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

Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

lapcatsoftware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

871–880 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#871

Post by thomascountz »

withinboredom wrote: post #756
andybak wrote: post #666

Users of my (free, open-source) app seem surprised to learn that we've got zero insight into usage patterns. There are situations where a small amount of anonymous telemetry would be extremely helpful but I'm not going to touch it with a barge-pole. Opt-in makes the data useless - not just in terms of the huge drop in quantity but because of the fact it introduces a huge bias in the data selected - the people that wo…

I can't remember where I saw this before. However, there was a site that collected analytics data client side in a circular buffer (or something), and there was a menu in the settings to send it back one-time or always, or download it yourself. If you experienced an error, they would pop up in a toast to share the analytics data with them so they could help fix the problem. You could, of course, decline. That was pro…

Maybe the Datadog Flare works like this?

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#872

Post by mhlakhani »

withinboredom wrote: post #756
andybak wrote: post #666

Users of my (free, open-source) app seem surprised to learn that we've got zero insight into usage patterns. There are situations where a small amount of anonymous telemetry would be extremely helpful but I'm not going to touch it with a barge-pole. Opt-in makes the data useless - not just in terms of the huge drop in quantity but because of the fact it introduces a huge bias in the data selected - the people that wo…

I can't remember where I saw this before. However, there was a site that collected analytics data client side in a circular buffer (or something), and there was a menu in the settings to send it back one-time or always, or download it yourself. If you experienced an error, they would pop up in a toast to share the analytics data with them so they could help fix the problem. You could, of course, decline. That was pro…

I built the same for my browser extension (effectively dead product) -- would love to see if this pattern has a name so I can share it more widely!

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#873

Post by dan-robertson »

JTyQZSnP3cQGa8B wrote: post #714
dan-robertson wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not enabling something by default is pretty close to not having it at all. Accessibility is a reasonable exception where it makes sense to have the features even though they are off by default. I mostly think the reaction to this article is overblown because it appeals popular ideas here about big tech. I think one should be wary of Apple’s claims about privacy: the reason is competition with Google and so they want…

> Not enabling something by default is pretty close to not having it at all And I care "why" exactly? It was turned on by default on my phone without my consent, it's a privacy violation, nothing else matters in that case.

In the comment you are replying to, I’m trying to explain some of the reasons for the world being the way it is. I’m not trying to convince you to be happy about it.

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#874

Post by pbhjpbhj »

hn3er1q wrote: post #868
jchw wrote: post #766

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, if my mindset were leading, we wouldn't have cookie consent banners because we would've just banned non-essential tracking altogether.

Now we just have to define what’s “essential” and how to identify it, across states, countries and jurisdictions. Should be easy. ;)

How about this:

'Nothing is essential until you prove it is' - apply to the cookie ombudsman for €1k to make your case for allowance.

You complete a detailed form including giving your company registration and the reason for use of each cookie. You list each company with access.

You pay into escrow €10 per user per company (eg 10 users, sending data to 1200 companies; 120000€) you wish to gather/keep data on, providing that users details and an annual fee.

Any non trivial infringement and you get DNS blocklisted, the escrow money is paid out, CEO of the registered company is fined one years income (max of last 4 years) and legal proceedings are started against the company and its executives.

On application to the cookie ombudsman I can see all companies who legally have access to my data (and via which gateway company), I can withdraw access, they can withdraw service.

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#875

Post by sweeter »

diggan wrote: post #643
mvkel wrote: post #629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This mindset is how we got those awful cookie banners. 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…

> This mindset is how we got those awful cookie banners. The only thing I've found awful is the mindset of the people implementing the banners. That you feel frustration over that every company has a cookie banner, is exactly the goal. The companies could decide that it isn't worth frustrating the user over something trivial like website analytics, as they could get that without having to show a cookie banner at all.…

People think in terms of what is inconveniencing them directly. Great examples are when consumers yell at low level workers when a company has horrible policies that run back to cost cutting...

or union workers strike against Imaginary Mail Service Corp. because they are being killed on the job, and people (consumers) get angry at the workers because their package wont show up on time (or the railways arent running, etc...) instead of getting mad at the company inflicting that damage on other people...

or when [imaginary country] puts sanctions on [other poorer country] the people of that country blame the government in power instead of the people directly inflicting harm on them.

