[matrix_overload]

Well, the elephant in the room is that an app these days is a packaged version of a website with one twist: notifications. Unless you explicitly disable it via settings, it will try to get a small chunk of your attention every now and then.

- Would you like to enable notifications to see when your EV finishes charging?

- Yes.

(in a couple of days when you're thinking about a completely different topic)

- SPECIAL OFFER! 20% OFF THE FATTY FRIES IF YOU GET A CAR WASH FROM US!!!

And that's everywhere. It pays off due to the scale, just like spam. It costs nothing to send an annoying notification to a horde of users, and even if 1% of the users go for it, it is still 5+ figures of revenue out of a handful of characters pushed to users' devices, and hours of human time wasted dealing with useless annoying distractions.

[left-struck]

Idk why more people don’t do what I do. I call it notification hygiene, or maybe attention hygiene. If an app has a legitimate reason for notifying me, like it’s a messaging app and a human being has messaged me, then the app gets to notify me, otherwise it does not. The first time an app shows me a notification that is useless to me it gets deleted from my phone if I’m not using it anymore. On the spot. Drop everything I’m doing and delete the app. If I am still using the app I disable notifications for it. I get almost no notifications that aren’t people messaging me.

[MrMember]

I was an Audible subscriber for like five years when they started spamming my notifications with ads. I unsubscribed on the spot and haven't looked back. I couldn't believe it, I had probably given them $1000 by that point but apparently that wasn't good enough. Even if you give a company a significant amount of money they'll still do everything they can to squeeze even more money out of you.

[accurrent]

Cant do that with my banking app, payment app or government apps :(. Unfortunately where I live almost everything requires a phone.

[left-struck]

You can’t turn off the notifications?

To be clear I wouldn’t delete my banking app if it showed me a marketing notification, I would go into the app and turn off that kind of notification. I have notifications turned on for my banking app because of 2FA and transaction notifications. In the past I was actually able to stop a fraudulent transaction within minutes because of a transaction notification so I value them.

[ailurooo]

you can't selectively turn off junk notifications from apps that you need notifications from.. i want to use the peets app to know when my coffees ready but it spams me with pumpkin spice latte deals..

[left-struck]

I think this is something I genuinely differ on to most people. If an app doesn’t allow me to selectively choose the notifications then I don’t allow it to notify me. I put a really high value on my attention and I don’t consider that ok behaviour from an app. If I miss something because I don’t get notifications then that’s too bad, the value of not being interrupted is so much higher.

[DougN7]

I feel similarly. I hunt for the Unsubscribe button to every email I don’t want and/or mark it spam in my mail app. It makes a real difference after a while.

Unfortunately, companies know most people aren’t like us so they keep pumping out the crap.

[yetihehe]

> you can't selectively turn off junk notifications from apps that you need notifications from

You can't if it's a junk app. Many reputable apps today have properly described notification channels and you can turn them off selectively (under android at least). That's what I did for my banking and several other apps. Every "marketing" channel was turned off.

[xboxnolifes]

Contact the associated app store. Those should be labeled differently and not misused.

[consteval]

My banking app has pretty fined-tuned control over notifications. They also support ulterior notifs, like email and SMS.

[jauntywundrkind]

Android kindly has notification channels. Apps can setup whatever categories they want & users can turn individual channels on and off as they like.

Alas it seems like few apps have it implemented. Hiss boo. Wish this was available of Web Push.

[chrismartin]

It's not only notifications, it's permissions (that the app won't work until you accept) to track your location, exfiltrate your contact list, and so forth. It's an invasion of privacy. It should not be required to, e.g., order food at a restaurant or configure your headphones.

[zzo38computer]

> It's not only notifications, it's permissions (that the app won't work until you accept) to track your location, exfiltrate your contact list, and so forth.

My idea of an operating system design (it is intended for desktop and laptop computers, but a variant could also be possible for smartphones and stuff if wanted), that all I/O (including determining the current date and time) must use capabilities (and can be proxy capabilities). The built-in programming language allows users to define new proxy capabilities and configure existing ones, and the C programming language can also be used. This can avoid such invasion of privacy but also is useful for other purposes, e.g. for testing, or to allow programs that expect a camera to work even if you do not have a camera, or to filter or redirect notifications, etc. Therefore, permissions can be as fine and as faked as you intend it to be. And, furthermore, the standard package manager would exclude programs that are designed to be invasion of privacy and other antifeatures like that (users can still install them manually, and the security features of the system still ensure that it would protect against many kind of malware and misfeatures).

