Apple Privacy Feature Costing Ad Companies Millions

Where were you when you realised Applel we’re fighting the good fight all along?

>Internet advertising firms are losing hundreds of millions of dollars following the introduction of a new privacy feature from Apple that prevents users from being tracked around the web.
>ITP was announced in June 2017 and released for iPhones, iPads and Macs in September. The feature prevents Apple users from being tracked around the internet through careful management of “cookies”, small pieces of code that allow an advertising technology company to continually identify users as they browse.
>Its launch sparked complaints from the advertising industry, which called ITP “sabotage”. An open letter signed by six advertising trade bodies called on Apple “to rethink its plan … [that risks] disrupting the valuable digital advertising ecosystem that funds much of today’s digital content and services.”
theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/09/apple-tracking-block-costs-advertising-companies-millions-dollars-criteo-web-browser-safari

Other urls found in this thread:

businessinsider.com/apple-admits-steve-jobs-vision-for-iad-was-a-huge-flop-2013-6
bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1411425
ix.io/DY8
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Apple just wants to be the only ones allowed to track its users. They have some sick fetish for that shit.

It's still an american company so there's that.

how are you just realizing this now in 2018? between google, microsoft, facebook, and apple, only one company *doesn't* have a huge stake in advertising and data mining. this has been the case for like a decade.

>privacy is evil
top jej

This kek
>Be the only company that can track users
>Sell that info so all the revenue goes to you instead of Google/other ad analytics companies

This.

It's really a pity they make shitty hardware.

Apple is known to lie like this. There were lots of articles about apple refusing to unlock phones, and yet later it became known that they cooperate with law enforcement anyway and unlock at first request.

My guess is the outrage is fabricated and Apple's privacy feature is a no-op.

They are starting to play like that because they didn't / couldn't get into the datamining business. So now their tactic is to cockblock others while they may or may not be developing their own botnets. It seems nice for the user but I wouldn't entirely trust them.
t. owns applel shit because of this but still cautious

is that in the context of subpoenas or what?

this sounds like one of those things that's salacious as a long clickbaity headline but retarded and mundane when you get into the facts.

also, a quick google tells me you're a retarded faggot, so i'm going to have to weigh all this info and get back to you.

I like that Apple is like that, but isn't it ironic that it is exactly them not doing what the customers demand and wish for?


People want USB, HDMI, Ethernet, ability to upgrade RAM and HDD/SSD, USB-C instead of lightning, headphone jacks and fanless devices (that don't throttle).

It certainly feels like Apple is the company most disconnected from its own userbase and even reality outside of silicon valley.

Coincidence?

>later it became known that they cooperate with law enforcement anyway and unlock at first request.
I've read that Apple cooperate with law enforcement when the phone's available for unlock (e.g. TouchID within the timeout window) if law enforcement makes the request in a timely fashion. Can you give more information on how they further cooperate with law enforcement?

And what was the context of the San Bernardino thing that was different from what you're talking about? That is, why would they put on a big show resisting the FBI's requests in that case if they're as chummy as you seem to say?

It's funny, because Applel's brand is sold solely on brand name and their PR dept's blacklist control over media outlets. If you say anything bad about Apple, you get blacklisted and get no review units, no early access, no event access, etc. If you promise to ALWAYS give glowing reviews of Apple products, you get invited to the campus, early review units, exclusive timed access, etc.

The irony of course is that ALL those media outlets run on advertising. By starving out the people helping sell their fruit trash, Apple are killing off their own PR mouthpieces, whose Apple viewership base all have them adblocked. These sites will eventually have to switch focus to other topics and giving up on being nice to Apple, who will start blacklisting them for "disloyalty", and that will just spiral into a completely total PR and brand suicide.

No. You're retarded. Apple refused to create software that would allow bruteforce attacks to phones with auto erase after 7 attempts. Apple can't unlock your encrypted devices. Apple does however fork over iCloud data to the agencies since they have to by law. You're just such a brainlet that you can't understand these separate things and boil it all down to lying.

This, they still shouldn't be trusted

>That is, why would they put on a big show resisting the FBI's requests in that case if they're as chummy as you seem to say?
To make it appear to public that they care about their privacy, obviously.

