Children, specifically.
> Perhaps they don't know the full extent of what Facebook is tracking
…is this not bad?
> sideloading apps on iOS is not a one-top process—anyone who used this had some sense of what they were doing
This is not sideloading; this is enterprise app distribution. Users are not self-signing this app.
> And, $20 per month is pretty substantial compensation.
For a child who doesn't know any better, maybe…
Just to be clear, that's the process I was referring to. I consider it a form of side loading, because the app is coming from an unofficial, non-Apple source.
Enterprise apps won't run until you manually go into settings and certify that you trust the developer. Far from the most onerous of tasks, to be sure, but significantly more involved than tapping a download button. I don't see how someone could be "duped" into running an enterprise app.
I'm just not convinced on this point. I think it's likely a lot of people did understand that Facebook could see all their internet traffic, and thought for $20 it was a fair trade. There's a HN user down thread (anonymous5133) who says he used the app and quite liked the exchange.
Now, it's possible these users did not think through all the consequences that sending this data to Facebook could have—but just how much responsibility does Facebook have here? Does Facebook need to say in big red type, "This data could be given to health insurance companies some day and used to deny coverage?" (I'm not even clear if that would be legal, but I bring it up as an oft-cited nightmare scenario.)
So many of the comments in this thread are literally "Think of the children!"
Which brings us back to you falsely claiming anyone but you uttered that phrase, and your implied assertion that there is something wrong or odd with looking out for others, including children.