Apple dropped plan for encrypting backups after FBI complained

Dont know why down voted. Even if someone doesnt care for individuals in other legal zones (sad), the extra injustice Apple is accepting in other legal zones is a clear display of what they are willing to do to you eventually.

> Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

So I 100% agree.

the youth are either ambivalent or just not the point of understanding, have you seen how much they freely share with each other on messaging, dating, and other apps? Now for the most part today's schools lean pretty heavily towards indoctrination and with so many distractions at hand at their age they don't see issues we see.

As I posted before, then you get into the so called adult realm and many of them will trade away privacy if it gets them money off their coffee, coupons for grocery, or just to brag about their latest get away. it does not matter if its private or government channels, give them a reward and they want it.

Privacy also tends to be highly associated with identity theft not realizing that not only is privacy important for reasons of protecting your stuff but your person and your interest also need protecting both from government and private parties.

Also, some here seem to think they have more to lose than they do. It seems more about wanting to be part of a victim class as long as people and organizations they don't like are punished

tl;dr no, most don't care, give them a cookie and you can get their email and more

Or maybe rclone with encryption set to on. Then you have a bunch of clouds working for you with crypto which is only yours.

>There's this popular conception that the average person doesn't care about privacy, but I think that's wrong. I just think that to really get a handle on what it means to be private in the modern digital age is too complicated for the average person.

Cypherpunks tried to sound the alarm around the time email got popular and had similar difficulty then - the barrier to adoption was too high and laypersons didn't really understand why they should care enough to overcome that barrier.

See Wired coverage from 1993 as one example of this view from the techno-savvy thinking things should be one way but acknowledging that reality is much different. https://www.wired.com/1993/02/crypto-rebels/

From the article Crypto Anarchy, he believes, is inevitable, despite the forces marshaled against it. "I don't see any chance that it will be done politically," says the Cypherpunk. "[But] it will be done technologically. It's already happening."

Rather than some digital utopia where personal information is heavily protected and not linked, we have a generation of programmers working to persist tracking cookies across browsing sessions, whether anonymous or not and law enforcement leveraging a scraped database of three billion photos to identify people whether they choose to be identified or not.

By following the electronic links we make, one can piece together a depressingly detailed profile of who we are: Our health records, phone bills, credit histories, arrest records, and electronic mail all connect our actions and expressions to our physical selves. Crypto presents the possibility of severing these links. It is possible to use cryptography to actually limit the degree to which one can track the trail of a transaction.

Of course that didn't happen beyond https everywhere for point-to-point encryption and regular leaks of consumer data proves once collected data is often not protected from public scrutiny, much less encrypted at rest, anonymized, etc. So even if you do protect your data perfectly there's still a chance it'll be discovered elsewhere. Rather than trying to create backdoors, government should be trying to enforce much more stringent regulations on use and protection of consumer data. However given the political zeitgeist I don't really see that happening.

Here's a source indicating that from 2018:

https://www.switchingtomac.com/tutorials/ios-tutorials/backu...