Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tim Cook says Facebook's collection of user data 'shouldn't exist'

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 140 posts

Re: Tim Cook says Facebook's collection of user data 'shouldn't exist'

#111

Post by darawk »

improbable22 wrote: post #82
darawk wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see no reason to think that making this possible would alter their ecosystem at all. It would always be a small minority of users. A small minority that developers could always just ignore. Developers on Android don't bother to think about custom Android kernels, unless they're specifically targeting that user niche.

I'm not too sure what exact freedom this minority of users is after. Does granting the ability to load a custom kernel require zero engineering effort from Apple? Including doing it in a way which won't leave the door open for the FBI, and whoever else, to break in?

It requires substantially less engineering effort than they've put into making sure people cannot do those things.

Re: Tim Cook says Facebook's collection of user data 'shouldn't exist'

#112

Post by darawk »

mung wrote: post #76
darawk wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hates freedome how? This statement is overbroad. In the sense that their devices are not free. > Besides which, I just want to use my phone, not spend endless hours fucking around with it to install all manner of stuff. The fact that you don't want to use it that way is hardly relevant to the question of freedom . Listen, i'm not saying they should spend a bunch of time engineering a solution to support this use ca…

They are just preventing several potential headaches in their view. If I build something and I don't want end users to do X with it, I'm entitled to do that. If the user doesn't like it, the user can go elsewhere. Those are the terms I set as the vendor and you are free to not engage, you have other choices. In short, you are still free to not buy their hardware.

Absolutely true. Just as you are free not to use Google and Facebook if you don't want your data collected. Not trying to say they don't have every right to do it.

Re: Tim Cook says Facebook's collection of user data 'shouldn't exist'

#113

Post by darawk »

innagadadavida wrote: post #110
darawk wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is falsifiable, i've explained elsewhere my reasoning, but i'll repeat it here: The same basic moral orientation that would motivate one to care about privacy would also motivate them to care about freedom. Apple's policy of not giving you sovereignty over your device is anti-freedom. However, the thing that explains both behaviors is self-interest. It's to Apple's strategic interest to focus on privacy, it's not…

so in summary you are saying 1. Apple is selfish (like any other company). 2. Their self interest is coupled to user privacy (but not freedom or moral values).

I'm saying that their stance on privacy is motivated by self-interest. Nothing more, nothing less.

Re: Tim Cook says Facebook's collection of user data 'shouldn't exist'

#114

Post by darawk »

whytaka wrote: post #101
darawk wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't align their business model in order to further privacy, though. It just happened to shake out that way. If Apple cared in the slightest about issues like this, they wouldn't make it impossible to control your own hardware when you buy an iPhone.

What disincentives are implicit in Apple's business model that discourages collecting more data from their users?

Not collecting user data is something that only Apple can do. Google depends on data collection for its primary revenue stream. Apple does not. This means that focusing on privacy is a uniquely competitive tactic for Apple to take, and they have shrewdly taken it.

To be absolutely clear, i'm not disparaging them for taking this position. I think it's great. I'm just trying to contextualize it.

Re: Tim Cook says Facebook's collection of user data 'shouldn't exist'

#115

Post by macspoofing »

asadotzler wrote: post #60
macspoofing wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And society at large paid for it. What's the cost again? I'm still experiencing cognitive dissonance over the fact that this is news here on HN. What Facebook was doing was common knowledge (for the last 8 years?). I assumed all those spammy facebook apps, like candy crush, had access to the entire social graph of facebook (not just US) or at least built it up over time. All those stupid "Log in with Facebook" apps…

Did you also assume they were exfiltrating that data and selling/giving it to third parties? I didn't.

Whose 'they'? And after all those sketchy apps asking for your friends list all these years? Yeah. Yeah I did.

Re: Tim Cook says Facebook's collection of user data 'shouldn't exist'

#116

Post by replicatorblog »

cdmoyer wrote: post #99
replicatorblog wrote: post #94

Apple's business model is unlike Facebook's business model in that it does not make money from ad targeting. Facebook's business model is unlike Apple's business model in that it does not make money from sending 12-year-olds into cobalt mines. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/11/industry-gian...

Huh, I expected much worse than “Earlier this year, Apple became the first company to publish the names of its cobalt suppliers, and Amnesty’s research shows it is currently the industry leader when it comes to responsible cobalt sourcing. Since 2016, Apple has actively engaged with Huayou Cobalt to identify and address child labour in its supply chain.”