> It should not be required to, e.g., order food at a restaurant or configure your headphones.

You shouldn't need a app or a web browser to do either of those things anyways.

[xerox13ster]

I'm extremely confused by your first statement. If I take out all the parenthethicals, I get:

"My idea of an operating system design, that all I/O must use capabilities."

Any OS feature is a capability. Time and date are not I/O. What does capability mean to you?

Then you go on to say that the built in language will allow definition of proxy capabilities "and the C programming language can also be used"

How exactly does the inclusion of C avoid invasion of privacy? What such invasions? How does the conclusion follow?

I am sincere, please help me make sense of what you are saying.

[zzo38computer]

I am sorry if I am being unclear. I will try to answer your questions.

> Time and date are not I/O.

In my system, they are. Anything except deterministic operations on the program's own memory is considered I/O.

> What does capability mean to you?

"Capability" refers to capability-based security. For a program to do any I/O, it must be given an object called a "capability" (which is similar than, but different than, a "file descriptor" in UNIX). There is no ambient authority; to open a file you must already be given a capability to open a file, etc. Capabilities can also be used to give someone else an additional capability.

A "proxy capability" is a capability that a program makes up itself, which can be used to pass messages between itself and another program that the proxy capability is given to. Programs cannot distinguish between a proxy capability and any other capability, therefore ensuring that anything that an application program would know from outside of itself can be overridden by the user. So, if a program wants to track your location, a proxy capability can be used to give fake location data (this is useful for testing as well, and also for other purposes e.g. if your computer cannot determine your location but you want to specify it anyways).

> How exactly does the inclusion of C avoid invasion of privacy?

Avoiding invasion of privacy is independent of what programming language is used.

[wlesieutre]

One under the radar change in iOS 18 is that contacts permissions are now more like photos have worked for a few years now. Instead of having to give the app all your contacts and then pick within the app, there’s now a system picker and you can choose specific contacts to grant permission for.

[gabeio]

That’s cool and all but tbh don’t they already have it from the last time I accidentally pressed allow all? And when it’s out there it’s out there… even the FTC agrees: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41688080

[benoau]

They've had 14 years to get it. I remember ages ago there was a startup Path who famously justified uploading your contacts without permission (before dialogs were implemented) as it being an industry-norm!

https://techcrunch.com/2012/02/07/path-uploads-your-iphones-...

[wlesieutre]

Yes, if you didn’t want them to already have all your contacts you’d need to have declined that previously

Well behaved apps may not have uploaded or looked at anything they didn't absolutely need to, but the problematic ones would

[wafflemaker]

At least they can't track changes to your contacts, which is also an important data.

That's really cool with per app contacts lists, like on GrapheneOS. Seeing it's now on iPhone, I hope it will trickle down to Android too.

[scarface_74]

I have never had an iOS app that won’t work if you don’t give it your location, contact list data, etc except for obvious things like Maps.

[gruez]

McDonald's app won't give you offers if you refuse to give precise location permission. That said other functionality works fine.

[ToucanLoucan]

I've honestly never had an app that didn't have a VERY good reason to need contacts access actually request it.

[BobaFloutist]

WhatsApp insisted on important contacts instead of letting me add them manually.

[wafflemaker]

What's up doesn't start if you don't give it full contact list on Android.

[scarface_74]

It works fine on iOS if you say “no”

[BobaFloutist]

That's the impression I got, though I had a haunting suspicion that there was some other way I wasn't able to find.

It's disgusting.

[consteval]

Pretty much all social media apps request contacts and will auto-recommend your profile(s) to your contacts. Kind of a shitty feature if you want a somewhat private social media profile. I mean, not all social media is Facebook, can we please stop treating it as such?

[scarface_74]

And you can say “no” and the app still works

[consteval]

Okay. And? I guess I don't have a right to complain because I can just ignore the app's pestering.

With this kind of mentality, you can justify close to anything. I don't think this is sound reasoning.

[eep_social]

> one twist: notifications

I’d argue the second twist is data collection, which for an app can be much more invasive than what a web client leaks depending on permissions.

[scarface_74]

What “private data” can an app leak that a website can’t if you don’t explicitly give it permissions?

[komali2]

> if you don’t explicitly give it permissions

A lot of users don't understand that permissions are optional. They just tap to make the boxes go away. So the app developer stealing your data isn't insulated from being unethical just because they gave you a series of dialog boxes on installation.

So to answer your question: your contact list, location, connected Bluetooth devices, your photos, etc.

