Similarly, Apple’s new, much-lauded anti-tracking policy does have a technical component to it, but it would be easy enough for motivated developers to get around it. All that stops them is app review, or more precisely, the threat of app review.

In both cases, I assert that such editorial control cannot survive store diversification. Right now the App Store policies are able to nudge developers towards pro-consumer behaviours. Any substantive amount of store competition flips the script and means stores will compete to appease developers, rather than apply principles in the long term interest of consumers. The nanosecond after Apple is forced to change their product, big names like Google and Facebook will be the first to set up their own shops, specifically to escape Apple’s pro-consumer editorial policies.

Yes, and they can also nudge us to pro-Apple business model behaviours such as direct payment instead of ad funding or force us to mislead consumers into paying higher prices than are available elsewhere.

They can also enforce random cultural biases such as "no porn" and threaten our human and civil rights as a side-effect of banning side-loading. In other cases they help to protect our civil rights.

So that's the dilemma. Apple can make arbitrary rules for arbitrary reasons, sometimes helping us, sometimes hurting us. Taking away Apple's right to make those arbitrary rules would allow other companies to impose their own rules without giving users a real choice.

One way or another, users and small developers are left with very little choice and very little freedom.