Saw this today and now I’m reconsidering if Boost is right for me. I’m really hoping this is shitty boiler plate that was accidentally copied and over looked because that is some bullshit to say “unless we decide we want to use your personal data for whatever we want”.
I know “legitimate interest” is a phrase from the cookies law but there is no legitimate interest justification for this. My data is my data and I decide who has a legitimate interest in it so advertisers can fuck off, as can Boost if this the direction it’s going.
Edit to say this blew up. I didn’t realise I was kicking as big a hornet’s nest and haven’t read all the comments yet.
To be clear, what I don’t like about this and other provisions in the terms is the language and implications around data use. I’ve no problem with ads being shown - I want developers to get paid for the work they do and that makes it possible for users to have “free” access to software if they can’t afford to purchase.
I also want to add the response from Boost’s dev below to make sure it’s visible. You’ll see that it is boilerplate but required by Google and was present in Boost for reddit. I just hadn’t seen it because I purchased it immediately based on a recommendation. It doesn’t make me happy about it but does remove some doubts I was having about the direction Boost is heading.
I will be purchasing the app to support the dev because I do like Boost but I understand not everyone can afford everything so you’ll see some other suggestions in the comments below that don’t have any ads if you’re not happy with the free version and ads with their associated loss of data privacy.
Dev here.
The dialog and its content is not created by me, it is a standard solution from Google to comply with GDPR and other laws. More info here: https://support.google.com/admob/answer/10114014?hl=en
The consent dialog is also required by Google AdMob to show ads, and it is shown when the ad network is initialized.
When the app launches, first it checks for the remove ads purchase, and if it is not present, it will initialize the ads sdk. The ad network is not initialized if the remove ads purchase is detected.
Boost for Reddit was using the very same ad networks and consent dialog.
Dev here.
The dialog and its content is not created by me, it is a standard solution from Google to comply with GDPR and other laws. More info here: https://support.google.com/admob/answer/10114014?hl=en
The consent dialog is also required by Google AdMob to show ads, and it is shown when the ad network is initialized.
When the app launches, first it checks for the remove ads purchase, and if it is not present, it will initialize the ads sdk. The ad network is not initialized if the remove ads purchase is detected.
Boost for Reddit was using the very same ad networks and consent dialog.
This is the app creator everyone.
He doesn’t know anything, I know Boost better!
Yes literally first word of his comment, thanks for reminding us kind stranger
With the hate here, even after you explained, I am starting to think these FOSS heads are going to kill Lemmy.
Instead of just using any other app, they are attacking you. What a great way to push any future devs away. Lemmy will continue to be a weird little FOSS niche if the FOSS users don’t stop soiling their diapers over nothing.
It’s honestly a huge turn off to Lemmy writ large. Look at what happened when Dawson released Sync.
A few weeks ago someone posted to c/techsupport with an issue with their Office install. Every. Single. Comment. was "uSe LiBrEoFfIcE” or something to that effect, some going as far as to insult the OP for asking a tech support question in the tech support forum, because MiCrOsOfT bAaAaAd.
I was the only one to offer a real solution. If I were that OP, I wouldn’t come back to Lemmy.
Damn, that’s really frustrating, and literally doesn’t help one bit. Even if OP wanted to switch.
I use LibreOffice because I keep spreadsheets of my vehicle kilometres and whatnot, but my girlfriend, who works in a professional setting, would never be able to use anything other than Microsoft Office. The compatibility, features, etc. make nothing else a viable alternative, unless you’re keeping stupid at home spreadsheets like I am.
Meanwhile I work for a HUGE fortune 500 company that uses libreoffice on work laptops.
Meanwhile I work for a HUGE fortune 500 company that uses libreoffice on work laptops.
So weird that there’s so many down votes for this comment.
Because its most likely a lie since most companies on the fortune 500 list are older then libreoffice itself. No company that size could change its entire office suite without essentially stopping all office work for a few months.
No company that size could change its entire office suite without essentially stopping all office work for a few months.
