An anonymous reader shares a report: On Tuesday, Congress revealed whether it thinks Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google are sitting on monopolies. In some cases, the answer was yes. But also, one app developer revealed to Congress that it -- just like WordPress -- had been forced to monetize a largely free app. That developer testified that Apple had demanded in-app purchases (IAP), even though Apple had approved its app without them two years earlier -- and that when the dev dared send an email to customers notifying them of the change, Apple threatened to remove the app and blocked all updates. That developer was ProtonMail, makers of an encrypted email app, and CEO Andy Yen had some fiery words for Apple in an interview with The Verge this week. We've known for months that WordPress and Hey weren't alone in being strong-armed by the most valuable company in the world, ever since Stratechery's Ben Thompson reported that 21 different app developers quietly told him they'd been pushed to retroactively add IAP in the wake of those two controversies. But until now, we hadn't heard of many devs willing to publicly admit it. They were scared.

And they're still scared, says Yen. Even though Apple changed its rules on September 11th to exempt "free apps acting as a stand-alone companion to a paid web based tool" from the IAP requirement -- Apple explicitly said email apps are exempt -- ProtonMail still hasn't removed its own in-app purchases because it fears retaliation from Apple, he says. He claims other developers feel the same way: "There's a lot of fear in the space right now; people are completely petrified to say anything." [...] "For the first two years we were in the App Store, that was fine, no issues there," he says. (They'd launched on iOS in 2016.) "But a common practice we see ... as you start getting significant uptake in uploads and downloads, they start looking at your situation more carefully, and then as any good Mafia extortion goes, they come to shake you down for some money."

Kurt Nelson, a software engineer at Uber, writes an op-ed at TechCrunch: I've been a software engineer at Uber for two years, and I've also been a ride-hail driver. I regularly drove for Lyft in college, and while my day job involves writing code for the Uber Android app, I still make deliveries for app-based companies on my bike to understand the state of the gig economy. These experiences have made me realize a crucial factor in the gig economy: Uber works because it's cheap and it's quick. The instant gratification when we book a ride and a car shows up only minutes later gives us a sense of control. It's the most convenient thing in the world to go to your friend's house, the grocery store or the airport at the click of a button. But it's become clear to me that this is only possible because countless drivers are spending their personal time sitting in their cars, waiting to pick up a ride, completely unpaid. Workers are subsidizing the product with their free labor.

I've decided to speak out against my employer because I know what it's like to work with no benefits. Before joining Uber, I worked a range of low-wage jobs from customer service at Disneyland to delivering pizza with no benefits. Uber is one of several large companies bankrolling California's Proposition 22. They've now contributed $47.5 million dollars to the campaign. At work, management tells us that passing Prop 22 is for the best because it is critical for the company's bottom line. Yet, a corporation's bottom line will not and should not influence my vote. Uber claims Prop 22 would be good for drivers, but that depends on Uber the company treating drivers better. [...]

As a software engineer, I have a very different experience working for Uber than drivers do. Being classified as an employee affords me benefits including healthcare, a retirement plan, stock vesting and the ability to take paid vacation and sick leave. Uber drivers are not afforded these benefits, since Uber misclassifies them as independent contractors. Since January 1 of this year, the law has been clear: Gig drivers should be classified as employees. Yet Uber refuses to obey the law and is now seeking to get Prop 22 passed so they can write a new set of rules for themselves. There's a misconception that all Uber drivers are part-time. Maybe they drive as a fun hobby in retirement or pick up a few hours after class in college, as I did. These drivers exist, but the drivers who are essential to Uber's business are full-time workers.

Facebook Chief Revenue Officer David Fischer said Tuesday that the economic models that rely on personalized advertising are "under assault" as Apple readies changes that would limit the ability of Facebook and other companies to target ads and estimate how well they work. Apple frames the change as preserving users' privacy, rather than as an attack on the advertising industry, and has been promoting its privacy features as a core reason to get an iPhone. CNBC reports: The change to Apple's identifier for advertisers, or IDFA,will give iPhone users the option to block tracking when opening an app. It was originally planned for iOS 14, the version of the iPhone operating system that was released last month. But Apple said last month it was delaying the rollout until 2021 "to give developers time to make necessary changes." Fischer, speaking at a virtual Advertising Week session Tuesday morning, spoke about the changes after being asked about Facebook's vulnerability to the companies that control mobile platforms, like Apple and Google, which runs Android.

