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

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

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 488 posts

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

#411

Post by thefounder »

nabla9 wrote: post #130
thefounder wrote: post #34

Still they were/are part of PRISM so keep in mind that the privacy offered depends by various U.S agencies.

Privacy is not all or nothing issue. If you have privacy against commercial use but not against various U.S. agencies that's better than nothing. Any service where you can reset your password/token that is known only to you after you lose it is not safe from government warrant. It can still be safe from mass collection like PRISM.

I agree though I believe the abuse of privacy rights by the government is the worst kind of the two, capable of inflicting the greatest damage.

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

#412

Post by at-fates-hands »

scarface74 wrote: post #291
at-fates-hands wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we're talking about privacy, there seems to be a direct correlation between the size of a companies profits and their willingness to sell your private information. As someone who values my privacy, I prefer smaller, stable companies because I'm more confident they are acting with my best interests in mind; not chasing massive growth and huge profits. I spend quite a bit of money per month to maintain some semblanc…

Until they get bought out by a larger company. See Onova....

Agreed. At which point I'm free to move to a different provider, but yes, this is always a possibility.

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

#413

Post by afpx »

hellofunk wrote: post #377
afpx wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because, eventually, Apple will lose revenue, and their shareholders will demand profit. And, Apple will be sitting on a trove of data, or metadata, or predictive models built from that data.

That sounds speculative. Why will they lose revenue eventually? Do you think 40 years from now they will be in a worse position than today? After all, they are today in a better position than 40 years ago. Perhaps a privacy-focused company will actually perform better in a society obsessed with privacy, and eventually, their competitors who don't share these perspectives will be the ones that lose revenue. All we can…

It’s not speculation, just logic. Shareholders seek as much profit as possible. The moment that being PrivAAS is worth less than not being one, they’ll switch strateg

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

#414

Post by la_barba »

mirimir wrote: post #203
bighi wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple is talking about what their own products do. Their cameras, their apps, their devices. They can't 100% guarantee that third-party apps won't spy on you, and they don't even promise to do it. You might want to bash Apple for something they haven't promised and is probably not even possible. But that's on you, just baseless bashing.

These apps are in their store. That implies that they have approved them.

What does it mean (officially) for an app to be approved? You seem to have your own interpretation.

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

#415

Post by laughinghan »

babypuncher wrote: post #396
dcosson wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using iPhone and MacOS for years and successfully picking & choosing different parts of the ecosystem. Sure, the defaults are usually set up to opt you into their own products so it takes a bit of fiddling but it's not hard to opt into just the set of services you want to use - i.e. sync only particular services like iCloud Notes and password manager, but use gmail for email and calendars (using open format…

You lose a lot more than just message bubble colors when you switch away from iMessage. Multimedia quality takes a nosedive to 2006, reactions don't work, you lose encryption (SMS/MMS is not encrypted at all), and you miss out on all the other little things that make people like iMessage. Of course this isn't really Apple's fault, we can blame the cell carriers for being categorically uninterested in modernizing SMS…

Is multimedia quality between Android phones using MMS much better than iPhone-without-iMessage? I thought it's the same, which isn't lock-in, that's just iMessage being a superior service to MMS, and in fact the iPhone is going out of its way to not lock you in and allow MMS.

On the other hand, if the iPhone is intentionally crippling MMS, that's pretty slimy lock-in.

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

#416

Post by behnamoh »

geofft wrote: post #362
tfha wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest problem that I have is that it's privacy built on a closed source platform that works extremely hard to wall users in and create substantial vendor lock-in. As someone who has tried multiple times to dip their toes into the Apple world, I can tell you that it's highly hostile to users who try to pick and choose how much they want to be an Apple citizen. If you don't agree to sign up for Apple cloud on the…

This is quite at odds with my experience with my iPhone, so I'm confused. I don't have an iCloud account. I'm not sure what "basic functions for a smartphone" I'm unable to use, but, I don't want my photos backed up to iCloud - I'll handle that on my own, for the photos I actually want somewhere other than on my local device. Everything otherwise seems to work. I don't use iMessage. I've ticked the little box that sa…

I think the GP meant that without an Apple ID, you basically can't install apps to begin with, and most of the OS's apps also require an Apple ID to work to their fullest.

However, I don't share the same degree of skepticism as the GP.

