure of letting the market solve these problems is that they can do so without the need for legislation (which could be compromised, incomplete, or unjustly preferential).
Now whether or not we prefer the capitalist or socialist method of solving this issue is a big question, but I don’t think you can argue that the system isn’t “functioning” as intended right now.
The only reason this can work is Apple having a dominant position and being benevolent--that's not competition generating better, fairer options.
But if I have a choice between trading my money for services and trading my privacy/dealing with annoying ads, I would much rather pay for services.
Big Tech though is basically a closed black box that has immense power and is almost totally unregulated. This leaves an incredible amount of room for abuse. Therefore, I am totally okay with a semi-competent, sometimes-benevolent entity that is accountable to the public (government) to much more tightly regulate this industry.
EDIT: "Prejudices" don't necessarily mean race, religion, etc. It also could be "evil capitalist" vs "evil socialist" or "baby killing war monger" vs "peace loving hippy".
And giving more power to the government couldn't possibly lead to abuse.....
Re-election rates for congressmen over the years hovers at around 90%. Senators are around 85%. Perhaps they're all doing a great job, but I'm skeptical
Middle America and the Bible Belt don't vote based on tech issues.....
And you're absolutely right, and if California has an issue with that they can push for changes or even for their separation from the US (taxation without enough representation and all that).
What's the alternative? If you have a household income over $60K (the national average), are you willing to give everything over $60K up to make things more "fair"?
Yes I'm all for the social safety net.
How is this still a retort? OF COURSE MANY GOVERNMENT AGENCIES SUCK. That is the direct result of fifty-plus years of "government is terrible, elect us and we'll prove it." Even some of our more popular agencies are so underfunded they can barely do their original mission, much less the aspirational stuff we want of them. NASA says it'll take--pulling numbers out of thin air--$10 billion to reliably go to the moon. Our electeds' response is "you can have $3 billion" and then we complain that NASA hasn't sent anybody to the moon yet.
Never mind this patchwork of responsibility where virtually everything is no one's actual fault or job. The much-complained-about Department of Motor Vehicles is, in various states, operated as an independent entity, part of the department of transportation, part of an agency that handles licenses for everything that needs a license, or simply just kind of happens. There's no one whose job it is to say "this thing needs to work well" and since everyone doesn't like it, it doesn't command any kind of respect for being paid properly.
And then speaking of paid properly, why on Flying Spaghetti Monster's Earth would someone go to work for a state or local government and get paid, especially in tech, on average about two thirds of what he or she could be making in the so-called "private sector," or go to work for the Federal government and not only have the same wage penalty but ALSO be subjected to random "well, we couldn't get our heads out of our ass so you're not getting paid for anywhere from one to one hundred days, sorry" instances.
"Just visit the inside of any government agency" my shiny metal ass; we MADE this problem and now we kick dirt at it as though decades of voters bitching about government haven't gotten us exactly the front-line government services we deserve as a consequence of those votes.
Even the military is a wasteful mess because of government power. The military has told the civilian government that they don’t need some of the weapons or military bases that they are getting but the government - because of corporate meddling -keeps funding things that the military has said they don’t want.
Why would you trust these same government officials not to be persuaded by corporate officials. This is the same government that got rid of Net neutrality, bans cities from creating municipal broadband, extended copyrighted repeatedly and protects draconian DRM.