Comment by ants_everywhere
2 years ago
This quote is pretty consistent with my take on what Apple has been up to:
> In the end , Apple deploys privacy and security justifications as an elastic shield that can stretch or contract to serve Apple's financial and business interests .
In the EU / app store ballyhoo, privacy / security has been used too often.
But in general, Apple has relentlessly set standards for data privacy that no other business seemed willing or able to provide. Far from perfect, (CN datacenters) but still seemingly far out ahead.
People don't normally pay for privacy or data security because they're not considered valuable until something bad happens.
So I can at least understand why the company might lean on this loss-leader to try and prop up its position in the face of unwanted regulation.
> Apple has relentlessly set standards for data privacy that no other business seemed willing or able to provide
One of the big differences between Google and Apple is that users treat Google (IMO rightly) as a privacy threat, but treat Apple as a privacy ally. Apple's data privacy positions look a lot different if you treat them also as a privacy threat. For example, it becomes really odd that you can't set a non-Apple secure messaging app as your SMS app, or set a non-Apple browser as your default web browser. Apple insists that you share your browsing and messaging data with them.
What's the risk here? The risk is that, as has happened with nearly every darling tech company in history, Apple decides to end the honeymoon period at some point because that's what the market demands. Then you're in a position where you've handed over to Apple gobs of private data that they have unencrypted backups of.
Apple is in the process of getting into the ad business. Why not sell privacy and personal data at the same time? They are in a perfect position to sell ad attribution.
https://pluralistic.net/2022/11/14/luxury-surveillance/
> Then you're in a position where you've handed over to Apple gobs of private data that they have unencrypted backups of.
https://support.apple.com/en-us/102651
> Then you're in a position where you've handed over to Apple gobs of private data that they have unencrypted backups of.
What are you even talking about? You can E2EE all your information in iCloud, even your iOS backups, such that Apple cannot access them.
1 reply →
> But in general, Apple has relentlessly set standards for data privacy that no other business seemed willing or able to provide.
I find this hard to believe nowerdays given what I read 3 months ago regarding law enforcement and push notification data. Google had set the standard higher in this situation.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/apple-now-requires-judges...
The standards Apple set are for others, not for itself; Apple is all too happy to extract as much data as possible from its customers to build its own ad empire while limiting others'. I'd prefer a level playing field where I can control how much data Apple and others can extract from me ("none").
Also, the whole "security" bs is exactly the same thing as governments saying we're doing this to protect you citizens from pedophiles / terrorists / druglords.
The securtiy aspects are a big deal and I say this as someone who is not bothered at all by ad tracking and cookies and the like. But I and a lot of people have banking and crypto stuff on the phone and not having people able to hack in and steal your money is significant.
Truer words never been said
They are a company who’s out to make money and not a non profit, no?
Do you think? Is it in their financial and business interest to differentiate their product and keep working at it? I wonder if that’s expensive
The sarcasm isn't really necessary. I think most of us would prefer to live in a world where the capitalist mentality didn't trump all other considerations. It's actually possible for a company like Apple to be laser-focused on privacy and giving their users the best possible options, and still make a more-than-healthy profit margin.
Hell, with Apple's cash hoard, they could afford to give iPhones away for at least a couple years without much trouble. I'm not saying companies should be obligated to do crazy things like this once they have "enough" money, but I think it illustrates that there's no inherent reason why many companies need to take any particular action that increases revenue, regardless of the consequences.
Apple's long-standing culture of secrecy and exclusivity is the problem, really.
Doesn't seem that expensive considering their profit margins.
The point of the quote was not that it's in their interest to differentiate. The point was that, according to the complaint and for reasons they lay out, their marketing is dishonest and they frequently put their users at increased risk when it's to their financial to do so.
In other words, they're saying Apple's privacy and security stance is a bit like the trope of politicians saying "think of the children!" whenever they are selling a law that restricts liberty.