[scarface_74]

And there are now web standards for precise location (has been forever), Bluetooth, battery status, etc

[eep_social]

If the implication was that web fingerprinting has gotten really creepy too, then I agree. Unluckily, I don’t think I can do justice to the matrix of “depending on permissions” x mobile OS x valid but overly broad permissions in a comment. Apps can and do take anything you give them, active status, location, other installed apps, battery charge percentage, etc.

[scarface_74]

Location data is permission based and at least iOS has taken steps that prevent an app from seeing other installed apps.

There is also a battery status API for browsers. Safari doesn’t support it. But Android browsers do.

[aembleton]

I wish Android would let me filter notifications and add rules to them.

I know that you can switch off certain types of notifications, but thats only if the developer has added those in. For example Revolut uses one notification type and sends payment notifications and marketing through that same channel. So, I just don't use Revolut but it would be good if Android could let me set up keywords to block notifications.

[dqv]

You can do this sort of filtering with third party apps, which is why I'm probably going to be switching to Android pretty soon.

[godelski]

What's worse is when you're forced to use the app.

In my apartment complex we're forced to use an app for laundry (no cash, no card). The fucking app doesn't even sort the rooms (I'm actually impressed. I didn't know you could do any programming without knowing what sort is. Like not even one line of code...). It also has a 30 second load time because it redraws everything during the startup when it tries to connect to the network. Luckily their API got exposed, in May... and someone made all the machines free.

They also wrapped up their sales notification with the one that tells you the laundry is done. So you disable both. Not an issue though because the latter never even worked anyways.

But it's like when people send spam through the same email you send necessary information. Universities pull this shit all the time. Guess what? It all is spam now. And these people wonder why they emails get blocked.

Or when you go to a restaurant and they make you use their app. I'm autistic enough to try hard not to use them but often I give up because people I'm with get upset I'm taking so long (but I'm not the one at fault. It's like yelling at a cashier when corporate increases price on an item. Wrong target, but I get it). I think this is why they get away with it though. Because blame is often targeted at what is right in front of you, and they're often small. But a lot of small things add up. 1 shitty app can be ignored, but a hundred is overwhelming. And I swear, it gets worse every day

[attendant3446]

Oh, I used to live in a building where the laundry was operated by a similar app (and unfortunately there were no alternatives nearby). To make matters worse, the laundry room was in the basement, where there is no internet connection (no WiFi and no mobile signal). And you had 30 seconds from the moment you "booked" the washer or dryer. So the workflow was 1) go to the laundry room, load the clothes into the machine and close the door, 2) run upstairs and start the wash cycle via the internet, 3) repeat the process for the dryer. Hated it.

[rubslopes]

I'm curious: if there was no internet connection at all, how the machine knows it's been booked?

[attendant3446]

I can't remember now, but maybe there was a password-protected WiFi. Or the machine was connected to a controller that was connected by wire. All I know is that there was definitely no network available to the users of the laundry.

[godelski]

Idk about them, but at my place you just don't get to do laundry.

And you email them and they don't respond. You email your complex manager and they tell you to contact them. Eventually someone yells and it gets fixed. Or someone destroys a machine or in my case, someone hacks them.

[zzo38computer]

> What's worse is when you're forced to use the app.

Yes, especially if you do not have a compatible smartphone (or any smartphone, or any computer) or if it had run out of battery power. But also just in case you don't want to, or if the app is defective, etc.

(I had read on Usenet that there is a German word "Digitalzwang" if you are forced to use computers with specific software.)

> The fucking app doesn't even sort the rooms ... It also has a 30 second load time ...

Yes, also that, that they are badly written and badly designed.

> Or when you go to a restaurant and they make you use their app.

I had only been at one restaurant where this was required, although they provided a iPad for this purpose, to any customers who required it. Furthermore, the restaurant was mismanaged and not such a good quality anyways. I do not intend to go to that restaurant again.

[m463]

Can they actually force this on people?

[godelski]

Yes and no. What do you mean by force. From my comment I use it the everyday way, not literal.

Yes, I can go to the laundry mat a quarter mile away or 3 miles away and pay cash. Both of which I need to be on site the entire time or I can expect my laundry to be taken or someone else to stop my machine and replace my clothes with theirs... But if I want to use the ones that are in the same building or the same complex that I live in, yes, I must use the app. As annoying as it is, there are worse options... It's just that a handful of undergrads could make a better app during a hackathon. Ones who know what a sort function is and maybe even caching!

