Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by nwh | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

nwh

It's not just Facebook, Apple does this too with their "iAd optout" pages too.

Limit tracking: [ off | on ]

I'm still not sure which side I want really.

View on HN

Google has started resorting to some odd and arguably evil tricks as well: http://i.imgur.com/gqJAfH2.png

"Your channel will get a new page on Google+" only appears after checking "No", and does not show up if checking "Yes".

What's wrong? Of you split your identity, you get an extra page.

For context, since another commenter suggested "Ad Tracking - on/off", the limit ad tracking option doesn't actually prevent all tracking. Developers are supposed to use this setting to know what they can use the advertisingIdentifier for. See bullet #2 here: https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/AdSupp...

Facebook and Google make money selling your personal data, Apple makes money selling hardware.

That is a hasty oversimplification. Apple stands to make money selling your personal data just like Facebook and Google. And, were it true that Apple makes money only selling hardware, it would not feel the need to purposely confuse an iPhone user into being tracked by using dirty language tricks.

Apple may make some minuscule amount. Facebook and Google cannot survive without selling your personal data. It is beyond ethics, it is their entire business plan. If it makes you feel better to believe Apple is just as bad with your data go ahead.

Yes that's very true and perceptive. It is also irrelevant to the parent comment.

It goes to the question of motive, which is relevant to the discussion, generally.

No, not really, because whatever their current "motive" is they are using a dark pattern for their tracking opt-out.

Is that really a dark pattern. If Limit Tracking is On then theoretically your tracking is limited, no? Also Apple let's you get a new UDID if you want to wipe all data. Not the most lucrative way to handle advertising data. My biggest problem with tailored adverts is the uncanny valley. The more accurate they are the more it creeps me out.

I think you misunderstand dark pattern here. If you sit and think about it for a while, then yes, it makes perfect sense. But the point of a dark pattern is to give quick, hurried users a misconception of what the choice is.

The non-dark pattern here is to say "Ad Tracking - On/Off".

http://www.theverge.com/2013/8/29/4640308/dark-patterns-insi...

BTW, Google lets you opt out of Interest Based Advertising: https://support.google.com/ads/answer/2662922?hl=en

http://advertising.apple.com/

Apple sell your location data to advertising companies too.

Can't speak for Google, but Facebook certainly doesn't sell personal data. Facebook internally uses personal data to show targeted advertisements. Big difference.

Nor does Google. Twitter, however, does. That being said, Twitter is default public and they've been really open about it since day one.

Note: I have no special knowledge of Google, so maybe they do. Given that it would be really dumb to do so and lie about it, I believe that they do not.

certainly doesn't sell personal data.

It just sells access to use the data, not to know what the data is.

Their proposition is: "Give us $50 and you can target 26 year old iPhone users who go to Stanford and have posted about bratwurst in the past six hours."

You're paying to use the data they've collected about their users.

If they didn't sell access to use personal data, we'd be back to flat banner ads with no retargeting or privacy invading doubleclick social strata pinning.

Ads are not personal data. Google sells impressions, not details. FB too. Your supermarket sells your data to randkme aggregator companies.

Google and FB hoard personal data.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com