I’ve seen it done before.
Usually how it’s done is that you install LibreOffice in parallel to Microsoft Office, and then you transition people over, over time.
Not that hard to do.
Sure you do.
I am starting to think these FOSS heads are going to kill Lemmy.
The “FOSS heads” are the only reason why Lemmy exists at all.
How dare those supporters of open source software support open source software (Lemmy)!
To steel-man this argument, it’s really “Free software supporters are too hostile and demanding, and they’ll scare off developers.”
I have seen no evidence of this happening. Instead, there’s a huge number of Lemmy clients, both open and closed source. I have at least half a dozen installed on my phone, and that’s not even all of them! Compare that to the number of Mastodon clients.
Great. Let me know how many are still around in a year when people realize they’re working for free, and can’t keep doing it.
Okay, well have fun when you push everyone else away. Lemmy will look like the Ubuntu forums lol.
Lemmy is full of people that just want to scream about what they believe everywhere. The entire website has this coat of political speak that isn’t helping attract people that just want to talk about games or look at memes.
You pretty much just described today’s Internet
100% now that it’s easy to comment and make blogs etc so easy everyone now thinks their opinion matters because they can put it on the net.
Yea, it is definitely a turn off. A lot of people on lemmy are not just passionate about what they believe, they are basically evangelical about it to the point that they seem like they need to not only convince everyone how right they are, but be assholes to anyone who disagrees. Whether it’s political, or about software, or whatever.
To be honest, that sounds a whole lot like reddit, too.
I hope I dont regret asking this, but what is a FOSS?
Not sure you got your answer yet so here: Free and Open Source Software
Free, Open-Source Software
Think: Gimp, Blender, etc
Free open source software
Free/open source software.
Free & open-source software
Lemmy will continue to be a weird little FOSS niche
This sounds excellent TBH.
It really does not.
I mean, to be fair, if you don’t like it, you can fork the code and make your own network.
That’s not the point though. They’re talking about usage population.
A virtual ‘Public Square’, where everyone is discussing ideas that you can listen in on and contribute to, doesn’t work very well if there’s no one in the public square.
I guess if you enjoy a small group of people jerking themselves off and arguing over which distro is best, sure.
Your time is worth a few bucks. Happily removed ads immediately after download. Thank you for your work brother! Good to be back!
Well look at that, a simple logical explanation.
Oh and thank you sir for your app. I went to paid version before i even loaded any content. I look forward to it’s future
There are plenty of more justified directions we can go with pitchforks and torches for sure my friends.
This should be pinned.
Put this text in that popup. It explains everything.
this sounds like a good idea dev
When the app launches, first it checks for the remove ads purchase, and if it is not present, it will initialize the ads sdk.
UX-wise you might want to add a screen full of blurb before initialising the sdk. “The free version is ad-supported, google might ask you for tracking permissions” kind of thing.
Thank you for clarifying this.
I also apologize if this post has hurt Boost - I didn’t think it would get a fraction of the visibility it did or even the reactions it did. I edited to add your explanation to make sure anybody who reads it going forward has the full story.
You’ve done great work on Boost. I really enjoyed the Reddit version and look forward to seeing what you do with it, so thank you.
Since you’ve got the group’s and the devs attention, maybe suggest adding a little clarification to that dialog, as it is indeed a bit scary without Ruben’s explanation.
Something like, "Google ad networks and gdpr require me to state this: ‘that scary text from the orig. dialog’
Get more details here: < link >"
No worries on pointing it out, we just gotta be careful in supporting our devs when we also ask questions, so they won’t feel thrown under a bus.
Clearly you are trying not to make a big deal about it, and I respect that, but maybe make a pinned post on BoostForLemmy? Make sure you’re not actively trying to fleece people?
I am happy with Infinity now and I think it’s great that the app removes trackers for paying customers (many apps and websites don’t do that) and I don’t know a way to solve the situation properly myself but people who want privacy often don’t use Google Play and in that case you can’t actually remove trackers.
