211–220 of 422 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sounds an awful lot like FUD. Care to back up any of those generalizations with evidence?
The trouble is that the evidence is basically "Apple says they don't". Because the source code is not open, we can't know for sure one way or the other.
It's amazing to me how many comments here excuse Google's behavior by offering the impractical "solution" of just not using a smartphone (a false dilemma) when the obvious answer is to get an iPhone. That's the advice of pretty much everyone in the infosec field and I'm sure some of them will attest to that in this thread.
Apple provides a black box with iOS, they have full control. Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative. A more sensible way of dealing wirh the issue would be to use an open source Android version like AOSP or LineageOS, not run proprietary gapps, and replace its functionality with F-Droid, MicroG and Yalp-store. Your location will stay out of Apple's/Google's hands and you ca…
That’s not a great argument when you’re talking about the single most lucrative consumer product in the history of the world. At that point, the risk to your existing product by making an abrupt 180 like that is far too great.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Careful there with Kool Aid.
Agreed, it would be nice to have an actual conversation about the issues in the mobile market right now instead of pointing to one of the 2 major companies, that nobody should really be 100% confident about. IMO both Google and Apple aren't saints. Apple had a fairly similar headline in 2011[1]. Now watch people here on HN explain why that was completely different. It's a guarantee. We really should be focusing comin…
Ok, since you’ve so eloquently asked - a local copy of your location history that colllected when location services are turned on is completely different from remotely collecting location data even when you’ve explicitly disabled location services.
Any attempt to say these are the same thing has gone beyond naive to willfully ignorant at best.
Once again, when do I start hearing apologies from the supporters of closed source and mit/bsd (which allow tivoization like google did with android)? When do we finally realize RMS was right all along?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And? How does that matter? What's dangerous in them collecting my location information? I actually have location history in google maps turned on deliberately. You can't imagine how often it helped me to know where I was exactly, one and a half year ago, at a precise time. (That's how I managed to get a copy of my nexus 5x's warranty papers after it died on me) I don't really care about them collecting info about whe…
>And? How does that matter? What's dangerous in them collecting my location information? What's dangerous about them compiling your medical history? Who are you afraid of? Oh wait, that's a HIPAA violation. I wonder if they keep track of the location of every doctor's office you visit... and that abortion clinic... and that methadone clinic. Surely, nothing to lose there. The only information that isn't hackable, is…
> Wow, that's really fucked up, huh?
Well, fucked up that you're picking specifically on the Mexicans, sure (it's not right to ratchet up enforcement on just one nationality or race). And more than a little heavy-handed on enforcement.
Other than the obvious hyperbole, it's enforcing the law. Selective enforcement and non-enforcement of laws that you disagree with isn't a good thing; it allows those laws to stay on the books past their usefulness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative. Apple has demonstrated time and time again their commitment to privacy and to protecting user data. Apple does not see user data as something to be hoarded. They see user data as a liability and work very hard to collect as little as possible in order to provide the services they do. The idea that Apple is going to discard all of th…
You need user data to feed machine learning algorithms to make your product (siri, predictive text, face unlock, etc.) better. That alone is a very strong reason to hoard data if you're Apple.
Really the big outlier here is Siri, I'm sure they could make Siri better if they were willing to hoard data, but Apple has demonstrated that they value user privacy much higher than the incremental improvement they'd make with Siri, and violating user privacy would likely hurt their business a lot more than making Siri a bit better would help.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ever tried using an old iPhone?
Ever tried using one of those dirt-cheap Android phones?
For $300, you could get a competitevly specced Android phone with great support for AOSP custom roms. Get one of these, flash AOSP without play services and you've got a reasonably privacy-focused phone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> impractical "solution" of just not using a smartphone (a false dilemma) when the obvious answer is to get an iPhone. What is your life like to where you think not having a cell is impractical. In any case a smart phone is fundamentally a weak point in privacy/security no matter which one you get.
> What is your life like to where you think not having a cell is impractical. In the 90s it was inconvenient to be out and about if you were expecting a call. You might be able to check your messages though, by dialing your answering machine from a payphone. Payphones barely exist anymore, so it would be even more inconvenient. If you need to be reachable at all (nowadays by email/sms), a cell phone is nearly a requi…
Mostly pleasant and stress-free. I haven't owned any phone in ~6 years.