3 ms·

Those who are interested in the nitty-gritty of keeping a semblance of privacy generally will not baulk at taking some hurdles to get there, nor do they expect

Those who are interested in the nitty-gritty of keeping a semblance of privacy generally will not baulk at taking some hurdles to get there, nor do they expect their devices to work exactly like those within the walled gardens. Now if there where a way to combine these two worlds - that of the 'it just works but it knows more about me than I do myself' and the 'it does exactly what I tell it do do, no more and no less' - it would be feasible to offer such a device to a larger section of the general public. A stripped-down Android distribution - sans Google-specific bits, with some replacements where needed - which does over the air updates just like devices on the other side of the wall would be a good start.

BoorishBears 9y ago
iOS lets you keep a semblance of privacy without hurdles. The walled garden even contributes to it's security. I think more people who have a passing interest in privacy would rather take a walled garden on some of the best hardware out there with a rather enjoyable, if not powerful, OS.
- Yetanfou 9y ago
  iOS only allows this if you consider your data to be private as long as it doesn't leave Apple (i.e. the garden). This does not mean your data can not be used for profiling purposes, it just means the profiling would be done wholly within the confines of Apple, Inc. If you trust Apple to not use this data for anything but your personal good you can feel safe and secure. If on the other hand you consider Apple to be an (extreme) example of a profit-driven company you'd do well to reconsider whether you want your personal data within their reach. While it is hard - and getting harder - to evade profiling it is still preferable to minimise the amount of personally identifiable data collected by commercial or governmental organisations. Using an Android device without Google-specific code can help here.
  - BoorishBears 9y ago
    For the majority of users I'd recommend trusting Apple. If you're in a class of user where Apple can't be trusted I don't recommend a smartphone. They can earn profit by being the privacy oriented alternative to Google's OS. I think the conversation has shifted from my main point. When the average user hears "Android" or says it, it's "Android + GPS". The GP said Android but seeing as the most common Android devices competing with the other two OSes they mentioned come with GPS I find it disingenuous to try and imply that it's not "Android proper" if it has GPS. If anything Android without GPS isn't "Android proper" in this context because of the amount of functionality it provides that people include when they compare those OSes

BoorishBears 9y ago

iOS lets you keep a semblance of privacy without hurdles. The walled garden even contributes to it's security. I think more people who have a passing interest in privacy would rather take a walled garden on some of the best hardware out there with a rather enjoyable, if not powerful, OS.

Yetanfou 9y ago
iOS only allows this if you consider your data to be private as long as it doesn't leave Apple (i.e. the garden). This does not mean your data can not be used for profiling purposes, it just means the profiling would be done wholly within the confines of Apple, Inc. If you trust Apple to not use this data for anything but your personal good you can feel safe and secure. If on the other hand you consider Apple to be an (extreme) example of a profit-driven company you'd do well to reconsider whether you want your personal data within their reach. While it is hard - and getting harder - to evade profiling it is still preferable to minimise the amount of personally identifiable data collected by commercial or governmental organisations. Using an Android device without Google-specific code can help here.
- BoorishBears 9y ago
  For the majority of users I'd recommend trusting Apple. If you're in a class of user where Apple can't be trusted I don't recommend a smartphone. They can earn profit by being the privacy oriented alternative to Google's OS. I think the conversation has shifted from my main point. When the average user hears "Android" or says it, it's "Android + GPS". The GP said Android but seeing as the most common Android devices competing with the other two OSes they mentioned come with GPS I find it disingenuous to try and imply that it's not "Android proper" if it has GPS. If anything Android without GPS isn't "Android proper" in this context because of the amount of functionality it provides that people include when they compare those OSes