Fischer argued that though there's "angst and concern" about the risks of technology, personalized and targeted advertising has been essential to help the internet grow. "The economic model that not just we at Facebook, but so many businesses rely on, this model is worth preserving, one that makes content freely available, and the business that makes it run and hum, is via advertising," he said. "And right now, frankly, some of that is under assault, that the very tools that entrepreneurs, that businesses are relying on right now are being threatened. To me, the changes that Apple has proposed, pretty sweeping changes, are going to hurt developers and businesses the most."

Fischer said the company plans to "defend" its existing model. "There are different business models out there. Apple has one that sells luxury hardware or subscription services, mainly to consumers like us who are fortunate enough to have a lot of discretionary income in some of the world's wealthiest countries," he said. "That's fine, but I don't think it's appropriate to then dictate that has to be other business models, and the one that we believe is so valuable, one that relies on advertising, in our case, personalized ads, to enable free products, enable businesses to launch and grow and thrive, we're going to defend that. And we think it really important that not just we but our industry does that."

Users have found a major bug in Apple's iOS 14 iPhone software. The free software upgrade, which Apple made publicly available last week, includes features many users had long asked for, such as better ways to organize apps, living programs called widgets on the home screen, and the ability to change which default apps the phone uses to browse the web or send an email. That last one doesn't appear to work. From a report: A growing chorus of Twitter users has been posting about the bug in Apple's default email and default web browser options. What happens is that whenever they set the default browser to Google's Chrome, for example, it works as expected, and tapping any link in an app or browser will open Chrome on the iPhone. But then if they restart the phone, iOS 14 changes that default back to Apple's Safari. "We are aware of an issue that can impact default email and browser settings in iOS 14 and iPadOS 14. A fix will be available to users in a software update," Apple said in a statement.

Though the U.S. government averted a shutdown of TikTok through a new Oracle/Walmart partnership, that leaves much bigger questions unresolved. The biggest issue may be that banning apps "defeats the original intent of the internet," argues the New York TImes. "And that was to create a global communications network, unrestrained by national borders." "The vision for a single, interconnected network around the globe is long gone," Jason Healey, a senior research scholar at Columbia University's School for International and Public Affairs and an expert on cyber conflict. "All we can do now is try to steer toward optimal fragmentation."
But the Times also asks whether the TikTok agreement fails even at its original goal of protecting the app from foreign influence: The code and algorithms are the magic sauce that Beijing now says, citing its own national security concerns, may not be exported to to a foreign adversary... Microsoft's bid went further: It would have owned the source code and algorithms from the first day of the acquisition, and over the course of a year moved their development entirely to the United States, with engineers vetted for "insider threats." So far, at least, Oracle has not declared how it would handle that issue. Nor did President Trump in his announcement of the deal. Until they do, it will be impossible to know if Mr. Trump has achieved his objective: preventing Chinese engineers, perhaps under the influence of the state, from manipulating the code in ways that could censor, or manipulate, what American users see.
Other questions also remain, including America's larger policy towards other apps like Telegram made by foreign countries. Even Amy Zegart, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and Stanford's Freeman-Spogli Institute, complains to the Times that "bashing TikTok is not a China strategy. China has a multi-prong strategy to win the tech race. It invests in American technology, steals intellectual property and now develops its own technology that is coming into the U.S... And yet we think we can counter this by banning an app. The forest is on fire, and we are spraying a garden hose on a bush."

And another article in the Times argues that the TikTok agreement doesn't even eliminate Chinese ownership of the app: Under the initial terms, ByteDance still controls 80 percent of TikTok Global, two people with knowledge of the situation have said, though details may change. ByteDance's chief executive, Zhang Yiming, will also be on the company's board of directors, said a third person. And the government did not provide specifics about how the deal would answer its security concerns about TikTok...

