Hacker News Reader

Comment by w1nk | Hacker News Reader

I have to imagine the answer lies in the interpretation of the rules you quoted in your post: My app is in alignment with it... I've made sure since day one that a "reasonably suspicious" notification is present when the app is monitoring.

Could you elaborate on what your version of this reasonably suspicious notification compared to your competitors actually is?

View on HN

The original version of the app I submitted for notarization had the Truple logo, with a red dot/circle to indicate recording and make it more suspicious. The redesign I did dropped the red dot/circle because competitors weren't being forced to do anything like that. Competitors just use their logo. And their logo's aren't any more/less suspicious than Truple's. If you click on the notification on MacOS, a menu pops up indicating the device is being monitored and includes instructions for how to uninstall the app though if you do an alert is sent indicating that you did.

It's convenient to think I've done something wrong here... but I've puzzled over this for 2.5 years, and if I have done something wrong, the least Apple could do is let me know so I can correct it.

> The original version of the app I submitted for notarization had the Truple logo, with a red dot/circle to indicate recording and make it more suspicious. The redesign I did dropped the red dot/circle because competitors weren't being forced to do anything like that.

Doesn't this seem kind of damning? Like you admit the recording dot is suspicious, so you remove it because why? Are you targeting anyone that isn't fully aware of what the truple notification means, maybe because they are a child or otherwise mentally compromised?

Put on the hat of the end user. Keep in mind the end user is a child, or someone struggling with an online addiction/behavior they want to quit. They welcome the app, but those issues are somewhat personal. There's a balancing act I'm trying to walk here, of being reasonably suspicious while also not publishing for everyone who peeks over their shoulder that they're using an app like this.

Again, if the red dot matters, I'll add it back.

Apple's reasonable concern here might be that the end user isn't a child, or even someone who consents to have the application running.

You seem to be sticking a hood over your eyes and pretending that your app is only used for the most morally sound use cases you can think of. You've written something that enables abusive relationships and helicopter parenting and you should be ashamed.

Please keep this kind of emotionally-manipulative, anti-intellectual flamebait off of HN.

> Put on the hat of the end user. Keep in mind the end user is a child, or someone struggling with an online addiction/behavior they want to quit. They welcome the app, but those issues are somewhat personal.

This sure as hell reads to me like you’re trying to hide the fact that you’re recording vulnerable user’s screens from them.

You can read into it however you want. It wasn't my intention.

So you did the same thing, without trying?

The “trying” part isn’t the practical problem.

And if that was not your intent, you are not thinking through the obvious implications of your own software design.

No. He literally just said he added the dot to make it more likely to be arppoved, then he realized it's unnecessary and removed it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com