4 ms·

Ultimately I believe Tim Cook is a good human who really does want what he says and leave the world in a better place than what they found it. He routinely does

by mythz 9y ago

Ultimately I believe Tim Cook is a good human who really does want what he says and leave the world in a better place than what they found it. He routinely does things he thinks is the right thing to do, which is often contra to what Wall Street wants and that of a purely for-profit enterprise, e.g: > He said that there are many things Apple does because they are right and just, and that a return on investment (ROI) was not the primary consideration on such issues. > "When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind," he said, "I don't consider the bloody ROI." He said that the same thing about environmental issues, worker safety, and other areas where Apple is a leader. > "If you want me to do things only for ROI reasons, you should get out of this stock." - https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/03/at-apple-shareholders-meeting-tim-cook-tells-off-climate-change-deniers/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/03/at-apple-shareholder... Under Cook Apple's approach to privacy has never wavered, they've always been staunchly pro-privacy even when it was unpopular to do so during the FBI terrorist attack. So I don't think their stance on privacy is a marketing strategy, IMO he really believes we all have a fundamental right to privacy and that they're doing everything in their powers to ensure their customers get it.

cinquemb 9y ago
Yeah… seems like we've gone from bunker mode to full court press in 2 years… lol I don't think this will be enough to drum up demand… just ask apple's suppliers… "Apple had asked the F.B.I. to issue its application for the tool under seal. But the government made it public, prompting Mr. Cook to go into bunker mode to draft a response, according to people privy to the discussions, who spoke on condition of anonymity."[0][1] Besides, why pay so much for the latest and greatest surveillance tech when its so cheap now for threat actors to exploit what's already out there? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11133909 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11133909 [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/19/technology/how-tim-cook-became-a-bulwark-for-digital-privacy.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/19/technology/how-tim-cook-be...
- mythz 9y ago
  So the FBI waited for the perfect case to make a public spectacle in order to manipulate public opinion and set a precedent in order to increase their powers and I'm supposed to believe an anonymous source "privy to the discussions" who can read Cook's mind doing backflips on his stance to privacy? Where has Cook's stance ever been anything but pro-privacy?
  - cinquemb 9y ago
    FBI has Apple on record asking to offer privacy subversive tool of their own hardware under seal, regardless of any signaling pro/against privacy… Corps like Apple submit to governmental whims all around the world to make a buck, irrespective of any of our moral stances on such countries policies, to the dismay of the idealist (I suppose those of which that aren't in awe of the Kabuki performance). If a puff piece is enough for you and others to buy phone for ~$1k, so be it… not like I think i will have any weight to changing whats forming[0]… who knows, maybe they can land a huge DOD contract? [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-25/iphone-disappointment-hammers-suppliers-fuels-taiwan-outflows https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-25/iphone-di...
    - mythz 9y ago
      > who knows, maybe they can land a huge DOD contract? If you think Apple is willing to screw over Consumers to chase large Enterprise or DoD contracts you have absolutely no idea about Apple.
      - cinquemb 9y ago
        > If you think Apple is willing to screw over Consumers to chase large Enterprise or DoD contracts you have absolutely no idea about Apple. Are we assuming most customers are even aware/care of this stuff? Yeah… I think it might be more fitting to appropriate Stallman's "useds"…
  - aesh2Xa1 9y ago
    Was it not a major case to set precedent? It would need to be public.
hesarenu 9y ago
"He routinely does things he thinks is the right thing to do, which is often contra to what Wall Street wants and that of a purely for-profit enterprise" And yet Apple is asking for more Tax breaks in India. http://fortune.com/2017/08/01/apple-tax-break-india/ http://fortune.com/2017/08/01/apple-tax-break-india/ It seems more marketing rather then good will.
confounded 9y ago
> Ultimately I believe Tim Cook is a good human who really does want what he says and leave the world in a better place than what they found it. What does a 'good human' mean in your context? I'm not sure if the people that make Apple products would be convinced (suicide nets, plant explosions, high cancer and infertility rates) or the people mining minerals for chips. The conditions of all of these people are directly within Mr. Cook's influence. Of course, it's possible to argue over a La Croix that the real social good is making lots of new iPhones every year, which give more important people more important power. And you can make similar arguments about his vast international tax avoidance, keeping money from healthcare, education, housing, etc. Does "good person" simply mean "their self-interest appears to be aligned with my own, and I assume yours"? > IMO he really believes we all have a fundamental right to privacy and that they're doing everything in their powers to ensure their customers get it. Everything in his powers? Then why a 50% margin? Why is his only lobbying interest in Washington lowering his tax bill? I agree with the majority of posters on this thread, that privacy is a highly marketable feature, especially to older wealthy Americans. Cook is in the business of collecting the premium placed on privacy. He is doing everything in his power to collect that premium. If he was doing everything in his powers to further privacy, he could use Apple's considerable cash and lobbying muscle to push for legislation. But, products wouldn't be aspirational if people in general could have them!
- sjwright 9y ago
  > Cook is in the business of collecting the premium placed on privacy. A cynical view, but for the sake of argument let's assume that's correct. Okay, so where are all the marketplace competitors vying for that premium? Has Apple got a monopoly on privacy?
- sjwright 9y ago
  > I'm not sure if the people that make Apple products would be convinced (suicide nets, plant explosions, high cancer and infertility rates) or the people mining minerals for chips. Foxconn and its competitors manufacture for many companies, not just Apple. Why doesn't anyone raise these concerns when we discuss the Xbox and PS4? Or any of the countless other tier-one products manufactured by Foxconn? Have you ever raised these concerns about Samsung products and their responsibility towards the miners of rare earth minerals? (And let's not forget that a Foxconn worker has always been statistically less likely to commit suicide than an American citizen.)
pgeorgi 9y ago
> I believe Tim Cook is a good human who really does want what he says and leave the world in a better place than what they found it. I believe that all those CEOs want to leave the world in a better place than what they found it. Even Larry Ellison, although his metric for "a better place" might look a bit weird for anybody not Larry Ellison. >> "When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind," he said, "I don't consider the bloody ROI." Accessibility is a matter of being able to sell devices into the public sector, something that Apple is quite interested in (eg public schools). That's directly ROI driven, and the quality of new apps working with VoiceOver makes their engagement with accessibility sometimes feel like a checkbox item: it takes a while of updating until new first-party apps are usable, and sometimes they degrade in favor of the latest fluffy UI redesign. > they've always been staunchly pro-privacy even when it was unpopular to do so during the FBI terrorist attack They did what ever other company does: Give them the data they had (the most recent, yet still too old, iCloud backup) and push back on any extra work, both because it's work and because it creates precedent. The main thing unusual in that case was that FBI and Apple discussed these matters through the media.