A news release published by Walmart on Saturday on its website — then edited later — captured the chaos. "This unique technology eliminates the risk of foreign governments spying on American users or trying to influence them with disinformation," the company said. "Ekejechb ecehggedkrrnikldebgtkjkddhfdenbhbkuk."

Epic Games says Fortnite: Save the World will no longer be playable on macOS beginning on September 23rd because Apple is preventing the game from receiving new updates. The Verge reports: The co-op action shooter was initially released as a paid early access title in 2017. Epic's far more popular free-to-play battle royale will still be playable on Mac, the company says. Epic says Apple is blocking new updates and patches for the macOS version of Save the World, and an upcoming update going out to other platforms will cause bugs and "a very poor experience" for players stuck on the current version.

In late August, Apple terminated Epic's developer account, meaning users cannot download or reinstall games developed by Epic, including Fortnite, and Epic can no longer validate updates for distribution. The studio said that it will issue refunds to "all players who purchased any Save the World Founder's or Starter Packs (including Upgrades) and played Save the World on macOS between September 17, 2019, and September 17, 2020." Epic Games says it may take until October 2nd for players to receive refunds.

NBC News spoke to 21 people who said they were hooked on casino-style apps and had spent significant sums of money. The industry is almost entirely unregulated. From a report: Shellz, 37, a nurse from Houston, spends at least two hours a day with her husband playing a casino-style smartphone game called Jackpot Magic. The app offers a variety of typical casino games to play, including their favorite, called Reel Rivals, a game in which players accrue points by playing a virtual slot machine. As in a real casino, players exchange money for coins to bet. Unlike in a real casino, there is no way to win money back or earn a payout on coins. But that has not stopped Shellz and her husband from spending about $150,000 in the game in just two years. She asked to use her in-game username so her family does not find out how much money they have spent on the game. "We lie in bed next to each other, we have two tablets, two phones and a computer and all these apps spinning Reel Rivals at the same time," she said. "We normalize it with each other." Jackpot Magic is an app made by Big Fish Games of Seattle, one of the leaders in an industry of "free-to-play" social games into which some people have plowed thousands of dollars. Big Fish Games also operates a similar app, Big Fish Casino. Both are labeled as video games, which allows the company and others like it to skirt the tightly regulated U.S. gambling market. But unlike the gambling market, apps like Jackpot Magic and Big Fish Casino are under little oversight to determine whether they are fair or whether their business practices are predatory.

NBC News spoke to 21 people, including Shellz and her husband, who said they were hooked on the casino-style games and had spent significant sums of money. They described feelings of helplessness and wanting to quit but found themselves addicted to the games and tempted by the company's aggressive marketing tactics. Most of the 21 players wished to remain anonymous, as they were ashamed of their addictions and did not want their loved ones to find out about their behavior. A 42-year-old Pennsylvania woman said she felt saddened that she spent $40,000 on Big Fish Casino while working as an addiction counselor. "The whole time I was working as an addiction counselor, I was addicted to gambling and with no hope of winning any money back," she said. Big Fish Games did not make anyone available for an interview, nor did the company respond to detailed questions. The company has said in previous court filings that only a fraction of the game's players actually spend money. In a response to NBC News' inquiries, the company issued a statement saying its games are not gambling and should not be regulated as such.

An anonymous reader shares an opinion piece from The New York Times, written by Neil Shister, author of "Radical Ritual: How Burning Man Changed the World." Here's an excerpt: In perhaps the ultimate test of whether the internet can satisfyingly replicate the real world, Burning Man has gone online this year. The notion isn't as much of a mismatch as it might seem. Larry Harvey, who helped start Burning Man on a San Francisco beach in 1986 and was its guiding luminary until his death in 2018, saw himself as a social engineer. He envisioned a landscape of limitless possibility where people could, at least temporarily, liberate themselves from the numbing confines of commodified art, entertainment and even lifestyle. What has more limitless possibility -- in theory, anyway -- than the internet? Indeed, a community famous for innovation (some trace the origins of maker culture to Burning Man) and deeply endowed with tech wizardry (Elon Musk famously said Burning Man "is Silicon Valley") adapted to the pandemic by creating a virtual Burning Man known as the Multiverse. The weeklong assemblage of eight digital platforms, which anyone can view free, went live at 12:01 a.m. on the last Monday in August, the traditional time Black Rock City (the name of the makeshift town where Burning Man takes place) opens its gates with a burst of fireworks.