Bug report:
Inbox doesn’t clear when tapping the ✔️✔️.
deleted by creator
How does it make any difference that it’s required by a third party? That doesn’t really change anything.
While I absolutely respect your response, I don’t see the issue being addressed. You can easily include a caveat that mentions this, but more importantly be transparent with the data .
He’s not the one collecting the data, receiving the data, or even choosing what data is collected. How the fuck can he be “more transparent” with this data? It’s Google standard AdMob SDK used by the vast majority of Android-Apps showing ads. The SDK isn’t initialized in the paid version.
Literally, the only complaint I’m having here is that buying the Ad-Free version was a little too hard to find. A pop-up “hey, would you like ads or pay for this app” would have allowed me to pay for it faster.
“He’s not”, but the app is by initiating the AdMob. I understand we’re stating the data isn’t “in his hands”, but it could be more transparent and a selling point for the Ad-free version by stating the mechanics and why the legal terminology is in the agreement. This post has been very informative and could be a learning lesson for others.
Personally I’ve always wondered about companies that have “free versions” and “paid versions”. I understand the mantra of free versions being “You are the product”, so with paid versions am I still a product with my data or is that protected somehow? This conversation has cleared it up for me in regards to this app at least.
You better keep an eye out, then; your app may be in legal violation of the LGPD and GDPR.
How? Could you at provide a credible cause?
Article 2 of the LGPD already gets him: consent is autodetermined, i.e. only the user can define whether or not the data may be kept (except in very specific circumstances which do not apply)
You forgot article 10.
Art. 10. Controller’s legitimate interest can only be grounds for processing personal data for legitimate purposes, based on particular situations, which include but are not limited to:
I – support and promotion of the controller’s activity; and
II – protection of data subject’s regular exercise of her/his rights or provision of services that benefit her/him, subject to her/his legitimate expectations and fundamental rights and freedoms, in accordance with this Law.
§1 When processing is based on the controller’s legitimate interest, only the personal data which are strictly necessary for the intended purpose may be processed.
§2 The controller shall adopt measures to ensure transparency of data processing based on her/his legitimate interests.
§3 The national authority may request of the controller a data protection impact assessment, when processing is based on her/his legitimate interest, being observed commercial and industrial secrecy.
Are you seeing a clause stating previous dispositions may be voided in there? Because I am not. I.e. the previous terms still apply (made explicit in the entirety of chapter I).
I’m sorry, but I’m having a hard time seeing Lemmy Lawyers having better knowledge of GDPR laws than Google, which is the ones showing the consent screen. As others have pointed out, if you don’t want your data tracked by Google (which is mostly too late anyway for majority of people), just buy the app. The dev could make the option to pay a bit clearer, but I’m sure people would complain that a pay screen is shoved in their face instead. Can’t please everyone!
If you don’t want your data tracked by Google (which is mostly too late anyway for majority of people), just buy the app.
The dev should block all app functionality and tracking if no consent is given. Anything else is in violation of the LGPD and GDPR
better knowledge of GDPR laws than Google
You’re joking, right? Big companies try to sneak shit by all the time, because that’s just “the cost of doing business” when caught. That’s why the EU and serious consumer-protecting countries are increasing fines. Google had a whole disinformation campaign against the GDPR.
I’m sorry, but I’m having a hard time seeing Lemmy Lawyers […]
I’m assuming you’re capable of reading. Both laws are publicly available for you to check.
I totally agree with your first point! Not giving consent shouldn’t be treated as “okay, but we’ll still do it” scenario.
Second and third, I’m not saying I’m trusting Google, I’m saying I’m trusting the EU and all the auditors that target Google (which, by the way, includes us Lemmy Lawyers), meaning the likelihood nowadays that Google isn’t compliant to GDPR, in my view, is next to zero. Way more than if it was some custom consent screen by some arbitrary company. If Google is “sneaking something in” it’s because the GDPR law allowed it via loopholes or different interpretation.
