floomk

It would at least strive for equality, instead of letting the big boys do whatever the hell they want while punishing everyone else (and making it impossible to compete).

There's also the ethical concern about how apple (or their reviewer) can bully you specifically which means there is no other way to delivery our software to your users, other than complying with a bully.

A better response would be: "Thank you for making us aware, we will revisit their evaluation or update the guidelines" (and then they would actually do so)

This isn't what's happening though. If you're a big app you get to do whatever you want, and if you're small then you have to do as you're told.

No one is forcing you to install anything you don't want to. The only thing I want is having the ability to install anything I want to. If you don't want to install those things the solution is simple: Don't. You don't need Apple to make that decision for you.

It would be helpful and interesting if you could explain why the impact is so huge

> We're reviewing your app, not theirs, so what they can do is irrelevant

rules for thee but not for me

Apple has never been fair with its review, sadly.

> I would expect Apple's response to be "change it back".

Companies should not have to bend over to apple's whims just to get their software in end user hands. Hopefully upcoming EU regulation will reign apple's overreach in a bit.

I think you meant it's a great way for google to punish you for not giving them full access

They are in the EU. If something was not meant to be accessible you may not scrape it.

How would you feel about a cop that signed up because they wanted to do better? Should they just not even try? How would things ever get better?

The build process would produce the concatted file

As far as the browser should be concerned, yes it is trusted.

It's up to another layer of security to help the user not install extensions (or any other software) that they do not want on their machine.

This security is a farce anyway. Firefox is installed in the user profile so any sufficiently advanced malware can just patch the firefox binary and embed itself in there or disable this nonsense. The extension shenanigans is just done to take away user control, with the excuse being to protect users from malware.

If an extension has been installed on my machine it is by definition trusted. Firefox is not my antivirus solution and it should not try to be. Keep your lane.

That's because you are human and have rights that a computer program doesn't

Sadly this seems to be the most likely considering how the US is ran

Just pack your kids a lunch and send them off on their bicycles.

Digital learning on controlled devices is not the same thing as scrolling Instagram during class

This is just about school hours... Kids can do whatever they want outside of the classroom. They didn't allow me to play my gameboy in class either, but I still played that thing for many many hours.

That's why 3D secure exists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3-D_Secure

Blame your government for not caring enough to have it implemented

No one would answer calls from an Indian phone number and it would be incredibly expensive. This is relevant because number spoofing is blocked by the telcos in the EU.

Telemarketing basically isn't a thing in my country. The only reason it's so widespread in the US is a failure to regulate it.

I'm sure a $5 digital ocean droplet would go a very, very long way.

Is there a demo instance?

Of course there are many different things that can aid or hurt innovation. I believe that one of the things that aids innovation is accessibility to a wide spread of developers of all ages, so measures that make this more difficult hurt innovation.

Can I give it to my friend to try on his phone without jumping through a million hoops every week or so? Because I can just send him an apk file via whatsapp without paying anyone a dime.

Or let's take a step back: Can I develop the app without buying a $1000 macbook? You can develop for android using any platform. Apple's build tools are limited to only work on macos.

Why do so many people feel entitled to tell me how to use my computer? If they choose not to serve their webpages to me, that's fine. To be realistic, I probably won't even notice their attempt because my adblocker will already have updated to bypass their silly attempt.

But yes, it is their right to try. Just as it is my right to install & use an adblocker.

If you want to talk about reducing innovation then have a look at Apple's walled garden. They're preventing so many innovative new apps from ever being created by being inaccessible to young/poor developers.

Or, crazy idea, they can accept they have absolute boatloads of money and are making tons more, and that this is enough.

It should still be their goal, instead of some arbitrary percentage. Or I suppose they could offer everyone a blanket discount for the fraud percentage.

> Google says that it actively keeps it under a certain %, and advertisers are generally okay with that number

How about actively keeping that at 0%?

So using Adobe Firefly is fine, since they only trained on data they had the rights to?