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

#417

Post by skewart »

xenospn wrote: post #391
maxxxxx wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the push to more and more iCloud I would assume they have a lot of data but I am not sure.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a core part of their messaging has been that they don't actually know what users are storing inside their cloud, has it not?

Maybe, but they can change that at any time. If they wanted to have visibility into iCloud data going forward they easily could.

With Apple products, you're putting your privacy entirely in Apple's hands and assuming that their executives will continue to follow the same branding and product strategy that they've been pursuing for the past few years.

That said, Apple is probably the least bad option for phone + cloud for most people. But it's sad that that's the case.

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

#418

Post by la_barba »

briandear wrote: post #328
anoncake wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the cost of selling an app does not primarily depend on its cost. Size, frequency of updates etc. are a much bigger factor. Them taking a flat 30% is a clear sign Apple is a price-maker and the market doesn't work. And taking 30% for in-app purchases — while forbidding developers from even advertising ways of purchasing that bypass Apple — is just plain anticompetitive.

> while forbidding developers from even advertising ways of purchasing that bypass Apple — is just plain anticompetitive. Let’s say you are at a grocery store, offering free samples of a food, the store allows you to set up in the store however, you don’t want to let the store sell your product because of the distribution fees. While giving out the samples in their store, you tell customers to buy your product from y…

I have an iPhone. Where can I purchase iOS apps outside of the App Store?

>Is this actually a thought process that makes sense to anyone?

Totally. Apple encourages free apps just as much as paid apps. They even have a category on the App Store for free apps. They will promote free apps over paid apps if the free app is better. Many apps in their top10 lists are free. Does it sound to you like Apple is against free apps or is otherwise discouraging them? Also you have to pay Apple when you list your app on the App Store. I believe the developer license or whatever you need costs $100. So its not technically free, although I agree that the price is nominal.

To go back to your grocery store example, I'm selling someone a wifi router, and telling them to sign up for internet on my website. Apple wants to tax the internet too. Or I'm selling someone a Sirius XM Satellite radio for their car, and telling them to signup for service on my website.

I will concede that there is nothing either 'evil' or 'good' about what Apple is doing. But to me, taking 30% of a companies sales is super greedy at the very least. Apple does have a history of overcharging for their products. Nobody is opposed to paying premium for premium parts/labor/service, etc. But with Apple, they have an insane margin and so the extra money simply goes into a pile of cash or into some executives pocket. Its not going towards a better product.

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

#419

Post by babypuncher »

laughinghan wrote: post #415
babypuncher wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You lose a lot more than just message bubble colors when you switch away from iMessage. Multimedia quality takes a nosedive to 2006, reactions don't work, you lose encryption (SMS/MMS is not encrypted at all), and you miss out on all the other little things that make people like iMessage. Of course this isn't really Apple's fault, we can blame the cell carriers for being categorically uninterested in modernizing SMS…

Is multimedia quality between Android phones using MMS much better than iPhone-without-iMessage? I thought it's the same, which isn't lock-in, that's just iMessage being a superior service to MMS, and in fact the iPhone is going out of its way to not lock you in and allow MMS. On the other hand, if the iPhone is intentionally crippling MMS, that's pretty slimy lock-in.

SMS is just as bad on Android phones as it is on iPhones. The problem is it's an ancient crappy standard and carriers are uninterested in fixing it. That is why Apple created iMessage.

Apple does nothing to cripple SMS on iPhones. The only thing Apple is guilty of is not opening up iMessage to non-Apple devices. With Apple Music and TV+ making their way to other ecosystems, I'm hopeful this might change.

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

#420

Post by gundmc »

elliekelly wrote: post #254
mirimir wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. But would they have done this without the recent publicity about third-party app tracking? I suppose that they must have been working on this for some time. And maybe they deserve some slack. But there should at least be an apology for not acknowledging tracking by third-party apps. For years. While they were touting their privacy stance. And it's not just about behavioral ads. Some repressive governments have…

> And maybe they deserve some slack. They deserve a lot of slack. Apple's privacy approach may not be perfect but they are head and shoulders above just about every other major tech company. I've written many privacy policies - for privacy-focused companies and for companies seeking to get away with the absolute bare-minimum. One of the best "quick and dirty" ways to assess a company's privacy policy without actually…

Can you clarify your comment? I don't see anything I would classify as a footnote in either linked policy.
Post reply on HN