The Multiverse maintains much of the energy, abundance and wonder of the real thing. One's cursor wanders among detailed renditions of Black Rock City that, for anyone who has been there, are eerily familiar: the layout of the camps, the signature structures and the cracked desert floor. Hover over an icon on the screen and the avatar of a Burner appears playing music he or she programmed. Digital art pieces installed by Burners surface when you click on planted flags. Visitors move through the Temple, an island of spiritual contemplation amid the playa's cacophony, by connecting glowing colored orbs into meditative patterns. You can attend workshops, which often include chat rooms for serendipitous encounters. But what's missing are adequate simulations of the vulnerability, discomfort and gratitude so central to Burning Man's existential qualities. Those fabled personal transformations typically arise from reappraisals of the self-image you brought to Black Rock City. You discover more creativity, self-reliance, flexibility, generosity -- even love -- than you thought you possessed. Or less. "You don't always get the Burn you want," a playa adage goes, "but you always get the Burn you need."

Black Rock City continually serves up opportunities to examine one's internal guidance system. The Multiverse doesn't offer this kind of introspection. There's no app that replicates the dread of loneliness or the relief of forgiveness -- familiar emotions at Burning Man. Which isn't to say that won't happen someday. As artificial-reality techniques advance, as the psychodynamics of cyberspace become more sophisticated in integrating the brain with virtual technology, it may one day be possible to elicit feelings associated with the self-governance, communal trust, gifting and fun that make Burning Man such a singular experience.

Epic Games made another pitch to a judge to block Apple from removing Fortnite from its App Store in what the game maker calls "retaliation" for offering in-app purchases through its own marketplace. From a report: Friday's request for a court action comes after Epic was denied an order last month that would have temporarily stopped Apple from delisting Fortnite. The case is shaping into a major antitrust showdown over tolls of as much as 30% that Apple charges developers when users make in-app purchases. Epic has filed a separate suit with similar claims against Google. Apple's App Store business also faces antitrust scrutiny by lawmakers and regulators in U.S. and Europe looking to rein in power of big technology companies. Some app developers complain that Apple's standard App Store fees and others policies are unfair and designed to benefit the iPhone maker's own services.

"To be clear, Epic does not seek to force Apple to provide distribution and processing services for free, nor does Epic seek to enjoy Apple's services without paying for them," Epic said in a filing in federal court in Oakland, California. "What Epic wants is the freedom not to use Apple's App Store or in-app purchase, and instead to use and offer competing services." Apple released a statement maintaining it isn't backing down, adding that there's no chance of the companies working together as things stand.

Since Huawei's latest smartphones have no access to Google's Play Store, many crucial apps aren't available. David Phelan from Forbes reports that TomTom Go Navigation has launched on Huawei's own "AppGallery" app store, filling the void of navigation apps and making AppGallery a potent alternative to Google's Play Store. Phelan writes: TomTom [...] is an unquestionable big beast in the world of mapping with huge name recognition. It also has an offline setting, something that's strikingly important for navigation apps, since you may well be using it abroad where roaming costs can be high. With TomTom Go Navigation, detailed 3D maps are stored on the phone. TomTom specialities include moving lane guidance which helps drivers navigate intersections by indicating which lane is best. You can also customize maps by adding or deleting regions as needed. The only downside is that TomTom Go Navigation, unlike Here WeGo and indeed Google Maps, is not free. There's a 30-day free trial, after which it costs $12.99 per year, $8.99 for six months or $1.99 per month.

This is not TomTom's first collaboration with Huawei. The company uses TomTom's mapping solution in its Huawei Mobile Services kits, which developers can use â" ride-share apps need mapping kits, for example. Those are not accessible to consumers, of course, but this app, based on the same mapping, is. Oh, and that's not the end of the story. Huawei's own Maps app is coming and is being developed in conjunction with TomTom. It Huawei gets it right, it could diminish the loyalty to Google Maps decisively.

