Comment by anonuser123456
4 years ago
The concept of ownership you are asserting is but one of many historical principles of ownership. There are however, other concepts of ownership that conflict with what you are asserting.
https://www.econtalk.org/michael-heller-and-james-salzman-on...
I don't think there is a good faith argument that Apple is invading or controlling anything of you own. All that's happening is you agree to run the algorithm in exchange for using iCloud photos. That's just a contract; a mutual, voluntary exchange.
Contract implies meeting of the minds. I'd like to see the process by which I can line out or alter the terms of the agreement please.
I'll wait.
This is the other thing "digital natives" don't get, nor want to. Negotiation is normal. Ya know something else tgey don't get? Selling something with the damn manual, and enough system documentation to actually be able to sit down and learn something. Drives me nuts.
Of course they won't let you alter the terms of the agreement, but everyone always has the option (barring some sort of malicious state-enforced intervention) to walk away and divest themselves away from platforms and ecosystems that don't respect their privacy or otherwise act in ways they do not agree with. Or at least if it's going to take a long time to get there, one ought to start thinking about how to go about ensuring that escape hatch is available if their entire life's data depends on someone else continuing to provide them access to their "cloud" services based on potentially arbitrary rules and changing conditions they may never know about or be able to audit for themselves.
If there were enough people out there to stand up and make a difference by going somewhere else and hitting these companies where it hurts (stop giving them money and personal data to mine), then maybe it would start to make a difference.
I agree with the premise of what the parent is saying. How is it legal that you can enter into a contract that gives Apple a perpetual right to your private (Or your company’s) data, without clearly requiring you to consent, with a witness or notary, in plain and understandable terms at the point of purchase?
If your data is located in a cloud you might make the argument that Apple is the owner of the system. But if Apple is truly accessing data from your personal device or “server” without explicit authorization, it violates a whole host of computer crime laws.
2 replies →
Among the "historical principles of ownership" are those from the communist countries, where the individual humans had the legal right to own only things belonging to a very short list and nothing else.
However, USA has claimed during decades that such restrictions of the rights of ownership are an abomination.
Even if we would accept that this is just a modification of a contract between the "owner" of a device and Apple, if Apple would have acted in good faith, they should have offered that if you do not agree to let Apple run programs on your own device for their benefit, which was never mentioned when you "bought" the device, then Apple should fully refund everything that you paid for your device and other Apple services, so that you will be able to get an alternative device.
As it is now, you either accept that Apple changes their "contract" at any time as they like, or you incur a serious financial loss if you do not accept and you want an alternative.
This certainly isn't a "mutual, voluntary exchange".
the problem is that the companies make ilegal alternatives, obfuscated legals terms, and put himself in the least resistant position, and force you to opt in.