Also, watch your tone, no need to get aggressive. I merely pointed out that Google has more knowledge of GDPR laws than people on Lemmy. People on Lemmy, me included, has varied interpretations of GDPR laws (as is clearly demonstrated in the other sibling replies to my original comment, where they both interpreted it differently in separate clauses), since most are not educated lawyers. Law is all about interpretation, not just reading. So “assuming you’re capable of reading” is quite irrelevant.
Wife : “Promise you won’t have sex with my sister”.
Husband : " I won’t have sex with your sister under any circumstances, (quiet part); unless I have a legitimate interest in doing so."
Unity: unilaterally, retroactively, and silently amends prenup so that it technically allows sleeping with wife’s sister
Let’s just say it moved me… TO MY WIFES SISTER!!
Oops, I said the loud part quiet and the quiet part loud.
Her sister is gross!
Not that one. The younger, freaky sister.
I mean, still gross but… in a good way?
For now…
legitimate interest is a shitty data privacy loophole
Hi could you give me your name, address, social security number, browser history, sickness history, political affiliation, sexual orientation, pay grade please 🥺
I have a legitimate interest! It’s identity theft
TIL that some people have identity theft as a hobby
You never just buy a yacht for yourself in someone else’s name as a gift for yourself to reward yourself for finally learning that new skill?
I only subscribe to porn sites. As a hobby, of course
It’s a clause within GDPR which is usually misinterpreted and sometimes (as is most probably the case here) abused.
Ok, that is informative. Without that specific context, that message is utterly empty and useless.
Of course, it still feels weird, that “legitimate interest” seems a subjective term and maybe they could have found some better phrasing to reflect this sentiment…
From the dev has said, it sounds like it’s Google’s language, not his. So he probably doesn’t have any control over the phrasing.
Right, I was thinking not the developer, not the ad network, but all the way back to the wording of GDPR.
In fact, it feels like an ad network cannot have a “legitimate interest” in personal information of someone who opts out. If they count targeted advertising without consent as “legitimate interest”, seems like GPDR is significantly less useful.
Well the “loophole” exists for a reason.
For example my company requires the position and some identifier of people to do what people use our system for (tracking logistics units, and there is an option to do that via a mobile app for smallest clients not owning dedicated hardware). That’s what legitimate interest is about. Or well, is supposed to be about. Some data processing is the point of some applications, and hence they would naturally not be usable without processing that personal data.
True, should have clarified - it’s something that is abused and treated as a loophole by shitty companies.
wouldnt that fall under “essential cookies/data” or something like that? which is usually presented separately from “legitimate interest” in these forms and rightfully cant be turned off
It isn’t. Just as declaring yourself a sovereign citizen isn’t a loophole for whatever idiots claim it’s a loophole for, declaring illegitimate use legitimate isn’t a loophole.
Actual examples for legitimate use: Storing someone’s address if he wants to send you something, using someone’s IP-address to serve him data while he’s on your site… If it’s necessary it’s legitimate.
Deutsche Bahn is being sued right now just because of this, here’s the initiative that is suing them: https://digitalcourage.de/
Send a few bucks their way instead of spreading false information on the Internet.
What if I determine that selling user data is necessary to my business? Then it falls under legitimate interest, right? I guess what I’m asking is how using the legitimate interest label is any different?
Since there have been a few posts and comments about this and people are speculating
@rmayayo@lemmy.world
Could you clarify how the ads trackers and privacy policy works? Does it all go away when you pay for no ads?
The consent dialog is required by Google AdMob to show ads, and it is shown when the ad network is initialized.
When the app launches, first it checks for the remove ads purchase, and if it is not present, it will initialize the ads sdk. The ad network is not initialized if the remove ads purchase is detected.
Amazing, that’s great to hear!
Thank you for sharing the details
That reminds me, the app is a separate purchase from the Reddit app, right? (I don’t mind, just want to make sure before I hit purchase again)
Yep, I bought both.