Amazon is getting into the health gadget market with a new fitness band and subscription service called Halo. From a report: Unlike the Apple Watch or even most basic Fitbits, the Amazon Halo band doesn't have a screen. The app that goes along with it comes with the usual set of fitness tracking features along with two innovative -- and potentially troubling -- ideas: using your camera to create 3D scans for body fat and listening for the emotion in your voice. The Halo band will cost $99.99 and the service (which is required for Halo's more advanced features) costs $3.99 per month. Amazon is launching it as an invite-only early access program today with an introductory price of $64.99 that includes six months of the service for free. The Halo service is a separate product that isn't part of Amazon Prime. The lack of a screen on the Halo band is the first indicator that Amazon is trying to carve out a niche for itself that's focused a little less on sports and exercise and a little more on lifestyle changes. Alongside cardio, sleep, body fat, and voice tone tracking, a Halo subscription will offer a suite of "labs" developed by partners. They're short challenges designed to improve your health habits -- like meditation, improving your sleep habits, or starting up basic exercise routines.

Today, Mozilla launched the updated Firefox Android app with a version that many thought was a beta because it was full of bugs and UI issues. According to The Register, this was a deliberate software release and is the new version of Firefox for Android, which is set to hit the UK today, August 25, and the U.S. on the 27th. From the report: A Reg reader yesterday alerted us to an August 20 version bump that was causing so many problems, our tipster thought it was a beta that had gone seriously awry. "To sum it up, on 20th of August, Firefox 79 was unexpectedly forced on a large batch of Firefox 68 Android users without any warning, way to opt out or roll back," our reader reported. "A lot got broken in the process: the user interface, tabs, navigation, add-ons." Meanwhile, the Google Play store page for the completely free and open-source Firefox has a rash of one-star reviews echoing similar complaints: after the upgrade, little seemed to work as expected. "This is the worst 'upgrade' I've ever experienced," said netizen Martin Lindenmayer. "My main gripe is that there is no back button (to return to your previous page) anymore."

What's happened is this: the last stable version of Firefox for Android was version 68, released in 2019. For over a year, Mozilla has been working on an overhaul of its browser in a project code-named Fenix. Moz has slowly rolled out the result of its work to netizens in preview and beta form -- and since the end of July, as a proper release: version 79. This new stable version is what appeared on people's devices. As well as changes to the user interface and many new features that have thrown some users, it is also missing support for all extensions. In fact, by last count, only nine add-ons are supported so far, though this is expected to increase over time. The browser has also adopted Mozilla's GeckoView engine. If you accidentally updated the app and would like to roll back the update, you won't be able to. "[O]nce you've upgraded to the new browser, you won't be able to return to the old browser," says Mozilla.

For more information about the upgrade process, you can check out the browser's FAQ page.

NoMoreACs shares a report: On Friday, the internet erupted in a small way to learn that Apple had successfully forced WordPress to monetize its free app -- forcing it to sell premium plans and custom domain names seemingly just so that Apple could get its traditional 30 percent cut. But one afternoon and evening of surprise and outrage later, Apple is backing off. The company is issuing a rare on-the-record apology, and it says that WordPress will no longer have to add in-app purchases now that all is said and done.

Here's Apple's full statement: "We believe the issue with the WordPress app has been resolved. Since the developer removed the display of their service payment options from the app, it is now a free stand-alone app and does not have to offer in-app purchases. We have informed the developer and apologize for any confusion that we have caused." You'll notice that Apple is positioning this as the developer -- WordPress -- having done the right thing and removed the "display of their service payment options from the app," and to my knowledge that is technically true. But as far as I'm aware, that didn't happen today: it happened weeks or months ago.

WordPress founding developer Matt Mullenweg is accusing Apple of cutting off the ability to update its iOS app -- until or unless he adds in-app purchases so Apple can extract its 30 percent cut of the money. The Verge reports: Here's the thing: the WordPress app on iOS doesn't sell anything. I just checked, and so did Stratechery's Ben Thompson. The app simply lets you make a website for free. There isn't even an option to buy a unique dot-com or even dot-blog domain name from the iPhone and iPad app -- it simply assigns you a free WordPress domain name and 3GB of space. Is Apple seriously asking for WordPress owner Automattic to share a cut of all its domain name revenue? How would it even know which customers used the app? Or was this all a mistake? Apple, Automattic, and Mullenweg didn't immediately reply to requests for comment. As the article points out, all of this is happening in the shadow of Epic Games' gigantic fight against Apple, one that Apple responded to this very afternoon.

