Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

>In the case of epic it was not about the privacy settings but about the percentage they had to pay for on every transaction which is a different issue.

The claim wasn't that nobody was sideloading for privacy settings. The claim was "Facebook doesn't use sideloading on the android platform, neither does any of the other big companies."

>I kind of agree that less privacy protection this is a concern, but I think that should be solved by additional privacy laws.

Oh, that's a great idea. We should definitely rely on laws alone for this. VC-backed technology firms are well-known for willingly abiding by the spirit of laws—especially privacy laws. They definitely aren't filled with people whose entire job is finding the slimist things they can get away with.

Or—and I'm just spitballing here—we could have both the additional privacy laws and also a competitive marketplace where at least one vendor decides to use privacy as a market differentiator while leaving people free to choose to buy from other vendors with other priorities.

You should have multiple options, but third parties should not be required to provide you with an option that gives you 100% of what you'd like to have.

"I get to choose" does not mean "I get to have a bespoke solution."



Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: