[tmhrtly]

I think in some situations if users see value in the opt-in then it can be ok. E.g. your phone asking you if you're happy to share your location with an app. I sure as hell want my mapping app to know where I am, but I also feel very comforted that I still get a say in the process. The thing about this tracking opt-in is that no user would ever want it because it's solely there to exploit them. So in this case I think you're 100% right.

[cortesoft]

Wouldn't the value in this situation be "you get to use Facebook"? If they didn't make money off their users, Facebook wouldn't exist.

Would you be ok if they did it that way? A warning that says "by using Facebook, you are agreeing to be tracked", at which point the user could either continue or uninstall the app?

[hn_throwaway_99]

This is a bullshit tradeoff. Facebook still knows a ton about you by your friends and activity on Facebook, and they can still show you a ton of ads on Facebook that are highly targeted to your demographic profile, and make a shit ton of money doing it. They could also make a ton of money showing you ads on a partner app if, for example, you logged in with FB to another app.

The only thing Apple is preventing them from doing is making an even larger shit ton of money by essentially knowing every app you ever use for anything that includes the Facebook SDK.

Note the same thing is true of Google. Google can (and did, and does) make shit tons of money by showing you targeted, relevant ads just based on your search keywords, or alternatively on a partner site by showing you ads just based on that site's content. But no, they need to make even more gargantuan shit tons of money by tracking your every move in Chrome and Android.

[maps7]

I think the new changes will hurt facebook competitors more. Everyone knows Facebook and it has a brand. They want to collect some info? Most people won't care - they just want to use the app like they always have. They might think twice with a new app that they don't know

[tmhrtly]

I hope it might have the effect that those newer apps instead choose to innovate with their business models and pursue directions that don't require the user to sacrifice their privacy.

[jefftk]

The change Apple is making keeps Facebook (and others) from using the advertising ID to track users between apps. Facebook's ability to notice that you have suddenly started posting a lot of baby pictures and choose to serve baby-related ads is unaffected.

[iguy]

Aren't they free to make their app not work at all without this setting? If so, then they must still find enough in letting you use facebook without it, even if less than they would like.

[colejohnson66]

IIRC, Apple’s rules say an app is prohibited from not functioning if it’s denied permission.

[iguy]

Oh you may be right, sorry. I guess it's supposed to offer what functionality it can, like voice calls but no video if you decline camera permissions.

[Someone]

That wouldn’t fly in the EU because if the GDPR. https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/article29/document.cfm?action=...:

“If consent is bundled up as a non-negotiable part of terms and conditions it is presumed not to have been freely given.“