Not being FOSS disqualifies any lemmy client for me, I dont want a client that undermines what I like about the platform.
Ditto. I’m on Jerboa and loving the ad-free experience.
That’s what I’ve been “missing”!!! I haven’t seen an ad for months. Yay Lemmy 😁
I’ve seen the jerboa dev community grow tremendously and the app improve by leaps and bounds too! Nowadays it basically exceeds my old RIF experience in every way except for the traffic level on lemmy vs reddit.
leaps and bounds
What you did there. I saw it.
Why does rif keep ggetting cited as some kind of bastion of app development. Rif was shit compared to the alternatives.
I significantly preferred Rif to the alternatives.
It’s almost like people who aren’t you exist and are allowed to have their own opinions. Crazy, right?
Wait…why are you here then?
If you mean Lemmy: Lemmy is an open source and decentralized alternative to Reddit.
If you mean /c/boost, it gets federated to my instance.
Funny I’m seeing this after me googling what legitimate interest meant.
A user should be able to turn off legitimate interest cookies.
I also considered checking out Boost, but this is definitely a deal-breaker to me.
I feel a big part of my concern is addressed by the dev’s explanation and I now know it’s a problem with Google’s ad network with its terms and conditions though they’re all pretty similar in that regard unfortunately. I feel comfortable enough purchasing the app now which removes the rest of my concern because that removes any tracking associated with ads in the free version.
Sure, but I’ve never used Boost before. How can I test it without buying it? I can’t. Google will track me and I’ll have no choice.
They need to be harsher on companies invoking legitimate interest. It should be impossible for a user to use a service/product if they deny the information that falls under a legitimate interest – because by definition, the service/product needs that information to work. Like if I’m scheduling a delivery to my place, my address is a legitimate interest because they can’t deliver it otherwise.
There just needs to be a crackdown on what’s being claimed. If a user can turn off “legitimate interest” cookies and tracking, and they can still use the website just fine, those cookies and tracking were not legitimate interests.
I don’t think it’s that cut and dry. A cookie that registers your address may have your address in your computer, and the access it just to autofill the shipping form. No address is being stored or tracked on their end. That would be a legitimate “legitimate interest” cookie. If you deny the use of such cookies, then the website will simply ask you to fill out your address every time. The site can still function in this case.
Don’t get me wrong - I hate legitimate interest cookie abuse, but I just wanted to clarify that point about “if rejected, then legitimate interest cookies would break the site, and if they don’t then they’re tracking you!”
tbf I think it’s in Google’s best interest to do as little legitimate interest fuckery as possible. If they stretch the use of that clause too far the EU will just banhammer the new practice again with stricter terms and higher fines.
Heh. Best interest not to do that? An ad company?
Sounds paradoxical but long term they get more value out of just barely overstepping bounds than by, for the brief period until regulation catches up, massively overstepping.
Doesn’t mean they’ll do that, I fully expect them to abuse the ever living shit out of it, if mega corpos had a brain for long term planning they wouldn’t be caught in this banner mess in the first place
I’m kind of confused how this is so controversial or unexpected. You’re using commercial software for free, ad support should be expected. It definitely sounded like and was confirmed to be out of the dev’s hands, it’s Google’s ad platform. If you can spend $3.50 USD to remove ads it’s not a concern.
I love free software but people also need to feed their families. This guy chose software as a way to do that. Being opposed to ads is great but either cough up the 3.50 for an app you’ll likely use thousands of hours or don’t. Don’t shame the guy for allowing it to also be used “free” with ads.
Exactly. How much fuckin time have you used the app and can’t send the dude $3.50 ONCE to pay his bills?
I block ads on my network already, and still paid for it. Ruben has a great product here and a one time purchase is absolutely a proper way to get paid.
Just a friendly reminder that if you’d like to pay more than 3.50 you can also do that! There’s a donation tool built in. So if you like the app and want to support more, or again in the future you have that option.
and another reminder that other apps exist. Don’t get your panties in a bunch because a developer thinks his time is worth something, rightly so.
