621–630 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
If 6.99 billion people cannot give informed consent on something, you have more problems than just showing the dialog.
It still doesn't change the fundamental right to consent.
What I want is very simple: I want software that doesn't send anything to the Internet without some explicit intent first . All of that work to try to make this feature plausibly private is cool engineering work, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with implementing a feature like this, but it should absolutely be opt-in. Trust in software will continue to erode until software stops treating end users and their data…
> So why didn't Apple just simply ask for user permission to enable this feature? That’s an interesting question. Something to consider, iOS photos has allowed you to search for photos using the address the photo was taken at. To do that requires the Photos app to take the lat/long of a photos location, and do a reverse-geo lookup to get a human understandable address. Something that pretty much always involves query…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The headline is defensible but, in my opinion, quite sensationalised. How would you write the headline? There's always a criticism of headlines, but headlines are necessarily short. It's like critics want the entire article text to appear in the headline, which is impossible. I don't know what defensible but sensationalized is supposed to mean. > I think a lot of the interactions people had with this submission, es…
I would probably aim for a title like ‘what does the “Enhanced Visual Search” feature do in iOS 18 and MacOS 15?’ Or ‘how much data is sent to Apple for the new “Enhanced Visual Search” in Photos’. I think the early comments on this submission were because the headline made them mad because they were incurious and not particularly related to the topic of the article making – most could be under any article about Appl…
In my opinion, these are actually misleading headlines that don't represent the content of the article. In fact, I've never used the Enhanced Visual Search feature, nor do I know exactly how much data is sent to Apple.
My article was never intended as a kind of feature introduction that you might see in the news media. The main point was always about user consent for uploading data to Apple. To be clear, my article is and has always been a complaint. Thus, I think the headline is accurate. I am complaining, and readers should know that.
> another was, paraphrasing, ‘I’m so angry. I don’t care about homeomorphic encryption or differential privacy’.
> many of the early comments didn’t really depend on the contents of the article
The headline of the article didn't mention homeomorphic encryption or differential privacy, so they must have read the contents.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Opt in doesn't work, it never did. The vast majority (>95%) of users does not understand what those pop-ups say, seems fundamentally incapable of reading them, and either always accepts, always rejects, or always clicks the more visually-appealing button. Try observing a family member who is not in tech and not in the professional managerial class, and ask them what pop-up they just dismissed and why. It's one of the…
[flagged]
The same way, most tech privacy consent is assumed, not explicit. Users dismiss popups because they want to use the app and don't care what you do with the data. Maybe later they will care, but not in the moment...
I don’t even use iCloud Photos and this was on by default. Very bad move by Apple to ship my photos off my device, without my permission, in any shape or form, I don’t care.
Your “photos” aren’t shipped off-device without your knowledge, just an arbitrary blob of ”metadata” that you can’t audit describing everything about that photo. :)
It’s sort of like “I don’t want my WiFi router uploading my house online!” And someone replying “it’s not your physical house, just a map of the house and the real time location of everyone in it! The house never moves!”
What I want is very simple: I want software that doesn't send anything to the Internet without some explicit intent first . All of that work to try to make this feature plausibly private is cool engineering work, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with implementing a feature like this, but it should absolutely be opt-in. Trust in software will continue to erode until software stops treating end users and their data…
Opt in doesn't work, it never did. The vast majority (>95%) of users does not understand what those pop-ups say, seems fundamentally incapable of reading them, and either always accepts, always rejects, or always clicks the more visually-appealing button. Try observing a family member who is not in tech and not in the professional managerial class, and ask them what pop-up they just dismissed and why. It's one of the…
If you do not want it (and that is >90% of people, who never asked for it, never requested it, but was forced upon them these 'enriched' lies and exposure to corporate greed).
Another setting that surprised me with being turned on by default apparently on macOS 15 is System Settings - Spotlight - "Help Apple Improve Search": "Help improve Search by allowing Apple to store your Safari, Siri, Spotlight, Lookup, and #images search queries. The information collected is stored in a way that does not identify you and is used to improve search results."
No, this is not on by default. After system install at first boot it asks if you want to help improve search and it describes how your data will be handled, anonymized, etc. If you clicked on yes it is on. There is a choice to opt out.
Both the search and photos settings were on for me in both iOS and MacOs. Completely unacceptable Apple
What I want is very simple: I want software that doesn't send anything to the Internet without some explicit intent first . All of that work to try to make this feature plausibly private is cool engineering work, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with implementing a feature like this, but it should absolutely be opt-in. Trust in software will continue to erode until software stops treating end users and their data…
Even more dialogs that most users will blindly tap "Allow" to will not fix the problem.
Society has collectively decided (spiritually) that it is ok signing over data access rights to third parties. Adding friction to this punishes 98% of people in service of the 2% who aren't going to use these services anyway.
Sure, a more educated populous might tip the scales. But it's not reality, and the best UX reflects reality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Customers can (optionally) submit crash logs via email or support portal. Apple iOS provides crash logs via the following navigation path: Privacy & Security Analytics Data AppName-date-time.ips Notice Apple's choice of top-level menu for crash logs?
And of course you've reported every single crash you've encountered via email or support portal? Normal people don't email support with crash logs, they just grumble about it to their coworkers and don't help fix the problem. You can't fix a problem you don't know about.
And yet we don't have home inspectors coming into our homes unannounced every week just to make sure everything is ok. Why is it that software engineers feel so entitled to do things that no other profession does?