Fortnite-maker Epic Games and Apple are currently embroiled in a public battle over Apple's App Store policies, and in the latest move in the dispute, Epic has announced a Fortnite tournament taking place August 23rd where players can compete to win anti-Apple prizes. From a report: Last week, Epic added a new direct payment system to Fortnite in violation of Apple's policies. Apple removed Fortnite from the App Store the same day, and shortly after, Epic launched a campaign against Apple by suing the company, releasing a "Nineteen Eighty-Fortnite" video mocking Apple's famous "1984" ad, and promoting the hashtag #FreeFortnite. Players who compete in the tournament have the opportunity to win an in-game skin of the evil-looking apple featured in Epic's "Nineteen Eighty-Fortnite" video (cheekily dubbed the "Tart Tycoon"), a "Free Fortnite" hat, and even non-iOS gaming hardware, including an Alienware laptop, a Galaxy Tab S7, a OnePlus 8 phone, a PlayStation 4 Pro, an Xbox One X, or a Nintendo Switch.

An anonymous reader shares a report: This morning, multiple readers wrote in to alert us to a major Adobe gaff. It seems the latest update to the Lightroom app for iPhone and iPad inadvertently wiped users' photos and presets that were not already synced to the cloud. Adobe has confirmed that there is no way to get them back. The issue first cropped up on the Photoshop feedback forums two days ago, when the Lightroom app on iOS was updated to version 5.4. A user named Mohamad Alif Eqnur posted asking why all of his photos, presets, and watermark data had been removed after updating to the most recent version through the iOS app store. This was followed by replies from other users saying that the same thing happened to them, whether or not they were subscription based or free. One user posted to Reddit's r/Lightroom subreddit saying that they had lost "2+ years of edits" after the update.

"I've talked with customer service for 4+ hours over the past 2 days and just a minute ago they told me that the issue has no fix and that these lost photos are unrecoverable," wrote the user. "Adobe is unbelievable some times. All I got was a 'we're sincerely sorry' and nothing else. 2+ years of photo edits just gone because of Adobe and all they give is a sorry, lmao." esterday afternoon, at 4:30pm Eastern Time, Adobe officially confirmed the issue, explaining that customers who updated to Lightroom 5.4 on iPhone and iPad "may be missing photos and presets," that those photos and presets are "not recoverable," and that they "sincerely apologize" to users who have been affected by the issue. Version 5.4.1 has already been released, fixing the issue, but it can do nothing about the lost data.

An anonymous reader shares a report: With classic Hangouts on the way out, Google today has two video calling apps. However, that is one too many for the company, and sources familiar with the matter tell us that Google Duo will eventually be replaced by Meet. This decision is the result of Google placing its consumer communication services -- Duo, Messages, and Android's Phone app -- under the leadership of G Suite head Javier Soltero. After the unified team was made public in May, Soltero announced to employees that it does not make sense for Duo and Meet to coexist. Following the rise of work from home and remote learning, Google has moved aggressively to make Meet a Zoom competitor. Like Duo, it's now "free for everyone" to use and going after the same market. With all the focus on Meet, the new messaging chief opted to have the service become Google's one video calling service for both regular and enterprise customers. Internally, this is being described as a merger of the two services that is codenamed "Duet" -- a portmanteau of Duo and Meet. We're told by sources that this new direction and the reduced interest in building a dedicated consumer service came as a surprise to the Duo team.

Epic Games has filed legal papers in response to Apple, read more here (PDF). From the filing: Epic brings this suit to end Apple's unfair and anti-competitive actions that Apple undertakes to unlawfully maintain its monopoly in two distinct, multibillion dollar markets: (i) the iOS App Distribution Market, and (ii) the iOS In-App Payment Processing Market. Epic is not seeking monetary compensation from this Court for the injuries it has suffered. Nor is Epic seeking favorable treatment for itself, a single company. Instead, Epic is seeking injunctive relief to allow fair competition in these two key markets that directly affect hundreds of millions of consumers and tens of thousands, if not more, of third-party app developers.[....]

