Live data from Hacker News

Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

techcrunch.com

211–220 of 488 posts

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you get on the wrong side of Apple's algorithms, there is zero recourse. I don't follow what you're implying.

If Apple decided you're a bot and deletes your account, everything tied to it will also go.

This is true for Google, Facebook, and Twitter logins as well. It's a valid criticism for using any third party authentication provider (which I personally avoid and will be avoiding Apple's).

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#212
post #64
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple sells iCloud subscriptions though. And yet you're not worthy of their privacy if you didn't buy their completely DRM locked devices where they control even the content you're allowed to see.

You can access https://www.icloud.com/#iclouddrive from any device. Are you complaining that there is no app?

"Your browser is not currently supported."

Up-to-date Chrome on Android.

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can get a decent used iPhone for under $200. I don’t fault Apple for not making an iPhone cheaper than that.

Try to use it as daily driver. Very difficult.

I’ve done it. It’s not.

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#215
post #110

My cynical side read this as cheap/free = google/android who own your data in return for their services vs expensive = Apple who are selling you some degree of perceived privacy baked into the operating systems of their primarily hardware offerings, which you pay more for.

Sure, but that's the always-acknowledged reality. Either you're paying for the product, or you are the product.

I think reality is more along the lines of: you are the product or you're paying for the product and you're also the product.

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#216

Apple's strategy is simple. They want to retain control over their customers; at the same time, force the developers into relying entirely on Apple as a middle man so that they can't cut Apple out of any transactions. This way, Apple gets their cut and user's get some level of privacy. That they can get away with this arm-twisting as "privacy" is to give credit to their brand positioning.

Apple's strategy is simple because they had no strategy. They're pretty far behind with software and had no real cloud offering besides iCloud. They're doubling down on what they can do which is to convince people to avoid moving their life online.

In reality, I don't think people will go back to Cloud 1.0 but at least Apple will keep companies in check while they rot away to oblivion.

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#217
It's worth remembering that Apple's privacy spin began with people noticing that Siri is a joke and other ML powered functions in Apple's software are not nearly as good as the competition's, so the company line basically became "our software sucks because we don't spy on you" and because tech journalists are predisposed to hate everyone else and really love framing their stories as rivals dueling they gladly adopted that narrative.

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#218
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just anecdotal data but I for one am very happy to be switching to apple this year after almost a decade of android. I'm only too happy to pay a premium if that gives me some control over my own privacy.

Except now you don't have control over your own device. I don't think they are orthogonal goals. Give me root on my iPhone and I'll switch for the privacy. Leaving gapps off an Android install is becoming crippling.

The idea that the ability to easily root your own phone is going to make you more secure is laughable.

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The app store already works like this. They clearly mark subscription apps like this, including free trials.

But free trials are never really free: after 14 days when you've probably already forgotten about the app, your card gets charged. There needs to be a proper way to try stuff without slyly charging them. Maybe ask them outright at the end of the trial if they want to carry on?

That’s also already built in by Apple. Free trials don’t automatically turn into paid subscription unless you tell them to.

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#220
post #191

I am clearly in the minority here but I think "Sign in with Apple" is terrible for consumers. You keep your email address hidden from service providers, sure, but you are also placing your online identity entirely in the hands of Apple. If you get on the wrong side of Apple's algorithms, there is zero recourse. At least in the case of Facebook and others the third party still has your email address so you can always…

> If you get on the wrong side of Apple's algorithms, there is zero recourse. I don't follow what you're implying.

I think I understand the GP.

Let's say I sign up for an online game using Apple's secure sign in because I don't want to share my information.

Some time passes, and I've invested 250 hours into the game, when Apple decides to ban my account for whatever reason (perhaps I've refunded too many apps, maybe the credit card that pays my Apple Music expires, my country gets sanctioned by the US gov. etc.)

Apple would, presumably, shut down email services for me. Meaning, I won't be able to log into that game any longer. With no alternative log in method (which would defeat the purpose of using Apple's sign in) I would likely lose access to that game forever.

Post reply on HN