3 ms·

Authored by a law professor. It is Apple who pioneered this concept of the device that the user really does not own or control - the "smartphone". The compute

Authored by a law professor. It is Apple who pioneered this concept of the device that the user really does not own or control - the "smartphone". The computer that remains tethered to the manfacturer continually feeding back user data. Manufacturer makes replacing the OS difficult. Manufacturer gets root. Manufacturer gets right to modify OS remotely. And no surprise, manuacturer gets plenty of data about users. Manufacturer did not ask for these privileges. They just took them. It was not always this way. But users accepted it. And so other companies followed Apple's lead. I find the company's official statements about how they protect privacy to be offensive to common sense. Want to protect privacy? Stop forcibly collecting any and all data. (Not just "less than so-and-so".) If users really believe that sending data to Apple will help Apple create the "best experience" then let them opt-in to collection and send it voluntarily. The users own the device. If they wish untether from Apple's "ecosystem", then that is their right. There exists at least one user who does not want a company to collect their data, put it on a networked computer and then purport to "protect" it. They want the company to stop collecting their data. Why? Because they have weighed the risks and decided it is not worth it. IMO the "smartphone" is part of the IoT and was the first "thing". Because it was a thing where software was used to take away some of the control from the owner (control that owners had previously); owners only get partial control. Going forward, if one is opposed to internet connected things one does not fully control, the solution is not to select the things that collect the least data or that offer the most control. ("I trust Company X because they collect less data than the other companies.") The solution is to choose things that are not internet connected.

zimzam 9y ago
Apple collects very little user data. Developers have complained about the limits Apple puts on collecting data and Apple News partners have been quite frustrated. Even the people who originally developed Siri were frustrated by not having access to more user data. There are plenty of companies like Facebook and Google that have no regard for user privacy but I wouldn't include Apple in that bucket.
jodrellblank 9y ago
it is Apple who has pioneered this concept of the device the user really does not own or control - the "smartphone". Users controlled the Super-NES? Users controlled the Sony Playstation? Users controlled Blackberries with their perma-connection back to RIM servers? Symbian S60 users got a choice of the OS? Internet connections come with choices of user-controlled routers? Early internet connections with AOL-Compuserve-software was user-controlled and didn't talk back to one company? Devices where the user has any control at all are the rarity of device makes/models/types, even if they are a majority of sales due to the PC-compatible hardware.
wepple 9y ago
> The solution is to choose things that are not internet connected. A few ultra privacy-conscious people will do this, but they'll be statistically irrelevant. I believe the more likely answer we'll see is whistleblowers. Either internal employees of tech firms or hackers. It's a lot of fun to tear down IoT devices and RE firmware. It's getting harder to get any type of reasonable coverage across the plethora of devices available, but every tech firm knows if they're up to shifty things, it's going to end up as a twitter storm at some point in the future.
ntao8934nt 9y ago
> It is Apple who pioneered this concept of the device that the user really does not own or control - the "smartphone". Oh bullshit! Microsoft and other companies shipped user-hostile EULAs for years before smartphones existed (let alone the iPhone). These shrink-wrap licenses used this concept for years, and there were probably others before them.

zimzam 9y ago

Apple collects very little user data. Developers have complained about the limits Apple puts on collecting data and Apple News partners have been quite frustrated. Even the people who originally developed Siri were frustrated by not having access to more user data. There are plenty of companies like Facebook and Google that have no regard for user privacy but I wouldn't include Apple in that bucket.

jodrellblank 9y ago

it is Apple who has pioneered this concept of the device the user really does not own or control - the "smartphone". Users controlled the Super-NES? Users controlled the Sony Playstation? Users controlled Blackberries with their perma-connection back to RIM servers? Symbian S60 users got a choice of the OS? Internet connections come with choices of user-controlled routers? Early internet connections with AOL-Compuserve-software was user-controlled and didn't talk back to one company? Devices where the user has any control at all are the rarity of device makes/models/types, even if they are a majority of sales due to the PC-compatible hardware.

wepple 9y ago

> The solution is to choose things that are not internet connected. A few ultra privacy-conscious people will do this, but they'll be statistically irrelevant. I believe the more likely answer we'll see is whistleblowers. Either internal employees of tech firms or hackers. It's a lot of fun to tear down IoT devices and RE firmware. It's getting harder to get any type of reasonable coverage across the plethora of devices available, but every tech firm knows if they're up to shifty things, it's going to end up as a twitter storm at some point in the future.

ntao8934nt 9y ago

> It is Apple who pioneered this concept of the device that the user really does not own or control - the "smartphone". Oh bullshit! Microsoft and other companies shipped user-hostile EULAs for years before smartphones existed (let alone the iPhone). These shrink-wrap licenses used this concept for years, and there were probably others before them.