Fake news.
Safari is used by nearly nobody and its small irrelevant userbase doesn't have impact on companies, ergo companies don't need to give a fuck about Safari. They care more about Android and Microshit.

>, obviously
The obvious thing is whatever agrees with occam's razor - that Apple literally wasn't able to do what the FBI wanted. You can't push a conspiratorial agenda and then end it with "obviously" and expect someone to take you seriously.

...

everyone i know with an ishit uses safari.

A lot of people use safari on iOS. Also, earnestly using the term "fake news" makes you look like a literal retard.

You should read my response more carefully; the question had "if" in it. I'm not saying it's obvious they're lying about not cooperating. I'm saying that if they are lying about not cooperating, then, obviously, they are doing it to deceive public.

>Apple refused to create software that would allow bruteforce attacks to phones with auto erase after 7 attempts.
Does't mean they don't have software to backdoor around that completely.

Why are you articulating this point then? If the sun has exploded then we only have ~8 minutes before the light reaches us and we all die.

if that were the case then why wouldn't they just quietly cooperate with the FBI when they demanded access to that shooter's phone?

It's a direct answer to the question that user asked me. Are you ok? Brain damage?

To make it appear to public that they care about their privacy, obviously.

Too bad their products are dogshit.

...

come home white man

You said that they could unlock the phone anyway but the facts don't match up with that because they empirically have told law enforcement that that's not possible in at least some circumstances. I was asking what the differences were between those circumstances and the vague ones you were describing because you've been carefully nebulous about your claims. Now it seems like you're backing away from any statement, saying it's all some hypothetical "if" scenario.

Can you do me a favor and just lay your cards on the table? I'm not going back and forth with you like this because it's entertaining. I'm doing it because you're being annoyingly vague.

>It certainly feels like Apple is the company most disconnected from its own userbase and even reality outside of silicon valley.

No, that title goes to Microsoft, they had so many failed projects, every product they offer is fucking shit and the only reason they're not bankrupt yet is their data mining efforts and outsourcing development to India.

Everyone you know with an ishit is still part of a very small global userbase which doesn't warrant companies taking big hits because of Apple, as Google and Microshit consist the vast majority.

A lot of people is still an irrelevant number, and Safari is a hilarious piece of crap as good as IE. Fake news is fake news, suck it.

>Apple bites the hand that sells their products
2018 is going to be an amazing year.

Are we in fucking groundhog day?

PR.

>believing crapple marketing
you probably thought the fbi had difficulty breaking into San Bernardino shooter's phone

>isn't it ironic that it is exactly them not doing what the customers demand and wish for?
what? customers demand and wish for data mining?

apple wants to push expensive hardware with steep margins. they also want to maintain an appearance of being forward-thinking and innovative. they've figured that breaking compatibility is okay if it means having super thin laptops and jumping on the USB-C train and whatnot as quickly as possible, but drawing a line between their hardware design decisions and their user privacy/data decisions is insane.

you're trying to ascribe too much reason to too large an organization.

Apple is doing the good guy advertisement tactic. Like when they didn't want the FBI to get into their shit. It's all just fucking smoke and mirrors with these motherfuckers. They want to get the hipsters that are bothered about a few issues but know not well enough how sick these people are in the fucking head.

To be fair though they're not in any way worse than Microsoft or Google anyways.

ITT spinning their fuck-ups to their gullible sheep fanbase who will eat whatever shit they excrete.

businessinsider.com/apple-admits-steve-jobs-vision-for-iad-was-a-huge-flop-2013-6

No, I just skipped that part of your post. I only responded to your question about Apple's intent in case they are lying about protecting privacy.

Here are my cards: I don't trust Apple's claims about not being able to unlock phones, first and foremost, because the only thing remotely close we have to confirmation of this is Apple's "just trust us".

You obviously choose to trust Apple, and I'm fine with that, I don't want to convince you otherwise, so I'm just ignoring those parts of your posts since there's not much to talk about there.

Ask the same question, get the same answer.

