Re:Sex toy company Lovense admits its Android app locally st...
by squarefoot on Friday November 10, 2017 @06:20PM
(#15673932)
I believe we should push Google, Apple etc. into taxing permissions usage, say 2% for every permission if you use it and 5% if you require it but don't use it, so that if common sense doesn't work at least greed will encourage programmers to require access only to what is really necessary.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Sex toy company Lovense admits its Android app locally st...
by Johnny555 on Friday November 10, 2017 @07:18PM
(#15674212)
How about just giving users the ability to turn off a permission. Like Google already does.
I use that a lot to turn off contacts access to apps that have no business reading my contacts.
Re:Sex toy company Lovense admits its Android app locally st...
by squarefoot on Friday November 10, 2017 @07:30PM
(#15674259)
The problem is that 99% of users don't know about them or don't know how to disable them. The damage was already done when years ago apps started to require permissions for hardware or data they shouldn't have access to, so that users now blindly accept every request because "the app comes from the official store, so it is safe".
Re:Sex toy company Lovense admits its Android app locally st...
by mattkrea on Friday November 10, 2017 @10:18PM
(#15674823)
*Like Google added in Android 6 but Apple had for years.
Re:Sex toy company Lovense admits its Android app locally st...
by bdcravens on Friday November 10, 2017 @06:26PM
(#15673976)
How would you tax free apps?
Re:Sex toy company Lovense admits its Android app locally st...
by dredmorbius on Friday November 10, 2017 @09:11PM
(#15674609)
In many professional contexts, a bond is required to be paid.
In the Free Software world, packaging of applications generally involves a third-party who does that packaging, and has specific guidelines to adhere to. E.g., Debian Package Maintainers and the Debian Policy Manual.
Re:Sex toy company Lovense admits its Android app locally st...
by sidlls on Friday November 10, 2017 @06:45PM
(#15674058)
Do not permit them. Free apps are just a way to reinforce the user-is-the-product problem that exists today.
Note: I don't agree with a "permissions tax."
Re:Sex toy company Lovense admits its Android app locally st...
by fleitz on Friday November 10, 2017 @06:53PM
(#15674105)
You may also want to purchase your phone from a company that isn't the world's largest advertising company.
It's kinda funny that everyone is upset about a temp file when the device itself sends their entire porn history to Google everyday of the week.
Basically, if you don't want to be spied on, stop using Google products.
Re:Sex toy company Lovense admits its Android app locally st...
by dejawu on Friday November 10, 2017 @09:02PM
(#15674584)
The problem is now that turns into a cost-benefit problem. Can we make back the 5% that we're paying to get access to the phone book by selling that data? Chances are we can, so it's worth it.
Re:Sex toy company Lovense admits its Android app locally st...
by penagwin on Friday November 10, 2017 @07:02PM
(#15674148)
I feel that could encourage them to lower the number of permissions though, which I'd argue is worse.
Re:Sex toy company Lovense admits its Android app locally st...
by cabaalis on Friday November 10, 2017 @06:52PM
(#15674097)
It does make sense to pay a fee for usage of the hardware, if only to guarantee legitimate usage.
Re:Sex toy company Lovense admits its Android app locally st...
by squarefoot on Saturday November 11, 2017 @07:18AM
(#15676053)
That was my point: pay a little if you use it and pay more if you don't, which should discourage lazy programmers to ask for access to everything by default "just in case I need that later" and then leaving potential holes in every app they release. Not to mention the bloat involved.