Apple Vs. Facebook Is Kayfabe
Key topics
The tech world's ongoing spectacle between Apple and Facebook has some commenters calling foul, suggesting Apple's outrage is just a show - a phenomenon dubbed "kayfabe" - as they don't restrict in-app browsers despite touting privacy concerns. While some see Apple's contradictory moves as a clever strategy, others point out that if they truly cared about privacy, they'd disallow in-app browsers or not sell search traffic to Google for billions. The discussion highlights the complexities of Apple's stance, with some noting that users can change defaults, but others arguing that most people won't, making it a lucrative business.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Active discussionFirst comment
1h
Peak period
11
0-3h
Avg / period
3
Based on 21 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Aug 25, 2025 at 9:37 PM EDT
5 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Aug 25, 2025 at 11:07 PM EDT
1h after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
11 comments in 0-3h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Aug 27, 2025 at 12:36 PM EDT
5 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
For instance, everybody thinks Apple hates advertising, esp user-tracking. The interesting thing is Apple themselves run a $6B+ ads businsess, which does first-party user tracking - which is the nuance.
Similarly, if Apple truely wanted user privacy, they'll outright ban Facebook from their platform.
Or most egregious is Apple "stands up to government" (famously with FBI) but is more than happy to bend the knee to Chinese government, or most recently with the gold plaque with Trump.
This would mean many apps like the Facebook App, Messenger, Google Maps, GMail, Line, WeChat, Slack, Discord, etc would effectively not be allowed to open links to the entire internet but only domains directly related to the app and would be a privacy win.
They'd have to have some wording that would have to distinguish between a browser app and a non-browser app but i'd argue that's probably not that hard to do.
That's why a regulator can be effective. You can have a regulation that A has to be as easy to do as B and enforce it. Think of browser choice in on PCs in Europe or (briefly) the rule that it should be as easy to unsubscribe in the US as it is to subscribe. People have different feelings about regulations, but I think in places where everyone converges on a single platform pregulation that is protective of the individual makes sense.
[0] https://pluralistic.net/2024/03/12/market-failure/
[1] https://www.phonearena.com/news/apple-facebook-almost-worked...