In 2014, some were very disgusted anaba personal iCloud photos from some of the world’s top celebrities and post them on the website, creating one PR problem for Apple CEO, Tim Cook. The company was about to do so spread out Apple Pay as part of its latest software, a process that took more than a decade to bring a good reputation paid processors and sellers he climbed. The only problem was no one Apparently they want their credit card records in the hands of the same company whose work was used to steal more photos of Jennifer Lawrence last week.
Apple lacked a name, and that’s what we have. A few days later, the company released a polished advertiser advertisement—Last and new website and an open letter from Cook himself — explaining the company’s secret, as well as security — that was followed by the downfall. Apple was not a company you could trust, Cook said, it was a company – unlike all the other guys (* cough * Facebook * cough *) who created their own Silicon Valley empire by recording your data to advertising companies, Apple’s business model is made by “selling big things, ”No need for data mining.
This advertising activity has been going on for the past seven years, with all accounts, it has worked. It has worked well enough that in 2021, we trust Apple with our credit card information, ours more for your health, and many a which is inside our homes. And when Tim Cook criticized things like “data-industrial complex“In a separate interview earlier this year, it was released a murderer IOS updates that give users the right power, we changed our iPhones and felt a little safer.
The program of App Tracking Transparency The ATT (FT) feature packed with iOS 14 updates gave iPhone users everywhere the ability to tell their favorite apps (and Facebook) to uninstall the next thing. To say the least, Apple has promised to stop these apps from tracking you online, as well as through other apps on your phone. This, of course, was not the case. The Washington Post was first to say pa research which tested Apple’s ATT side, and found the placement … completely useless. As the researchers put it:
In our evaluation of the ten most selected apps, we found no difference in tracking other people by selecting App Tracking Transparency for “Ask App Not Tracking.” The number of third-party participants was the same regardless of the ATT type of selection, and the number of experiments was slightly lower (~ 13%) when the user chose “Ask App Not Track”.
G / O Media can be sent
So, what the hell happened? In a nutshell, ATT looks at one (and powerful) digital component that advertisers use to identify your device – and your name – across pages and multiple functions: the so-called Advertiser ID, or IDFA. Telling the app not to monitor their chances of getting this identification, which is why companies like Facebook they lost their minds on this. Without IDFA, Facebook had no way of knowing if, say, an Instagram ad was meant to be sold on a third-party platform, or if you downloaded an app because of an ad you saw on your feed.
Unfortunately for the companies mentioned (but unfortunately for us), compliance does not start and end with IDFA. Fingerprint – or a combination of a few phone data to identify your device privately – is like the most popular method to other big digital advertising companies, which eventually led Apple to tell them to sell the bad stuff. But because “fingerprints” include different types of information in different places (and can go by different names), no one knocked. And outside of one or two banned apps, Apple really seems to not care.
“Apple believes that compliance should be transparent to users and improve,” an Apple spokesman told Gizmodo. “When the user chooses ‘Ask App Not to Follow,’ the app is notified that the user may not want to be followed in any way, and all developers – including Apple – must comply with the user’s wishes. are involved in resolving the issue, or have been removed from the App Store. ”
With the same words the company gave to the Post when it asked why asking some of these apps not to “look” made the programs send more information to other companies, however. In some cases, this includes everything from the carrier the person uses to the storage area on their equipment, which can be connected together to form the individual’s unique “fingers”.
Apple responded by telling the Post “it’s over”[reach] go to these companies to understand what they are taking and how they are sharing it, ”before … they seem to be doing the same thing that they have not been doing so far. As the Post puts it, these apps haven’t changed even after Apple’s voice.
It is a move that seems to be without Apple, considering that the company has always wanted to take a look at the Silicon Valley secret. But maybe Apple, which is looking at an antitrust investigation several countries due to the ironclad that the company operates on its App Store, it does not want to harm the manufacturers who travel around IDFA by taking some of the information because of where it could lead. One of the objections forced the company to approve some of its terms – especially on payments within the program, especially last month.
Some Apple critics around the world have advertised they have raised red flags for months related to the controversy surrounding the release of the Apple ATT, and it is not difficult to know why. It gave Apple the opportunity to use Intel more powerfully everything of its clients, IDFA, where it leaves competing companies competing with any remnants they can find. If all these pieces become Apple’s only asset, too, that’s almost to ask that an extra light of metal would be thrown in its path. What Apple seems to be doing here is what each of us would do if we were in it: choosing its own battles.