You hate Boost? Download something else. Personally I prefer an app by a developer who has many years experience making a Reddit app. The free and FOSS apps are fine, but they are all missing stuff and rough around the edges.
Then again, Lemmy attacks anyone who says they like, or require windows, and calls them names on how they should use Linux, despite drivers/programs they rely on not being available on Linux. Seems like it’s hard for the FOSS community to not be toxic.
That’s a great point and I may do that! So far the app works wonderfully so it’s probably deserved.
Removing ads doesn’t stop data sharing
"The consent dialog is required by Google AdMob to show ads, and it is shown when the ad network is initialized.
When the app launches, first it checks for the remove ads purchase, and if it is not present, it will initialize the ads sdk. The ad network is not initialized if the remove ads purchase is detected."
So according to the dev, it does stop the tracking. Or am I misunderstanding it?
Sounds pretty clear to me, no tracking if ads are removed
Just linking the comment you quoted for posterity: https://lemmy.world/comment/3811201
That comment is from the dev who made the app.
Right, thanks :D
And unless you: have access to the source code, are fluent in the programming languages used to build it, AND have time to review it all, you’ll never know if an app does that.
Conforming to the Play store does not make the dev shady imo. If that’s your stance you probably should stick mainly to F-Droid apps.
you can packet capture and hazard a guess at least, not necessarily access to source code
That’s definitely true. I wonder if anyone throwing a tantrum here would ever care to learn how to do that.
Of course not.
Doubt the capture would help any, TLS and all that jazz.
Unless the app uses hard-coded root certs, you can still capture and decrypt ssl/tls traffic using a custom root cert so the device trusts your MITM server. It’s just a bit more work.
The verbiage is shitty and sideways. Just be straightforward and say that by using the software you consent to the agreement, not that if you disagree, we’ll only use it if we really think about it and feel like it or some shit like that. It’s disingenuous.
It’s Google’s verbiage
Commercial?
Yes. It was meant to be paid for unless ads are okay with you. He does this for a living.
The point of issue isn’t in using ads, but on hiding the fact your consent means jack shit. How are you people having trouble understanding something this obvious?
How is it so hard for you to understand that Google does shit that everyone else has no choice about?
He better find a choice, then, because that shit won’t fly wherever strong legal protections for data privacy exist.
You are all over this thread completely missing what people continually explain to you: THIS IS GOOGLE. If there is a law broken, Google would be liable. At no point did Ruben have a choice if he ever wanted to have an ad supported version in the Play store.
Are you illiterate? It doesn’t matter if the API was made by John Doe, Google or even Santa Claus
because that shit won’t fly wherever strong legal protections for data privacy exist.
The only person here demonstrating learning disabilities is you.
Hardly a convincing line, coming from a 'murican.
Use something FOSS.
I honestly can’t understand why in a world of open source alternatives, one would be OK with an option that shows you ads in exchange for spying on you
I don’t know any open source client that is even remotely as nice to use as Boost. Also, it’s not like the developer is actively spying on you, that’s just the default AdMob popup Google is now forced to show (They simply didn’t ask for any kind of consent in the past).
Anyway, I simply paid a few bucks for ad-free Boost.
Eternity, forked from Infinity for Reddit, is in a really good place and open source. I highly recommend it.
The dev that stole the name and only changed it when enough people got mad at him for essentially impersonating the original dev? Sounds like a deal!
open source client that is even remotely as nice to use as Boost
I replied with a suggestion that met all the criteria… No need to be a jerk to me about it.
Not a jerk. Just making sure we have the same dev? because personally, I don’t support garbage behaviour like that.
Thunder is decent, but you can 7se what you want
Jerboa is fine
The point stands. Why are you willing to sell your data for a minor convenience like a slightly better UI for social media app.
Of all the fucking things you sell your data for, you’re doing it for the UI of a social media. Fucking UI of fucking social media, that’s the convenience you’re willing to sell your data for?