by mythz 9y ago

cinquemb 9y ago

Yeah… seems like we've gone from bunker mode to full court press in 2 years… lol I don't think this will be enough to drum up demand… just ask apple's suppliers… "Apple had asked the F.B.I. to issue its application for the tool under seal. But the government made it public, prompting Mr. Cook to go into bunker mode to draft a response, according to people privy to the discussions, who spoke on condition of anonymity."[0][1] Besides, why pay so much for the latest and greatest surveillance tech when its so cheap now for threat actors to exploit what's already out there? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11133909 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11133909 [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/19/technology/how-tim-cook-became-a-bulwark-for-digital-privacy.html http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/19/technology/how-tim-cook-be...

mythz 9y ago
So the FBI waited for the perfect case to make a public spectacle in order to manipulate public opinion and set a precedent in order to increase their powers and I'm supposed to believe an anonymous source "privy to the discussions" who can read Cook's mind doing backflips on his stance to privacy? Where has Cook's stance ever been anything but pro-privacy?
- cinquemb 9y ago
  FBI has Apple on record asking to offer privacy subversive tool of their own hardware under seal, regardless of any signaling pro/against privacy… Corps like Apple submit to governmental whims all around the world to make a buck, irrespective of any of our moral stances on such countries policies, to the dismay of the idealist (I suppose those of which that aren't in awe of the Kabuki performance). If a puff piece is enough for you and others to buy phone for ~$1k, so be it… not like I think i will have any weight to changing whats forming[0]… who knows, maybe they can land a huge DOD contract? [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-25/iphone-disappointment-hammers-suppliers-fuels-taiwan-outflows https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-25/iphone-di...
  - mythz 9y ago
    > who knows, maybe they can land a huge DOD contract? If you think Apple is willing to screw over Consumers to chase large Enterprise or DoD contracts you have absolutely no idea about Apple.
    - cinquemb 9y ago
      > If you think Apple is willing to screw over Consumers to chase large Enterprise or DoD contracts you have absolutely no idea about Apple. Are we assuming most customers are even aware/care of this stuff? Yeah… I think it might be more fitting to appropriate Stallman's "useds"…
- aesh2Xa1 9y ago
  Was it not a major case to set precedent? It would need to be public.

