Comment by sgammon

Consumers seem to think well of their pro-privacy standpoints, even if the devil is in the details with regards to how effective it might be.

The people giving “poor reports” are often the hardcore tech users (or LARPers) who grew up in a different era and mindset and are slowly being shoved out.

How did they do it? The idea for homomorphic encryption has been around a long time, but as far as I am aware the time+space requirements have found to be tremendous, thus rendering any serious implementation of it impractible.

If they managed to do it, they should open-source the code. If they made a research breakthrough, they should publish. Doing either of those things would give me the peace of mind that I need.

> It is frankly nothing short of amazing that Apple ships things like homomorphic encryption, and differential privacy, and client-side vectorization, and encrypted vectors, at the scale that they inhabit... and they still get a bad report card back from consumers about privacy.

Personally, I don't shy away from criticizing Google, but that's not the point. Apple makes big claims about their privacy practices that neither Google nor Microsoft make, it would be bizarre to hold Google or Microsoft to claims and standards that Apple set for themselves.

> Comparing Apple and Google, or Apple and Microsoft, it seems to me that Apple's track record on these issues is actually not as bad as public opinion might suggest. Meta doesn't even make the list for comparison, and neither does Amazon.

> It makes me wonder if picking privacy as a strategy is workable in the first place. People trust TLS; people use banking apps on their phone now without thinking. I remember in 2008 or so when people still didn't quite trust SSL.

> I'm not sure if Apple will be able to bridge the gap here, though, if _all_ of their competition simply chooses not to ship those features. Do customers know the difference? Do they... care? In theory they want their data to be private, yes. But if they are not willing to educate themselves to perform their counterparty obligation in fulfilling "informed consent," there may be no action Apple could take to avoid catching the same bad rap everyone else does.

I've said this elsewhere, but what I really dislike about Apple's strategy regarding privacy is that they treat privacy as a purely technological problem that could be solved if only we had better technology, but they ignore that a huge component of why users have been subjected to so many flagrant privacy violations is because they have zero visibility and zero real control over their computing experiences. Apple would very much like to retain their iron grip on what users are allowed to do on their platforms, as they make a ton of money off of their control of the platforms in various ways, so they have a huge incentive to make sure we're all arguing about whether or not Apple is better or worse than Google or Microsoft. Because sure, I do believe that if we held Google to the same privacy standards that Apple currently has, it would probably kill Google. However, if Apple and Google were both forced to give more transparency and control to the users somehow, they'd both be in a lot of trouble.

Despite all of this effort, I think that user trust in the privacy of cloud computing and pushing data out to the internet will only ever go down, because attacks against user privacy and security will only ever continue to get more and more sophisticated as long as there are resourceful people who have a reason to perform said attacks. And there certainly always will be those resourceful people, including in many cases our own governments, unfortunately.