Apple became the most valuable company in the world in 2012 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2012/08/20/apple-bec...) and had been a leader for the better part of ten years before that.

A recent change in procurement doesn't change the fact that they grew their business on the backs of teenagers who were sent into unreinforced holes in the ground to dig while kindergarten age children crushed the ore without the benefit of any protective gear.

I'm an iPhone user and I understand the world is a messy place. My point is it's rich of Cook, whose sub-contractor had to install nets outside of windows to prevent suicides, to lecture Zuckerberg about morals.

At the end of the day, Facebook has built an incredibly powerful adtech platform. An unpopular person used it to get elected. That's bad. Tim Cook's career has been spent building workplaces that either crushes spirits, leading to suicide, or literally crushes bodies in mine collapses.

Re: Tim Cook says Facebook's collection of user data 'shouldn't exist'

#117

Post by ilovecars2 »

nso95 wrote: post #90
IAmEveryone wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> operating devices owned by an employer is strike one. It’s not your personal property. You didn’t buy it from the store, you give it back when you quit or get fired, right? By that logic, your landlord could install a camera in your bedroom. It’s their property after all, right?

You pay for your apartment, it’s reasonable to expect privacy.

We also pay for Internet service, yet a lot of ISPs collect and extract browsing behaviour about their customers.

Re: Tim Cook says Facebook's collection of user data 'shouldn't exist'

#118

Post by whytaka »

darawk wrote: post #114
whytaka wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What disincentives are implicit in Apple's business model that discourages collecting more data from their users?

Not collecting user data is something that only Apple can do. Google depends on data collection for its primary revenue stream. Apple does not. This means that focusing on privacy is a uniquely competitive tactic for Apple to take, and they have shrewdly taken it. To be absolutely clear, i'm not disparaging them for taking this position. I think it's great. I'm just trying to contextualize it.

And yet we know that the personal data of your customers is worth billions.

And we also know that nothing about writing walled software ecosystems prevents one from syphoning this data.

So it would appear that Apple has purposefully left money on the table.

So please tell me how that fits with your 'self-interest' explanation of Apple's stance here.

Re: Tim Cook says Facebook's collection of user data 'shouldn't exist'

#119

Post by darawk »

whytaka wrote: post #118
darawk wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not collecting user data is something that only Apple can do. Google depends on data collection for its primary revenue stream. Apple does not. This means that focusing on privacy is a uniquely competitive tactic for Apple to take, and they have shrewdly taken it. To be absolutely clear, i'm not disparaging them for taking this position. I think it's great. I'm just trying to contextualize it.

And yet we know that the personal data of your customers is worth billions. And we also know that nothing about writing walled software ecosystems prevents one from syphoning this data. So it would appear that Apple has purposefully left money on the table. So please tell me how that fits with your 'self-interest' explanation of Apple's stance here.

I already have elsewhere in this thread, but here goes: Google's primary business model is contingent on user data collection. Apple has the most profitable business in the world, which is not contingent on user data collection. Yes, you are absolutely correct that Apple is leaving a few billion dollars on the table by not doing this. However, that's only true in a fairly narrow, greedy (in the sense of a 'greedy algorithm') sense.

Taking a more strategic perspective, you would look around and see that your competitors have to collect this data to survive. But you don't. That makes this a weakness for them, which means that it's a differentiating factor for your product that they can never copy. This strategic advantage is worth much more than the few billion in quick cash they might pick up by monetizing their user data.

Re: Tim Cook says Facebook's collection of user data 'shouldn't exist'

#120

Post by willstrafach »

cm2187 wrote: post #105
kerng wrote: post #49

It makes a difference having a CEO that is so vocal about this, it changes what everyone in the org does and sees as "right". It's a good thing. At Facebook the understanding seems to be more Orwellian community like, spearheaded by Mark Zuckerberg. They envision and build a future where everyone is under surveillance at all times - so collecting a bit more doesn't matter, more to the contrary. Last week there was a…

Apple isn’t the privacy white knight either. By default every iPhone logs and sends to the mothership your gps locations. They designed iMessage in a way that ensured they could access the conversation. IOS comes with an advertising ID, etc. They are certainly not as bad as a Google or Facebook but they are not good either.

> By default every iPhone logs and sends to the mothership your gps locations.

> They designed iMessage in a way that ensured they could access the conversation

Neither of these sound correct. Can you explain more or link a source on either?

Post reply on HN