This story is specifically about a municipality in Japan.

It's more or less defined as a "guideline", precisely because it's not going to be enforced as a law.

This is more akin to, say, the health department issuing guidelines on, say, dietary (or similar) things - merely suggestions for best health, but otherwise unenforceable. I'm just find it interesting that it would be acceptable from a local municipal government as opposed to a more "federal" government body.

Ah yes, the convenient excuse for not providing any reasoning for any type of lockout for an eternity: "it's an error" - sounds a lot like "don't hold it like that".

Interesting that this would even be considered (even merely as an unenforced "suggestion" or "guideline") - this is not something that would fly in North America (and I would imagine in many other regions, like EU or Australia, China India, etc.) without fierce opposition, even if, again, just as a guideline.

I guess there must be a massive difference in culture in Japan if they find this proposal acceptable enough to even be proposed publicly.

LoL! Sweet, naive innocent child!

I get that 99.999999% are not "customers" of theirs at all - purely victims of their monopoly power.

TransUnion Says Hackers Stole 4.4 Million Customers' Personal Information

"Privacy Rapists That Deal in Customers' Personal Information Leak 4.4 Million Customers' Personal Information"

There FTFY.

Translation: "Whaa! We want to keep our duopoly and don't want anyone else playing in our sandbox. Whaa!"

Note: macOS is less restricted for distribution (for now), but still requires dev account/notarization to avoid the B.S. scary warnings they put up during install when you don't go that route.

Basically, you still need a developer certificate (and account) from Apple, because even though the developer might not release to Apple's AppStore, they still need to have their app notarized through Apple's notarization service in order for it to be installable on any device, regardless of the source "store" it's installed from. That gives Apple the usual powers it's always exerted on any iOS/macOS developer.

There's other ways to develop for Apple's devices, ("ad-hoc"), but those severely limit how you can distribute the app (basically: you can't).

Agreed - any service provider that accepts money for a service but then locks customers out of said paid service without valid explanation deserves these types of fines (I'm looking at you, Google!)

This is just Apple doing its usual malicious compliance thing, where it "allows" devs to do something, but only because it's required to by law, and then takes it away, without any real explanation given.

... or AI bots.

This - especially regarding the suggested requirement of:

It also sets guidelines for how long a post is required to be up (no more than 90 calendar days)

but also this is problematic:

how long the submission period can be (at least four calendar days) before applications can be reviewed

So now you're forcing the employer to limit applications to 90 days (and then what? Post it yet again? What a waste of time for both the employer and potential applicants), and forcing them to wait 4 days before they can fill the role when they do get applicants?

If this were to get passed, I do hope employers would have to ability to bill that "TJAAA working group" for the extra work it entails.