See personally I think I’m a lot more valuable than that.
Not everyone shares your values and priorities, and that’s okay a lot of times.
Foss fanatics being completely out of touch with how normal people interact with the internet will never not be funny to me.
99.9% of people do not give a shit. They want a good experience. That’s it.
I do what I can to block trackers on my end but if your app can’t give me the experience I want then I’m not using it.
They want a good experience. That’s it.
That’s exactly what I’m saying. They’re so obsessed with tiny conveniences that they’re willing to sell themselves over where the buttons are on the screen.
I understand perfectly how normal people interact with the internet, and I’m calling them stupid for it.
Not “out of touch” with how “normal people” don’t care about their right to privacy being trampled. Critical of it.
The thing is, the experience is still worse. Even when you forget about trackers. Proprietary software is meant to best benefit the developer, not the user. So it is only a matter of time until you are fed up with it. See recent examples like Unity, Reddit, Twitter, Plex,… It all goes to shit. So why not take the convenient way and choose user-respecting software from the start?
🤡
Something wrong with what I said?
It’s like you only read the first sentence of their response and ignored the rest.
Boost has to show the google ads consent and TOS. It only shows up if it downloads the google ads SDK after checking to see if you purchased ad free. So if you purchased ad free version you wouldn’t see this TOS since you didn’t get the Google Ads SDK.
You are most definitely not more valuable than the data collection they can do. Do not kid yourself.
I think their point was that they value/respect themselves enough to not sell their information for better UI
But not enough to spend a few bucks on the ad-free version of the app
If I personally wanted to spend money, I would donate to people who make open-source Lemmy clients free for everyone without spying on non-paying users instead of paying for this.
Oh, so it’s OK if Google does it… Fuck you defending these tech giants stealing data. Seriously. Fuck defending any part of this shit.
I need you to understand that me saying “Boost is pulling a Google ads SDK and that’s their terms of service” isn’t me saying it’s ok. Me saying “you’re not more valuable than the data” is also not me saying it’s ok. Both of those things can be true while it’s still not ok. The world isn’t black and white. The difference here is knowing who, what and why to be mad/angery/upset at something. Otherwise you just have misdirected anger. The original comment called out boost as being a data predator (which I don’t use Boost for the record). I simply pointed to how the app and systems are setup and how the prompt shown isn’t Boost’s doing, it’s part of an SDK that boost uses as they’re injecting ads into the free app. They have to show whatever TOS the ad injector/SDK uses.
Keep defending the bahavior.
I don’t. I chose to purchase the pro version for a few bucks.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Look I love FOSS, but this mentality that using anything except for FOSS is dumb. An incredible amount of time, money, and effort goes into building an app like Boost and the developer has every right to keep it closed source and charge for it and you have every right not to use it.
Many people are more than willing to pay for great software and others are happy to give up some privacy to get it for free. That’s their choice.
Fuck boost, it’s garbage and wasted time for everyone as long as it’s closed source
Just for you, I’m accepting all cookies today 😉
Edit: tomorrow too 😍
You can also download more RAM from the internet.
Life changing
Your loss of freedom isn’t affecting anyone else, so sure, go ahead
I always do :)
Please also hammer your fingers, you are making me hot 💦
One can select a proprietary solution when it provides better user experience.
And you can purchase an application if you do not like and based model.
Better user experience like having your private data mined and sold 🤩🤩🤩
Like highlighting new comments in the thread and a GUI which is more pleasurable to use. If you see nothing beneficial for you in a non-foss app, you do not need to consider it.
When people like to eat poisoned food that you know will kill them, but they won’t listen to you and eat it anyway cuz it’s so damn tasty, then those people must be extremely stupid, right?
Right. But this is not a correct comparison to the discussed topic.
And even then, is it fair to say that everyone who’s tasted alcohol, spicy food, or garlic is stupid?
Competent dev?
Any of the FOSS apps, that have had a head start + the “power” of people contributing to it, are all SO far behind Boost when it comes to features and stability.