I'm not sure why this is the case, but we have been conditioned to be resistant to the inconvenience and not the direct cause. Maybe its because the direct cause tends to be a faceless, nameless entity that directly benefits from not being the target of ire.

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#876

Post by sweeter »

necovek wrote: post #645
diggan wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This mindset is how we got those awful cookie banners. The only thing I've found awful is the mindset of the people implementing the banners. That you feel frustration over that every company has a cookie banner, is exactly the goal. The companies could decide that it isn't worth frustrating the user over something trivial like website analytics, as they could get that without having to show a cookie banner at all.…

Seconded: and we need to have worthy competitors spring up without those bad practices and lousy cookie banners, and people to flock to them. Once that happens, the "originals" will feel the pressure.

one must ask themselves, "why?", this never happens lol.

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#877

Post by catgirlinspace »

withinboredom wrote: post #756
andybak wrote: post #666

Users of my (free, open-source) app seem surprised to learn that we've got zero insight into usage patterns. There are situations where a small amount of anonymous telemetry would be extremely helpful but I'm not going to touch it with a barge-pole. Opt-in makes the data useless - not just in terms of the huge drop in quantity but because of the fact it introduces a huge bias in the data selected - the people that wo…

I can't remember where I saw this before. However, there was a site that collected analytics data client side in a circular buffer (or something), and there was a menu in the settings to send it back one-time or always, or download it yourself. If you experienced an error, they would pop up in a toast to share the analytics data with them so they could help fix the problem. You could, of course, decline. That was pro…

maybe it was offen? i remember seeing it a while ago but i don’t know of any sites using it. https://www.offen.dev/

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#879

Post by HumblyTossed »

jchw wrote: post #292

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…

I want a hardware mic switch. We are an iHouse with one exception and that's a SheildTV that is currently out of order because I want to reset it and haven't found time in, oh..., weeks. Anyway, out of the blue one of the kids asked about Turkish delights and wonders where the name came from. SO and I facepalm then explain. Not an hour later she gets something in her Facebook feed: 15 interesting facts about Turkey.

This is just too much of a coincidence. I know, I know, this "... isn't Apple's fault" blah blah. Bullshit it's not. They can't have it both ways where they say their app store process is great and then they allow this shit.

Re: Apple Photos phones home on iOS 18 and macOS 15

#880

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

jchw wrote: post #292

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…

"What I want is very simple: I want software that doesn't send anything to the Internet without some explicit intent first."

It exists. I use such software everyday. For example, I am submitting this comment using a text-only browser that does not auto-load resources.

But this type of smaller, simpler software is not popular.

For example, everyone commenting in this thread is likely using a browser that auto-loads resources to submit their comments. HN is more or less a text-only website and this "feature" is not technically necessary for submitting comments. All so-called "modern" web browsers send requests to the internet without explicit intent first. IN addition to auto-loading resources, these browsers automatically run Javascript which often sends further requests never intended by the web user.

Brand new Apple computers now send packets to the internet as soon as the owner plugs them in for the first time. This may enable tracking and/or data collection. Apple proponents would likely argue "convenience" is the goal. This might be true. But the goal is not the issue. The issue is how much the computer owner is allowed to control the computer they buy. Some owners might prefer that the computer should not automatically send packets to remote Apple servers. Often it is not even possible to disable this behaviour. Computer purchasers never asked for these "convenenience" features. Like the subject of this submission, Apple Photos, these are Apple's decisions. The computer owner is not allowed to make decisions about whether to enable or disable "convenience" features.

As the court acknowledged in its opinion in US v Google, default settings are significant. In this case, it is more than a default setting. It is something the owner cannot change.

Post reply on HN