Contrast this anti-competitive harm with how similar markets operate on Apple's own Mac computers. Mac users can download virtually any software they like, from any source they like. Developers are free to offer their apps through the Mac computer App Store, a third-party store, through direct download from the developer's website, or any combination thereof. Indeed, on Macs, Epic distributes Fortnite through its own storefront, which competes with other third-party storefronts available to Mac users. App developers are free to use Apple's payment processing services, thee payment processing services of third parties, or the developers' own payment processing service; users are offered their choice of different payment processing options (e.g., PayPal, Amazon, and Apple). The result is that consumers and developers alike have choices, competition is thriving, prices drop, and innovation is enhanced. The process should be no different for Apple's mobile devices. But Apple has chosen to make it different by imposing contractual and technical restrictions that prevent any competition and increase consumer costs for every app and in-app content purchase -- restrictions that it could never impose on Macs, where it does not enjoy the same dominance in the sale of devices. It doesn't have to be like this. [...]

Apple has become what it once railed against: the behemoth seeking to control markets, block competition, and stifle innovation. Apple is bigger, more powerful, more entrenched, and more pernicious than the monopolists of yesteryear. At a market cap of nearly $2 trillion, Apple's size and reach far exceeds that of any technology monopolist in history. Epic just streamed this video to its users.

The therapy-by-text company Talkspace -- which has raised more than $100 million from investors -- made burner phones available for fake reviews and doesn't adequately respect client privacy, former employees say. From a report: The app launched in 2014 to positive press but lukewarm customer reviews, with ratings of about three stars out of five on both the Google and Apple app stores, according to a Times analysis. Users complained about glitchy software and unresponsive therapists. In 2015 and 2016, according to four former employees, the company sought to improve its ratings: It asked workers to write positive reviews. One employee said that Talkspace's head of marketing at the time asked him to compile 100 fake reviews in a Google spreadsheet, so that employees could submit them to app stores. Mr. Lori (an ex-employee) said that Talkspace gave employees "burner" phones to help evade the app stores' techniques for detecting false reviews. "They said, 'Don't do it here. Do it at home. Give us five-star ratings because we have too many bad reviews,'" Mr. Lori said.

Mr. Reilly, the Talkspace lawyer, disputed this account, saying that employees were free to write reviews any way they liked. "We alerted employees if they were to leave a review, to do it from their personal phones -- not from the Talkspace office network, as that would cause issues with the app store," Mr. Reilly said in an emailed statement. "To be clear: We have never used fake identities or encouraged anybody to do so; there is no event involving 'burner' phones, and the idea in and of itself is nonsensical relative to the large number of reviews outstanding."

Late Friday night, the American Civil Liberties Union tweeted its objections to banning TikTok in the United States. "Banning an app like TikTok, which millions of Americans use to communicate with each other, is a danger to free expression and technologically impractical."

More details from TechCrunch: "With any Internet platform, we should be concerned about the risk that sensitive private data will be funneled to abusive governments, including our own," the ACLU wrote in a subsequent statement. "But shutting one platform down, even if it were legally possible to do so, harms freedom of speech online and does nothing to resolve the broader problem of unjustified government surveillance."
But TechCrunch also reports TikTok is facing another threat: On Tuesday, a clutch of the company's largest celebrities, with a collective audience of some 47 million viewers, abandoned the platform for its much smaller competitor, Triller.

Founded in 2015, two years before TikTok began its explosive rise to prominence, Triller is backed by some of the biggest names in American music and entertainment including Snoop Dogg, The Weeknd, Marshmello, Lil Wayne, Juice WRLD, Young Thug, Kendrick Lamar, Baron Davis, Tyga, TI, Jake Paul and Troy Carter...

[T]he creators say they're leaving TikTok because they've grown wary of the Chinese-owned company's security practices. "After seeing the U.S. and other countries' governments' concerns over TikTok — and given my responsibility to protect and lead my followers and other influencers — I followed my instincts as an entrepreneur and made it my mission to find a solution," Richards, who's assuming the title of Triller's chief strategy officer, told the LA Times.