• poVoq@slrpnk.netM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    In response to Apple’s comments on Meta’s requests, Meta said the following: “What Apple is actually saying is they don’t believe in interoperability. Every time Apple is called out for its anticompetitive behavior, they defend themselves on privacy grounds that have no basis in reality.”

    I hate to admit it, but I agree with Meta here. Apple themselves are collecting all of these things on their devices, so their privacy argument is clearly a lie.

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      There’s Android. Or a dumbphone. They might be more to Meta’s liking. Well, are. Except the dumbphone.

      • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Apple is AFAIK a designated large platform operator under the DMA and hence are legally required to open their platform to 3rd parties. That’s the main point of the DMA regulation.

        • Optional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Sounds like the perfect opportunity for Meta to bumrush all of Apple’s IP and use it to all the nefarious ends. I’m not sure that’s the best idea.

          • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            I see no big difference to Apple doing the same, and the DMA opens the possibility for Apple users to switch to more privacy respecting apps.

            And contrary to the Apple device built in surveillance apps, no one is forced to install shitty Meta apps on their device.