This is incredibly clever. We have a completely separate, but equally crazy hack that we were thinking of using to implement this. But well done. And so glad you like it :)
You're misunderstanding what the OP is saying. He/she is pointing out a logical fallacy in the App Review rules.
Developers are allowed access to something called an "advertising identifier" which lets them track users between apps, for the purposes of targeted advertising. Apple is very restrictive in terms of user identification, in order to protect users' privacy, so this is the only way to uniquely identify a user/device, and the user can optionally opt-out of the advertising identifier entirely.
Apple doesn't want developers to use the advertising identifier for things other than advertising. But the way they enforce this is simply by requiring that an app include ads in order to use the advertising identifier. If you use the advertising identifier and your app doesn't visibly include ads, it will be rejected.
This restriction is ostensibly intended to prevent developers from abusing the advertising identifier, but really it just encourages developers to include shitty ads in their apps, because if you include ads, you can use the advertising identifier for whatever you want behind the scenes. It's a nonsensical way of enforcing this policy. Thus, "security theater."
Awesome, thanks for the advice. We were looking into alternatives for algorithms that better reflected human color interpretation, and that looks very helpful.
And yeah, your games are awesome, we basically modeled this as "the Kerning Game/Color Game, but for brands."
This article is very vague and confusing. I'm sure there are real problems here, but the grammar makes this hard to read. What are you complaining about, specifically, in the "Logos" section? What would you like a company like Twitter to be providing in terms of graphics?