HAve you ever wondered how advertising is even a thing in modern society. I mean jesus you would think that people would make their decision on basis of the products performance and general aesthetics or taste, instead its a multi trillion dollar industry to try make people buy shit they dont want and need instead of other shit they dont want and need.
Have you ever realised how retarded modern business models are, e.g. streaming sites where you can illegally watch shows that you cant watch legally at all, but at the cost of looking at ads that make so much revenue for the site so that they can employ like 1.000 lawyers who then keep away the copyright infringement cases long enough until the site is finally closed and has to move on to another url, continueing with the same shit?
Do your realise how many people are employed in this gigantic rampage of destroying each others work for no reason?
I dont want to live like this, seriously.

>what? customers demand and wish for data mining?
You have to read the whole post and keep in mind that the whole post is referencing itself, e.g. the first paragraph is introducing the second one etc.

Also: The sad truth is that people actually like targeted advertising, yes.

> -20%
no more hookers and blow for you then

Advertising works. People obviously choose a product based on its qualities, but brand popularity _is_ one of those qualities, even if it may seem counter-productive to consider it when choosing which product to buy.

I agree, with your point on brand popularity. It is technically important because if your brand is not popular its going to not receive support and die. But i feel like that is just the other, technical side of of the this sort of economy. If we e.g. android devices wouldnt be allowed to die out so fast software sides, it wouldnt be in turn so important to have the most popular brand etc. etc.

>through careful management of “cookies”
Fake news. Cookies have been obsolete for a long while now. No advertiser relies on them for user profiling. Smells like an ad for applel
>oy vey goy, look how good we are
just a shallow image boosting attempt which will most likely work on the iSheeple

>it wouldnt be in turn so important to have the most popular brand
Oh, but it would. More popular brand = more people buying your product. Support has nothing to do with it. Most products don't require support the way android phones do.

Just out of curiosity, what do you think advertisers use?

your gpu plus all the cumulative data they can get from you

So WebGL then?

if you use firefox you can type about:serviceworkers in the address bar to get a glimpse. That's just the beginning of the rabbit hole. There's also HTML Web Storage. Flash cookies (flash is preinstalled on all chrome browsers). Fonts. Resolutions. Referrer headers. JS canvas. Even the response times (delay/ping) can theoretically be used.

There's addons for nearly all of that (to disable most of this bullshit, that is)

>Internet advertising firms
There is only one and its called Google ad sense.
All the rest are businesses working around Google product.
Nobody is losing any money if anything Google has the whole thing on lock down.

I'm not sure how service workers can be used for tracking. Explain.

>HTML Web Storage
Which is not shared between hosts, how do you use it for tracking?

>Flash cookies
On iphone?

>Fonts. Resolutions. Referrer headers. JS canvas.
All the stuff that would be exactly the same for users of same models of iphone...

>Even the response times (delay/ping) can theoretically be used.
Except, they can't because response time is wildly different every time, and you're looking for things on the client that don't change for the purpose of tracking.

i can't wait for this to done t.bh
bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1411425

Yes, they are late, just a dacade or so.

Everything is a conspiracy.

I will not spoonfeed you, sorry. You can look all of that up yourself or just think about it and get to the answer yourself.

impressive quads.
What they are discussing there is what I've already been thinking about, not for tracking but for making websites look the same on every OS, regardless of font smoothing.

Recently somebody also found out that some sites identify users by exploiting the autofill forms. Let the browser save autofill info from a hidden tracking pixel, next time page reloads browser fills in autofill info, AJAX reads out the autofill and it's finished.

>i know this stuff just don't care to tell you!
Didn't expect anything else. Using http referrers for tracking. Genius. I feel sorry for taking your post seriously now.

that ticket is not about fonts thou

I know, but it would be possible with fonts as well.

fuck off, retard

Mac users will normally download Chrome or sometimes Firefox. Safari users are in a minority.

I wonder if people in this board actually believes companies like apple or google regarding all this shit.

>wahhhhhhhh ive been found out

>pixel
ix.io/DY8
>Sup Forums doesn't allow to post it in code
really maeks you think

>it would be possible with fonts as well.
yes it is
that's why you don't allow sites to use their own fonts

What are you babbling about, iToddler?
U mad you get no ads made for you like all other adults?

