If only Apple didn't have a monopoly on the App Store on the iPhone. Then we wouldn't have to know this information because we could get it from a different App Store where Facebook doesn't have to share this info!
This must be handled correctly as it can this also lead to privacy violation.
Question is will this be ethical .. I will not be comfortable using a device that logs every API an app on it is calling.
It would be better to be explicit: if it were not for the Apple 800 lb gorilla holding the Facebook 800 lb gorilla's feet to the fire here due to its self-appointed role as gatekeeper of the iOS App Store then this information would remain hidden from general consumers.
Google searches turn up stuff like this: https://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-data-collection-stored-r...
Do you know what's the problem with God?
If apple didn't restrict the OS so much, you'd have people making their own Facebook clients, wouldn't have mattered if Facebook liked it or not. The monopolization of Facebook's control on personal connections is partially because of closed OS's. And Apple's iOS is one of the most responsible OS's that gave rise to Facebook's data monopoly.
Had it been like Windows, there wouldn't be a way that Facebook could've maintained their monopoly.
The the answer is: a competitor could build their services on top of Facebook. They wouldn't have to start from scratch. Independent client's mean if the one user trusts you with their data, you can provide them a bigger value.
Today you cannot innovate on top of Facebook. Their network effects mean if your service is superior, you need to beat the network effects first.
And Facebook cannot reasonably offer independent access because: Cambridge Analytica.
Independent client's do what they want without Facebook taking a hit on their reputation. No one blames apple for the crimes committed using their phones/computers do they?
Hypotheticals can be argued either way but it’s just one possible option, not the only one.
Imagine if adblock wasn't allowed on those stores. Today the equivalent is alternative clients to Facebook not being allowed on iOS and the App Store.
Look at YC startups like motion being built on top of the web. They are building on top of the network effects of gmail/google/facebook/slack etc. We aren't allowed any of that on mobile. Had they been allowed more access to the mobile OS's, they could be a very successful company. We haven't even touched the tip of cross OS productivity integrations.
Like which ones? There's the AppStore, the PlayStore and that's it, nothing else is even worth being mentioned in terms of market share.
That didn’t happen before the App Store and isn’t happening anywhere else after the App Store either.
Instead it's probably more likely that FB would host Messenger and Whatsapp clients on their own app store with all the details hidden somewhere in the user agreement.
You're totally wrong on this. In fact, the first alternative FB clients I remember using sprang up on the iPad, before FB bothered to put a native app out for it.
What killed alternative FB clients was FB itself -- they've slowly closed off the APIs you'd need to access to make an alternative client optional. FB has also closed off their own alternative clients as well (FB Paper), and have been forcing users into their official web or native clients for a while.
How long before they ban ProtonMail because "You know what, we think our emails are "better for you". How long before they ban Signal because "You know what, IMessage has a better security than signal so it's "better for you".
Monopoly / tech dictatorship are the easy and tempting solution but nothing good ever came out of giving some dude total power over you. And even if you like those dude because you buy their propaganda, many other people might not share your view.