Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're not trying to be clever, they're trying to point out the very important philisophy of maximizing self reliance that so many people like you eschew. How do you distinguish between a company who 'has built protecting privacy into their core value proposition' and one who just says they've done so? What are you going to do if a major privacy scandal comes out with Apple at the center? If you wouldn't jump ship f…
I'm taking aim at the Google bros who try to raise these arguments to muddy the waters into a sort of false equivalence between Apple and Google. If you're already using a dumb phone and eschewing modern software services, then I'm not really talking to you. Roll on brother/sister, you are living your ideals. > How do you distinguish between a company who 'has built protecting privacy into their core value propositio…
If you really perceive this as a binary choice, I have no idea how you could conclude that iOS is more secure than the Android Open Source Project.
...of course, it's not just a choice between a Google-spyware phone or an Apple-spyware phone. Many people like to reduce it to that so they can rationalize whichever company they pick, but in reality you have many choices including no smartphone at all. On Android's side, the Open Source images have enabled rigorous cross-referencing in OS capability, as well as forks that reduce the already-limited attack surface. Apple has a long track-record of letting zero-days fester in their inbox and failing to communicate promptly to security researchers, even for actively-exploited vulnerabilities.
It's not a "false equivalency" to highlight how Google, Apple and Microsoft all fold over like wet paper when the intelligence agencies come around. It's not a coincidence, either; all of those companies are enrolled in the NSA's domestic warrantless surveillance program.