I'm babbling about the fact that you thought that HTTP referrer can be used for tracking purposes, which is absolute nonsense, and it just shows you know nothing about the subject. I don't use Apple products, but since I'm not a retard, this does not prevent me from having a sane conversation about them.

The http referrrer header let websites track from where you're coming from.
It's quite hard to explain the http referrer header without using the word 'track' in the first place.

You could write a tracking pixel that loads several websites in some order, this would supply enough http referrers usable for tracking.

You can see from where users are coming from and therefore track them. E.g. when you click on a YouTube link from Sup Forums, YouTube puts you in the Sup Forums categorie and suggests even more Sup Forums related videos than usual.

You're full of shit, but I was expecting to stumble across that in an Apple thread.

>Safari
There's people who use this shit?
Didn't this pile of crap lack any webm support last year? Probably still does.

That is not at all the tracking used by advertisers. They do not track which site the requests are coming from, they track users, they have a bunch of identifying information for a user, and a history of sites this user has visited. When they have to show an ad for a site, the choice of which ad to show preferably for them should be based on user's browse history, which they have because they are able to uniquely identify the user and retrieve the history from their database based on that identifying information (and add the current suite to history). HTTP referrers are useless for this, as well as response time.

>typical appletard thinks he knows what happens behind closed doors

install gentoo

Apple confirmed /our guy/

BASED APPLE
A
S
E
D

A
P
P
L
E

>open letter
Lmao these fucking faggots

sure on mac, but on iphone everyone i know uses safari.

>Apple does everything it can to protect your privacy
Just because they say doesn't mean they do.
>hurrf durrf we won't unlock the terrorist's iPhone to the FBI
>we will make a public scuffle with them for PR points
>meanwhile China will make a deal with the FBI for those codes in the background since China has actual full access as part of a forced deal to keep production there and bank on the massive population

Know why Sup Forums is against Apple? Because Sup Forums is against stupidity even more than it is against sniffing cunts.

>itoddler banned again

>writes a long post explaining something trivial and completely irrelevant to the topic
>when called out, accuses me of not knowing how tracking is done
I do know. You apparently don't.

kill yourself

Baby.

apple is in the same position pre-10 MS was

they're not selling you, they're selling you a mac. so they can do this.

>losing dollars
profit reduction is not a loss, you cunts

you forgot the dragon dildos

I use Self Destructing cookies with firefox, but i'm swtiching over to palemoon and apparently it's no longer supported.

What's the alternative that Sup Forums reccomends?

best alternative is to not use firefox or firefox derivatives.

Configuring your browser so that cookies are deleted after closing the window

I have it like that anyways, but that doesn't do as much since self destructing cookies deleted them on a per tab basis, not just per window

What would you suggest then?

Sticking to Firefox and avoiding pointless meme forks.

You can hide the header without problems, and you don't need any extensions, just a couple of changes in about:config.
Expect the dogshit that is cripplechan to complain, though.

How about simply not allowing sites to create cookies in the first place
Or maybe there's an old SDC version somewhere that's compatible with Pale Moon

A lot of sites refuse to work correctly unless you at least accept first-party cookies. Blocking them completely means breaking a shitload of websites.

My issue with firefox and why I want to switch is firefox always ends up freezing and eventually crashing once I have a lot of tabs open despite still having plenty of unused memory; and i'm told this is a common firefox issue and that palemoon might not have it.

wouldn't that cause me to not be able to effectively use websites that require me to login?

Why is stopping peoples meager websites from making money a good thing

Would you host a website for the fun of it? people have to make a fucking living

And yet they complain when some poor fella just blocks ads.

I unironically do. I make no money from my website.

Ads themselves aren’t the problem.

The problem is malicious invasive third-party JavaScript that fingerprints you, tracks you across sites, records your keystrokes and mouse movements, obtains your saved passwords, and mines cryptocurrency, all without the user’s knowledge or consent. That’s in addition to the massive data and battery consumption they impose.

Scripting on the web needs to die.

.

I just don't want to see ads. Other people's business ventures are no concern of mine.

ublock origin has a filterlist that interacts with tracking cookies. it works on chrome/ium and firefox.

which one of the lists is it?