Yeah, using a closed source lemmy client feels like it just defeats half the purpose.
A large chunk of people are on lemmy because reddit wouldn’t let them use the nice UI of their favorite app. So wanting to use the nice UI of their favorite app, even if it’s closed source, is entirely the point of them being here.
No.
🤡
💩
lmfao “trust me bro” as terms of service
Knee jerk responses like this are why Lemmy seems doomed to stagnate and die. And this is coming from someone who used to be all in. Utterly tired of the mob of goofs that think everything should be developed for free and anyone that tries to make a legitimate living in this space is an evil bastard.
Same crap with people brigading Sync too. Like, I don’t get the mindset. I work for my money, I get to decide how to spend it. I’m happy to use some of that money to give to someone who is earning it by creating a product that I love using every single day. That’s not wrong, that is how things work. Everything can’t just be free, nothing would get made like that.
Utterly tired of the mob of goofs that think everything should be developed for free
Nice strawman. You are not being intellectually honest. No one is arguing that (italicized part).
But how the money is made, how much of your privacy do you have to give up (remember when you used to be able to buy products and not have to give up any of your privacy?) for corporations to have profits, is what’s being discussed.
Some people on here will never realize that only paid devs putting in full days will make a platform like Lemmy grow to even a fourth of what Reddit is right now. Part time, unpaid devs will never grow this platform to that size and one way or another, those devs will want to be able to support themselves and that is either through donations or somekind of monetization, which may or may not include monetizing user data. It’s just honest facts that it costs money to run servers and that money has to come from somewhere. It takes time to develop an app and in the case of Sync (probably Boost as well) it’s just one dev and that takes a lot of his time. Nobody would do that amount of work for free.
Yeah it’s a bit much sometimes. I’m all about open source and I utilize linux for my home computer, but developers need to make money.
It’s not a Lemmy problem, though. It’s an internet problem. People just like going off half-cocked and feeling superior to others, especially people who actually do things.
The same thing happened with Sync, then people got bored and moved onto the next thing.
Bro, anything positive about Mac, Windows, Android that isn’t GrapheneOS, cars, or even fucking eBikes (yes, there was a thread where Lemmy was downvoting and hating on everyone who uses an eBike because they have batteries…), is extremely downvoted.
Everyone expects everything to be 100% FOSS. They refuse to pay, and refuse to be the product. Lemmy is full of entitled ass people.
Could it be that maybe there’s a way to monetize your work without being a sneaky fuck?
Tis is not not ok, actually. I’m a software dev for a European company. I’m briefed by our lawyers.
“Legitimate use” isn’t just a phrase from cookie law, it has a very specific meaning.
What’s legitimate use? Well, any data I necessarily have to store for our business relation I can store. For as long as I need it. For example: You want me to send you something? Gonna need to store your address. After I sent the package I don’t have any need for your address any more so I’d need your explicit consent to store it longer.
Another example for what is considered personal data: IP addresses. Which I store for as long as you watch my site, so that would be another example for a legitimate reason to store personal data.
Still I don’t get why they display this banner. To my knowledge it’s not necessary to inform the user about storage for legitimate reasons.
All that said, there’s plenty of examples of companies illegitimately storing personal data, google is a good example they were sued only yesterday (fitbit)
Voyager and Jerboa are both good options if this bothers you. I didn’t have to agree to any permissions when I installed both as no data is collected. No ads too!
Legit interest = We want to make money
Oof…bad look boost
I love how they say “Legitimate Interest”, normally they say “Legal Reason” or “To comply with law enforcement” or something that makes it clear the rule would only be broken under extraneous circumstances.
But “Legitimate Interest”, mother fucker, you wouldn’t even be asking if I wanted to to opt out if you didn’t already have a “Legitimate Interest” in monetizing every aspect of life. One of these days we’re gonna get cybernetic implants that block our lungs off unless we watch a five second ad, because somehow that’s a law now.
Cheese and fucking rice!
