Our Approach to Privacy • Hacker News Board

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#151

Post by movedx » Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 10:26 PM UTC

lxmcneill wrote: post #139

mirimir wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do like Apple's approach to privacy. A lot. And I love their phones. While their PC hardware is still pretty, it's getting more-and-more outdated and overpriced. But that's no longer their focus, so hey. And indeed, Apple seems to handle privacy well, in practice. I've managed to create pseudonymous accounts at Apple's online store, and fund them with anonymized Bitcoin. And I've managed to make digital purchases.…

The last time I went to pick up a product (AirPods) it required government issued photo ID (Australian driver's license), even though I had the Apple Store app which made the purchase installed on my phone.

That's an issue with Australian law, not Apple. You can also buy such devices overseas.

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#152

Post by mirimir » Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 10:28 PM UTC

lxmcneill wrote: post #139

mirimir wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do like Apple's approach to privacy. A lot. And I love their phones. While their PC hardware is still pretty, it's getting more-and-more outdated and overpriced. But that's no longer their focus, so hey. And indeed, Apple seems to handle privacy well, in practice. I've managed to create pseudonymous accounts at Apple's online store, and fund them with anonymized Bitcoin. And I've managed to make digital purchases.…

The last time I went to pick up a product (AirPods) it required government issued photo ID (Australian driver's license), even though I had the Apple Store app which made the purchase installed on my phone.

Well, that sucks. So much for privacy, in Australia anyway.

In Australia, do you need to show ID when you buy random electronics for cash? If you pay cash in an Apple Store, do you need to show ID?

Buying Apple hardware used, at swap meets etc, seems the best option. As long as it's not been stolen, anyway. But you can test for that, before paying.

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#153

Post by mirimir » Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 10:29 PM UTC

movedx wrote: post #151

lxmcneill wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last time I went to pick up a product (AirPods) it required government issued photo ID (Australian driver's license), even though I had the Apple Store app which made the purchase installed on my phone.

That's an issue with Australian law, not Apple. You can also buy such devices overseas.

Ah, thanks. What sorts of purchases in Australia require ID?

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#154

Post by zachlatta » Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 10:42 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #97

zachlatta wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give a few examples?

Pretty much every authoritarian overthrow that became genocidal relied on a previous bureaucracy's meticulous record keeping.

Can you please give a few examples?

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#155

Post by JumpCrisscross » Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 10:49 PM UTC

zachlatta wrote: post #154

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much every authoritarian overthrow that became genocidal relied on a previous bureaucracy's meticulous record keeping.

Can you please give a few examples?

The classic ones are Pol Pot and Hitler. With the latter, the Danish example is useful.

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#156

Post by markmark » Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 10:53 PM UTC

mirimir wrote: post #153

movedx wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an issue with Australian law, not Apple. You can also buy such devices overseas.

Ah, thanks. What sorts of purchases in Australia require ID?

None (well, some medicine, firearms probably, that sort of thing, not headphones). This is entirely on Apple.

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#157

Post by rrix2 » Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 10:56 PM UTC

dpkonofa wrote: post #145

greggman wrote: post #74

I'm happy Apple is at least trying hard to deal with privacy but honestly I don't think they are doing enough, at least for me. For example, I don't really want to give most apps constant access to my photos, my camera, or my mic but I really don't have a whole lot of choice if I still want to use popular apps and services like Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, Hangouts, Line, WhatsApp etc.. I really wish that every ti…

I don't really follow how that's something that Apple needs to change. You either want to use the apps or you don't. If you don't, just don't download them or don't give them access. If your friends absolutely have to use the apps, then they clearly don't care about the same things you do and you need to convince them to use something else that you are ok with using. I guess I just don't understand why Apple needs to…

Free Scenario: I install a photo sharing app. I use it to only post photos that I take while going on hikes or of my food. Those are always in an Album called "foodpics" or similar, and every time I open their app, I select the "foodpics" folder, then the image inside of it and then go through the app's upload flow.

Why should the photo app get access to the rest of my library of photos, like the ones in "business receipts" or "my son" that I would never upload to said photo sharing site?

Sometimes you want to use the app, but you don't want it to have a world-view of your phone. In a perfect world the photo sharing app should only get access to the individual photos that I choose to share with it (either through the Photos app or an OS-level file selector)

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#158

Post by userbinator » Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 11:06 PM UTC

chickenfries wrote: post #112

yaseer wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with this reasoning (although I'm not particularly privacy minded, and prefer Android and most Google products to iOS and iCloud). The older tech companies like Apple and Microsoft have built business models with a different set of incentives around user data. Google, and particularly Facebook's, business models entirely rely on monetising user data. My personal 'ranking' of a companies incentives to respect…

I'm curious why you would say that Microsoft has the most respect for privacy given Windows 10 telemetry. Is there a MacOS or iOS equivalent?

Pre-Win10, pre-telemetry Microsoft was pretty much "hands-off", i.e. you bought the software and then they mostly left you alone.

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#159

Post by adambrenecki » Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 11:11 PM UTC

mirimir wrote: post #153

movedx wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an issue with Australian law, not Apple. You can also buy such devices overseas.

Ah, thanks. What sorts of purchases in Australia require ID?

Anything over 10,000 AUD (about 8,000 USD) purchased with cash. AirPods are expensive but not _that_ expensive.

My guess is that they paid online for in-store pickup, and Apple asked for ID to confirm they're the one that made the purchase. In which case that's an Apple thing, not a government thing.

Re: Our Approach to Privacy

#160

Post by zachlatta » Sun, Sep 17, 2017, 11:12 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #155

zachlatta wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please give a few examples?

The classic ones are Pol Pot and Hitler. With the latter, the Danish example is useful.

In your original comment, you were implying that societies that lose privacy go south very quickly. As in that loss of privacy is causal.

I can't speak for Pol Pot, since I'm not very familiar with his regime, but with Hitler and the Danish, my understanding is that record keeping aided in the German occupation. Not that the Denmark went downhill after it started doing meticulous data gathering.

Can you give causal examples?