Once they even tried to steal $20 from me. It double processed. I sent them the log from the app and showed them my bank record. They said they didn't see it. I sent the docs again and threatened a clawback. They said they didn't see it. So yeah, I made a clawback. I wonder how often that strategy works considering who their target customers usually are

I guess there's a third option. As mentioned, the API was exposed. Someone used this in my complex to set all the machines to free (I understand this has happened several places across the country given news and Reddit). I guess I could also send POST requests and pay that way.

There are technically options, but there is no option that is not exceptionally bad. I mean the bar is low to make me happy. We live in a world where my computer can talk to me in a fairly realistic voice while simultaneously to do laundry I have to wait several minutes trying to reload an app to just fucking pay. Something that could be solved with a typical tap to pay (they even have Google and Apple pay in the app! But you gotta prepay in fixed amounts. The machines also have NFC but it's not enabled)

[xerox13ster]

If your washers are LG washers there’s a cheat code in the manual.

[brewdad]

Why can’t they? You technically have a choice to go elsewhere to do your laundry or to eat. It’s shitty and probably a long term negative but it isn’t anywhere close to illegal.

[komali2]

People should be allowed to set the rules corporations have to agree to to be allowed to do business near them. "Can't require a phone to purchase things" is a perfectly reasonable such rule... And in some states is a real one.

[godelski]

Maybe we should also recognize that "you get what you pay for" and "lowest bidder" are related topics.

So many businesses try so hard to save money that they end up losing a lot.

[m463]

I guess it's better than the apartments where you phone is your (only) house key.

[userbinator]

It depends where you are. Some states have made it illegal to refuse cash.

[dqv]

This is a big gripe of mine with iOS. There is no way for you to filter notifications by contents (e.g. if Wallet says "weekly spending" dismiss the notification [Apple Wallet has two options for notifications: on or off, there is no way to disable weekly spending notifications that I've been able to find]). Android doesn't have it either, but Android allows third party apps to do it. I'm strongly considering switching to Android for this reason alone.

[underbiding]

The real elephant in the room is all the apps that are basically packaged web browsers but also want all sorts of absurd permission privileges so it can harvest user data to sell.

[dzhiurgis]

It's becoming obvious operating systems needs to give us more options to control our devices - i.e. firewall, caller and notification filters, etc.

[ProxCoques]

The weird thing is that companies will pay for entirely separate engineering, product and marketing departments for their apps which duplicate their web apps in every way (or usually a bit less), not to mention being under the thumb of the app stores - all for the sake of notifications.

I'm no bean-counter, but that seems very odd to me.

[wlesieutre]

Uber is the worst about this. I make a point of disabling notification permissions any time I’m not actively hailing a car.

[orev]

Every time I see an app do this, I go to the App Store and give a one-star rating with a comment that this is why (app is using notifications for spam). I feel like using that method is more likely to be seen by the right people than complaining another way.

[anonzzzies]

I just have my phone and laptop on do not disturb 247. Works great. I have one chat app open and people who really need to reach me send a message there. Been doing that for 10+ years; it's excellent.

[strijelac]

Take look at this app (I know, one mora app to install :) )

https://www.minimalistphone.com

[gruez]

>Unless you explicitly disable it via settings, it will try to get a small chunk of your attention every now and then.

It's been opt in on iOS and Android for years

[smcleod]

I don't understand why you'd have notifications enabled for any app that you don't need them from?

[m463]

No, really it's identification and tracking on a mass scale.

[Dalewyn]

>Unless you explicitly disable it via settings,

You don't?

I disable notifs like the fucking plague.

Notifs? Yeah, because it's not a question of if; that shit is dead on arrival.

[OsrsNeedsf2P]

App stores should start treating notification blocks as a signal the app is low quality

[kibwen]

One look at the Android and iOS app stores should tell you that Google and Apple do not give a hoot about quality. If it makes money for the platform landlord, it stays.

[lukev]

The problem is when it’s an app that sometimes you want notifications from. I deleted Uber, for example, when it started spamming me.

[cryptoz]

That should be getting kicked off the store then! Didn’t google implement a solution to this like 10 years ago, notification channels? Does iOS still not having something like that? Is Uber lying about the content of the notification for the channel?

I thought it was against all the app stores rules to spam notifications that the user doesn’t want. Maybe I am mistaken.

[compootr]

Yep! Android packages do have channels. The issue is though, greedy companies jumble their notifications into one channel, so if you want one thing, you get the whole ass-blaster 5000. this is why we can't have nice things

I generally treat computers as less than equal, so only messaging and critical apps get notifications. You [phone] only speak when asked to!