hesarenu 9y ago

"He routinely does things he thinks is the right thing to do, which is often contra to what Wall Street wants and that of a purely for-profit enterprise" And yet Apple is asking for more Tax breaks in India. http://fortune.com/2017/08/01/apple-tax-break-india/ http://fortune.com/2017/08/01/apple-tax-break-india/ It seems more marketing rather then good will.

confounded 9y ago

> Ultimately I believe Tim Cook is a good human who really does want what he says and leave the world in a better place than what they found it. What does a 'good human' mean in your context? I'm not sure if the people that make Apple products would be convinced (suicide nets, plant explosions, high cancer and infertility rates) or the people mining minerals for chips. The conditions of all of these people are directly within Mr. Cook's influence. Of course, it's possible to argue over a La Croix that the real social good is making lots of new iPhones every year, which give more important people more important power. And you can make similar arguments about his vast international tax avoidance, keeping money from healthcare, education, housing, etc. Does "good person" simply mean "their self-interest appears to be aligned with my own, and I assume yours"? > IMO he really believes we all have a fundamental right to privacy and that they're doing everything in their powers to ensure their customers get it. Everything in his powers? Then why a 50% margin? Why is his only lobbying interest in Washington lowering his tax bill? I agree with the majority of posters on this thread, that privacy is a highly marketable feature, especially to older wealthy Americans. Cook is in the business of collecting the premium placed on privacy. He is doing everything in his power to collect that premium. If he was doing everything in his powers to further privacy, he could use Apple's considerable cash and lobbying muscle to push for legislation. But, products wouldn't be aspirational if people in general could have them!

sjwright 9y ago
> Cook is in the business of collecting the premium placed on privacy. A cynical view, but for the sake of argument let's assume that's correct. Okay, so where are all the marketplace competitors vying for that premium? Has Apple got a monopoly on privacy?
sjwright 9y ago
> I'm not sure if the people that make Apple products would be convinced (suicide nets, plant explosions, high cancer and infertility rates) or the people mining minerals for chips. Foxconn and its competitors manufacture for many companies, not just Apple. Why doesn't anyone raise these concerns when we discuss the Xbox and PS4? Or any of the countless other tier-one products manufactured by Foxconn? Have you ever raised these concerns about Samsung products and their responsibility towards the miners of rare earth minerals? (And let's not forget that a Foxconn worker has always been statistically less likely to commit suicide than an American citizen.)

pgeorgi 9y ago

> I believe Tim Cook is a good human who really does want what he says and leave the world in a better place than what they found it. I believe that all those CEOs want to leave the world in a better place than what they found it. Even Larry Ellison, although his metric for "a better place" might look a bit weird for anybody not Larry Ellison. >> "When we work on making our devices accessible by the blind," he said, "I don't consider the bloody ROI." Accessibility is a matter of being able to sell devices into the public sector, something that Apple is quite interested in (eg public schools). That's directly ROI driven, and the quality of new apps working with VoiceOver makes their engagement with accessibility sometimes feel like a checkbox item: it takes a while of updating until new first-party apps are usable, and sometimes they degrade in favor of the latest fluffy UI redesign. > they've always been staunchly pro-privacy even when it was unpopular to do so during the FBI terrorist attack They did what ever other company does: Give them the data they had (the most recent, yet still too old, iCloud backup) and push back on any extra work, both because it's work and because it creates precedent. The main thing unusual in that case was that FBI and Apple discussed these matters through the media.