[Rjevski]

This is definitely a possibility, but if a feature has 90% malicious/bullshit use and 10% legitimate use then there's a good chance it should either be removed or disabled by default (so the iOS situation regarding web notifications is perfectly fine by me).

[Yetanfou]

There was a time when a large amount of the email travelling the 'net was spam. I'm glad that the solution did not consist of removal of all email servers and clients. Inline images in web sites are (ab)used to show advertising, on many sites this accounts for the majority of use of this feature. Should this feature be removed from Safari for that reason?

For some category of web 'applications' notifications are a boon so it is good to have the possibility to use them. Apple is slow to implement it as it can be used to make web apps more competitive with native apps, something which they're not that keen on as native apps makes them a lot of money.

[hummingurban]

I think that's a poor analogy. Notification spam was invented because people weren't checking their spam folder. Those ppl are unlikely to open themselves up to an even more intrusive medium to deliver unwanted messages. Sure there will be usage cases for it, but not as the people selling mobile notification as a panacea, in fact I argue that it can do more damage than good in the long run.

It's like that creep you met at a night club who won't leave you alone with txt messages. Sure you were drunk but don't get mad when I don't reply.

[Yetanfou]

Defending Apple's business decision as if it were really a means to protect the user from harm is rather silly. It took a while for Apple to allow effective ad blockers on iOS, was that meant to protect users as well?

As said, I never have (nor had) problems with notification spam for the simple reason that only allow notifications for sites which need it. I don't have problems with spam because I block the stuff, I hardly see any advertising as I block that as well.

Communications is an adversarial field, there are those out there who'll try to get their message across by any means. Whatever way you choose to limit their access to your eyes and ears (and other sensory organs, and eventually your brain), there will be trade-offs. As an example I choose not to have a television in my house as that medium has been entirely taken over by adversarial parties. I do have computers of all sorts which connect to the 'net even though those are also being targeted by those parties. In contrast to television the computers give me the means to tailor the communications to (what I perceive to be) my wants and needs without needing to allow too many other parties access to my time and attention.