Comment by doctorpangloss
1 month ago
You’re right. But: Anyone in IT or tech, thinking deeply about the raw facts. They know it always boils down to trust, not technology.
The interesting thing is that Apple has created a cathedral of seemingly objective sexy technical details that feel like security. But since it’s all trust, feelings matter!
So my answer is, if it feels like a privacy violation, it is. Your technical comparison will be more persuasive if you presented it in Computer Modern in a white paper, or if you are an important Substack author or reply guy, or maybe take a cue from the shawarma guy on Valencia Street and do a hunger strike while comparing two ways to get location info.
Apple chose to implement things like OHTTP and homomorphic encryption when they could easily have done without it. Doesn't that count for something?
Nope. It's still taking the user's data away without informing them, and saying trust us we super good encrypted it.
Apple is building a location database, for free, from user's photos and saying it's anonymized.
It's not a service I want, nor one I authorize. Nor are my photos licensed to Apple to get that information from me.
Encryption is only good relative to computational power to break it available to the many, or the few.
Computational power usually seems always available in 10-20-30 years to generally break encryption for the average person, as unimaginably hard it seems in the present. I don't have interest in taking any technical bait from the conversation at hand. Determined groups with resources could find ways.. This results in no security or encryption.
> Apple is building a location database, for free, from user's photos and saying it's anonymized.
Where on earth did you get that from? The photos app is sending an 8bit embedding for its lookup query, how are they going to build a location database from that?
Even if they were sending entire photos, how do you imagine someone builds a location database from that? You still need something to figure out what the image is, and if you already have that, why would you need to build it again?
> Encryption is only good relative to computational power to break it available to the many, or the few. > Determined groups with resources could find ways.. This results in no security or encryption.
Tell me, do you sell tin foil hats as a side hustle or something? If this is your view on encryption why are you worried about a silly photos app figuring out what landmarks are in your photos. You basically believe that it’s impossible for digital privacy of any variety is effectively impossible, and that you also believe this is a meaningful threat to “normal” people. The only way to meet your criteria for safe privacy is to ensue all forms of digital communication (which would include Hacker News FYI). So either you’re knowingly making disingenuous hyperbolic arguments, you’re a complete hypocrite, or you like to live “dangerously”.
> So my answer is, if it feels like a privacy violation, it is. Your technical comparison will be more persuasive if you presented it in Computer Modern in a white paper, or if you are an important Substack author or reply guy, or maybe take a cue from the shawarma guy on Valencia Street and do a hunger strike while comparing two ways to get location info.
They’re broadly similar services, both provided by the same entity. Either you trust that entity or you don’t. You can’t simultaneously be happy with an older, less private feature, that can’t be disabled. While simultaneously criticising the same entity for creating a new feature (that carries all the same privacy risks) that’s technically more private, and can be completely disabled.
> The interesting thing is that Apple has created a cathedral of seemingly objective sexy technical details that feel like security. But since it’s all trust, feelings matter!
This is utterly irrelevant, you’re basically making my point for me. As above, either you do or do not trust Apple to provide these services. The implementation is kinda irrelevant. I’m simply asking people to be a little more introspective, and take a little more time to consider their position, before they start yelling from the rooftops that this new feature represents some great privacy deception.