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!
https://images.app.goo.gl/euNDZsn8oGq6mzy79
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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!
The dev should block all app functionality and tracking if no consent is given. Anything else is in violation of the LGPD and GDPR
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 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.