Then why take a check from google for $12B so that they can remain the default search engine?[0]
[0] http://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search-eng...
Tim Cook makes blistering attack on the “data industrial complex”
411–420 of 546 posts
Re: Tim Cook makes blistering attack on the “data industrial complex”
#412Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sacrifices for what, though? Let's say Apple does take a stand against China's human rights record. Then what? Apple pulls out of the country and a Chinese company fills the void in the market, possibly handing over even more user data to the government. What has been accomplished by Apple's "sacrifice"?
Apple customers elsewhere in the world are assured of Apple's integrity in this regard. Of course, it is a bit unreasonable to expect Apple to actually do that, but it is also a bit unreasonable to believe that Apple will guard your privacy anywhere else when push comes to shove.
Apple is not a human being, it is a company. That means expecting it to have integrity the way you would a person will only lead to disappointment.
A better way to understand the actions of a company is to look at incentives. Apple does not have a huge incentive to collect and monetize user data the way Google and Facebook do. Therefore, Apple has an incentive to try to differentiate their product based on this fact. That's all that is going on here, morality does not enter into the picture.
Re: Tim Cook makes blistering attack on the “data industrial complex”
#413Earlier quoted context omitted.
Name an advantage to google knowing what colour underwear you bought last Thursday at 3pm from an eBay seller called “thrusty jack”? Siri/iOS/macOS/etc are proof that “smart” services can be done on-device and/or without identifying information and still be useful. Google does it all server side because it’s the cash cow their entire business is built on, not because it’s the only way to do it.
If they are getting the data from Gmail, then it is useful for the heuristics in understanding what is and what is not spam. AFAIK, ebay don't use GA although most of the web do. GA is I'm sure largely to help with their advertising business. That is useful because it gives website owners (who choose to use it) analytics.
> If they are getting the data from Gmail, then it is useful for the heuristics in understanding what is and what is not spam.
Do you have evidence that they use their trove of personal data about you to improve spam filtering? No other email provider on the planet has the same amount of data, and they manage to filter out spam.
> AFAIK, ebay don't use GA although most of the web do.
eBay was an example, but my point was more about, if you used Google Pay on a shopping site.
> That is useful because it gives website owners (who choose to use it) analytics.
That isn't beneficial to the person whose data they hold, it's detrimental, and fucking creepy.
Re: Tim Cook makes blistering attack on the “data industrial complex”
#414It's sad how the introduction of a new class of devices "smartphones" brought along with it a surveillance software platform in the form of Android. Where it is clear that the only incentive for google to develop it is exfiltration of as much personal data as they can. In contrast in the case of Apple you have a customer relationship with the company that sold you the device and they have an incentive to keep you as…
As time passes I'm more and more wary of my Android phone (even though I have only a very limited usage compared to most "connected" people as far as I can tell). I just don't trust Google at all anymore. I think my next smartphone might well be the first Apple product I purchase in my life. Not that iPhones are without problems but as far as security and privacy are concerned they're pretty clearly the lesser evil t…
I've always had Androids, and my wife has always had iPhones. Recently I setup a Pi-Hole on my home network and I was floored by the number of network requests to various tracking services my android was making in comparison to my wife's iPhone. My wife has the facebook app and is always playing those junk free freemium games - but my relatively clean android was averaging at least double the amount of DNS lookups and blocked tracking domains. Apps that I hardly ever used, that I hadn't even opened since my last phone reboot - were almost constantly phoning in to some tracking service or another. It was an eye opening experience. I just recently switched to iPhone for my first time and have found replacements for most of the android apps I had become accustomed to. I want to be clear that switching devices isn't some magical button to disable all tracking, but I have seen a significant reduction in both the number of tracking domains on my network and the frequency that they are called. Now the blocked requests are much more in line with times that I have various apps open and not all the time whether I'm using it or not. I also feel better about the type of data apps have access to vs. the almost free-for-all of Android. Anyways, that my anecdotal experience with the two types of phones.
Re: Tim Cook makes blistering attack on the “data industrial complex”
#415Earlier quoted context omitted.
You literally said: > I would also caution against the push for almost complete privacy as that IMO leaves out a number of potential advantages from systems having enormous amounts of data about us. So I created an example. Forget my example if you wish, I still have the same question. What benefit is there specifically, from companies "having enormous amounts of data about us"?
