Comment by delichon | Hacker News Reader

Comment by delichon | Hacker News Reader

Google appears to be overlooking their explicit ban on this.

  If your app handles personal and sensitive user data, then you must ... Not sell personal and sensitive user data.

The rule also applies to third-party code.

  If you include third party code (for example, an SDK) in your app, you must ensure that the third party code used in your app, and that third party's practices with respect to user data from your app, are compliant with Google Play Developer Program policies... For example, you must ensure that your SDK providers do not sell personal and sensitive user data from your app.

https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ...

Isn't this abuse what we are supposed to be paying their 15% Play Store tax to stop?

World would be a much better place if Google and Apple enforced their chosen policies for apps, and Meta and Google enforced their chosen policies for ads, but then these companies would be very slightly poorer.

This just means you can't get money for the personal and sensitive user data. It's wild that companies think that's the problem.

Webloc is getting this data for free. And then reselling it, but it's outside the scope of Google then.

The tax is 30% and the purpose of a system is what it does

Come On, Obviously The Purpose Of A System Is Not What It Does

https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/come-on-obviously-the-purpo...

This guy just hasn't understood the phrase, he's picked several strawmen to argue against. Not literally everything a system does is its purpose, so you can't just pick the stupidest ones and use them to disprove the principle.

How about "the purpose of a system is not something it doesn't do" or "the purpose of a system is some of the things it does" but that's not as catchy.

"You won't believe it's on purpose"

"The purpose of the British government is to propose a controversial new sentencing policy, stand firm in the face of protests for a while, then cave in after slightly larger protests and agree not to pass the policy after all."

This might as well be the purpose of the British government.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com