Hmm Apple encouraging fraud.

Subscribe
Sep 26, 2015 | 12:31 PM
  #1  
"The top-selling advert-blocking software on Apple's App Store will soon let companies pay to show you ads"

http://news.sky.com/story/1558786/be...-soon-show-ads
Reply 0
Sep 26, 2015 | 12:38 PM
  #2  
How is Apple to blame? A developer of a third party app is making a deal with another third party?
Reply 0
Sep 26, 2015 | 01:00 PM
  #3  
Quote: How is Apple to blame? A developer of a third party app is making a deal with another third party?
Because as is always the way in any thread about Apple that wasn't started by Jack, someone is trying to troll Jack.
Reply 0
Sep 26, 2015 | 01:03 PM
  #4  
Because they are continuing to allow this ad blocker to be sold in their store which infact does not do what it is being paid for. So they are indirectly encouraging fraud. By allowing something to be sold that does not do what it is intended for.
Reply 0
Sep 26, 2015 | 01:16 PM
  #5  
Quote: Because as is always the way in any thread about Apple that wasn't started by Jack, someone is trying to troll Jack.
well to be fair its not like jack posts anything other than isheep worship so do need some balance,,,,,,

Reply 0
Sep 26, 2015 | 01:17 PM
  #6  
Quote: Because they are continuing to allow this ad blocker to be sold in their store which infact does not do what it is being paid for. So they are indirectly encouraging fraud. By allowing something to be sold that does not do what it is intended for.
I guess all countries (bar Switzerland) are encouraging VW and used car dealerships to commit fraud
Reply 0
Sep 27, 2015 | 12:59 AM
  #7  
I just wish people would read up on the links they're posting.

Its opt in. Which should shut you up but if you want the full and perfectly reasonable explanation then stop posting dumb and start searching smart.
Reply 0
Sep 27, 2015 | 01:05 AM
  #8  
http://murphyapps.co/blog/2015/9/25/on-acceptable-ads
Reply 0
Sep 27, 2015 | 12:22 PM
  #9  
Quote: I just wish people would read up on the links they're posting.

Its opt in.
What makes you think I didn't read the link?

Also it is not opt in, it is opt out as the ads will "likely to be on by default"
So this also raised another issue, not only is he selling an ad blocker that allows companies to pay for his blocker not to block their ads but he also provides an option to block ads that companies are specifically paying for his blocker not to block.
Reply 0
Sep 27, 2015 | 09:00 PM
  #10  
I put it on a plate for you and you still don't get it

Quote:
In my first update (6-10 weeks time?) there will be two new features. A user managed whitelist, where you the user can specify a list of domains that you would like to support and an option to enable/disable Acceptable Ads on the websites you visit.
If it's off by default I'd turn it on, blanket banning isn't a great idea.
Reply 0
Sep 28, 2015 | 12:28 PM
  #11  
Quote: What makes you think I didn't read the link?

Also it is not opt in, it is opt out as the ads will "likely to be on by default"
So this also raised another issue, not only is he selling an ad blocker that allows companies to pay for his blocker not to block their ads but he also provides an option to block ads that companies are specifically paying for his blocker not to block.
None of which is Fraud Wurzel.


Does the add blocker block adds - yes if set to do so.


Therefore it does what it says on the tin. Just like Ronseal. Stop being so dramatic
Reply 0
Subscribe