this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2024
251 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

1205 readers
264 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

[email protected]
[email protected]


Icon attribution | Banner attribution

founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Gavin Newsom said he opposes mandate on mobile operating system developers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] spankmonkey 68 points 4 days ago (5 children)

But Newsom said he is opposed to the new bill's mandate on operating systems. "I am concerned, however, about placing a mandate on operating system (OS) developers at this time," the governor wrote. "No major mobile OS incorporates an option for an opt-out signal. By contrast, most Internet browsers either include such an option or, if users choose, they can download a plug-in with the same functionality. To ensure the ongoing usability of mobile devices, it's best if design questions are first addressed by developers, rather than by regulators. For this reason, I cannot sign this bill."

Oh fuck off Newsom.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago

That sounds a lot like the legislature passed a bill because the people can’t trust companies to do the right thing, and Newsom said “we should trust the companies to do the right thing!”

[–] [email protected] 30 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What a fucking weasly excuse. Fuck this dude.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

It’s also categorical bullshit in terms of technical accuracy.

Source: 15 years as a software engineer

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I think he's talking about Do Not Track? That's a signal that's been in web browsers for over a decade now, but because of a lack of legal enforcement has largely been ignored by websites. To my knowledge, there's no equivalent signal in Windows, macOS, or Linux. Though none of that stops individual app developers from putting in a setting into their app's settings/preferences. And heck, the bill only required it to be opt-out, so in reality it would hardly have any impact on their bottom line, thanks to the tyranny of the default.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago

Not to mention: the government imposes onerous regulations on companies and entire industries all the damn time. Claiming “but it’s harrrrrddddddd :(“ is fucking stupid. This is computer science. Figure it out. We’re not paid as much as we are for our health. It’s because we solve hard problems. It meets the standards with its code or else it gets the hose again.

Source: also worked several years in aerospace; currently working in biotech.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 4 days ago

He’s trying to sound like he knows what he’s talking about in nuanced detail. But his comment makes it very obvious that he has no idea what the fuck he’s talking about.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago

Here's the extent of the design constraints by the bill:

(b) (1) A business shall not develop or maintain a mobile operating system that does not include a setting that enables a consumer to send an opt-out preference signal to businesses with which the consumer interacts through the mobile operating system.

(2) This subdivision shall become operative six months after the adoption of regulations by the California Privacy Protection Agency that outline the requirements and technical specifications for an opt-out preference signal to be used by a mobile operating system.

(c) The California Privacy Protection Agency may adopt regulations as necessary to implement and administer this section, including, but not limited to, ensuring that the setting described by subdivision (a) is easy for a reasonable person to locate and configure and updating the definitions of “browser” and “mobile operating system” to address changes in technology, data collection, obstacles to implementation, or privacy concerns.

It has to:

  1. exist
  2. be a setting
  3. that people interact with through the operating system
  4. Be reasonably easy to locate and change

idk guys, seems pretty difficult to me /s

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

It'd be great if the decision was made by developers, they'd probably implement it since they can benefit from it as well. It's not the developers making these decisions though, it's the companies who have a vested interest in selling your data that are.