But I also said: "This is where I think the decentralized part becomes really valuable. How can we own our own data but exchange it with others and build trust over time just like we would in the real world." So not sure why you are asking about about something that is only part of what I wrote when I elaborate further down.
> How can we own our own data but exchange it with others and build trust over time just like we would in the real world.
Well that's pretty simple. Don't use services that are paid for with your privacy.
> So not sure why you are asking about about something that is only part of what I wrote when I elaborate further down.
You claimed it's beneficial, I'm asking how.
Re: Tim Cook makes blistering attack on the “data industrial complex”
#416Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple was never a player in the ad market, so which of these "well-designed compromises" went against their bottom line?
Worth noting that they do have an ad platform, actually, and that all apps on the App Store are mandated to use it if wanting to monetize.
> they do have an ad platform, actually, and that all apps on the App Store are mandated to use it if wanting to monetize.
What? This is not true at all. Source: I released an iOS app that used a non-apple third party to serve ads.
Re: Tim Cook makes blistering attack on the “data industrial complex”
#417Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apples 'cheap' iPhone is last years (or the year before). And it works, because unlike most Android devices that get very few updates, with long delays (or no updates, ever, for the very cheap devices), they support devices with newer OS releases. A 5S will still run the latest iOS.
I agree that appears to be the way they are going. If they are working to extend the life of devices even further in coming years that seems to support this direction.
Over time the resources required to run the OS itself should go up slower than the hardware has increased in capability in the last few years.
While the next iOS release may require an iPhone 6 or 6S, I expect it will be quite a while before it changes base requirements again after that.
Re: Tim Cook makes blistering attack on the “data industrial complex”
#418Earlier quoted context omitted.
That shouldn't matter. The OS should let you create a fake photo collection which gets shown instead of the real one to apps you don't trust. This idea is obvious and very old. At least in the case of Android contact lists people have been asking for this for as long as I can remember. Why has it still not been implemented on iOS at least? Or has it now been implemented? I've been avoiding both Android and iOS becaus…
> The OS should let you create a fake photo collection which gets shown instead of the real one to apps you don't trust. Many times yes. And even more important, the contacts! Now it's you have to "give the app all the contacts" even if you know you want to give it only one or two. And of those one or two, just the number. Not the picture, not the date of birth, not the address. In short we should be able to pre-sele…
It could be done properly for us (techies), but this would go over poorly for normal people.
"Why do I have to click through all this mess when I just want to post this picture I just took to Facebook?"
"I think I set it right but now Facebook can't see the picture I wanted to post"
et cetera. These granular controls aren't something that regular people want to deal with.
Re: Tim Cook makes blistering attack on the “data industrial complex”
#419Why doesn't he put the the money where his mouth is? I haven't seen Apple making any attempts to create funding model for publishers, even though the success of their products depends on the wide availability of free content.
Apple has put forward numerous systems for publishers of all types to make money on their platforms, some successful, some not. iTunes, app store, Newsstand, iAds, Apple music, News, iBooks.
Re: Tim Cook makes blistering attack on the “data industrial complex”
#420Disclaimer: I use Apple products, and trust them slightly more than anything Google/FaceBook/startups because they don't have a business front selling my data to advertisement companies or 3rd party miners(as much as I know of). But, I'm baffled by this PR as if they are the privacy messiah. Didn't they just sellout their Chinese users icloud data to the Chinese government? Yeah. "It's the law, and Apple has to obey…
I struggle with Apple's China situation as well, but the more I turn it over in my head, the more I think it's that Tim is pulled between two parties: 1) His team + Apple Directors that I firmly believe, both in words AND in their action, are strong proponents of privacy of the user 2) The Apple Board + Sharedholders that would revolt if the privacy principles from (1) prevented access to a market of ~1.4 billion peo…
Yes, I agree that there is a nuance to it. But, if they said "We'd like the United States to stand up for the privacy of its citizens and create a law like that if GDPR. Apple is in full support of it because it helps our business too(it is our competitor's weakness)" I'd agree that they are talking the truth. But, writing that we "absolutely" care about your privacy, and that "caring for privacy is in our DNA" and so on just to turn around and give up the same principles to an authoritarian government(one that is building Social credit system nevertheless) is just plain hypocrisy IMO. I know several American and European friends that trust Apple as if they're infallible, and will protect their data in a war. That's what I think is wrong. Apple will give up its users, DNA, principles if there is enough money to be made or leverage to be taken.