13 ms·

Apple provides a black box with iOS, they have full control. Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative. A more sensibl

Apple provides a black box with iOS, they have full control. Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative. A more sensible way of dealing wirh the issue would be to use an open source Android version like AOSP or LineageOS, not run proprietary gapps, and replace its functionality with F-Droid, MicroG and Yalp-store. Your location will stay out of Apple's/Google's hands and you can still enjoy all convenience of a smartphone. Keeping your freedom in your own hands.

wyager 9y ago
> Apple provides a black box with iOS And google does it with Google Play Services. All we have to go on is the historical record of the manufacturer, and apple’s is vastly better. Obviously a high-quality open-source smartphone would be preferable, but I’m not aware of such a thing (Although I’m hopeful that purism’s phone will be good).
chappi42 9y ago
Agree. Another sensible way (if you are prepared to 'phone' a bit more frugal) is a Sony Xperia X with Sailfish. (But check together first.)
JonFish85 9y ago
"Apple provides a black box with iOS, they have full control. Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative." This is true, but it's also potentially worthwhile to consider that Apple has positioned themselves as a hardware company (i.e. the majority of their money is based on selling units of hardware), whereas their main competitor here (Google) is an ad company (i.e. the majority of their money comes from selling their users' data). Apple has chosen to highlight their commitment to privacy partially because they feel it helps their market position, whereas for Google, it would hurt it. Certainly it doesn't mean that Apple is infallible, just that I think it makes it easier to accept that Apple is more likely to protect privacy more than Google. I'm pretty biased towards Apple, so obviously this may not work for everyone; if you need source code to feel secure, then by all means, go for it. For people who are looking for less work but some of the benefits, I think that Apple is a decent way to go.
- growse 9y ago
  > This is true, but it's also potentially worthwhile to consider that Apple has positioned themselves as a hardware company (i.e. the majority of their money is based on selling units of hardware), whereas their main competitor here (Google) is an ad company (i.e. the majority of their money comes from selling their users' data). Apple has chosen to highlight their commitment to privacy partially because they feel it helps their market position, whereas for Google, it would hurt it. But this is all just marketing, whereas the reality is that Apple could also be hoovering up location data and you may never know. You may have good reasons to trust Apple more than Google, which is great. Others may reverse that position of trust (perhaps they had their iCloud account hacked into and photographs leaked on the internet).
  - horsecaptin 9y ago
    "But this is all just marketing, whereas the reality is that Apple could also be hoovering up location data and you may never know." It isn't just marketing. This is how the alignment of incentives works. A company's incentives are aligned with the people who pay them. Apple's are aligned with those that buy phones. Google and Facebook's are aligned with those that buy ads.
    - slaman 9y ago
      The parent argument is that without transparency it's difficult to actually know. Apple's true incentive is to provide value for their shareholders. If they can improve the value provided to shareholders by hoovering up information while also maintaining consumer confidence and sales then why would they not? I think that Apple's incentives are better aligned with my desires for privacy, but it's only an assumption.
      - rayiner 9y ago
        It would be a ballsy play of limited utility. For one, you're talking about Apple risking epic legal liability if they got caught. For the other, they'd be doing so for limited upside. They can only sell ads on the premise that they don't have all this inside information on their users.
eridius 9y ago
> Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative. Apple has demonstrated time and time again their commitment to privacy and to protecting user data. Apple does not see user data as something to be hoarded. They see user data as a liability and work very hard to collect as little as possible in order to provide the services they do. The idea that Apple is going to discard all of this and add privacy intrusion into iOS, doing a completely 180° on their business model and discarding all of their corporate principles, is extremely unlikely.
- whyagaindavid 9y ago
  Can you post a link to close my appleID? Yes, you can close a Google/ Microsoft account with few clicks
  - bjelkeman-again 9y ago
    It should be available, at least in the EU, by May, if it isn’t already. I think it is a requirement of GDPR.
    - ATsch 9y ago
      Similar measures have been implemented in a number of european countries for years, I think originally in France. As far as I am aware, GDPR only standardises these laws and applies them to all EU states. Plus it adds a fine large enough for companies to actually care.
      - smueller1234 9y ago
        The fines are indeed substantial: up to 4% of annual turnover. On top of thay they can force you to shut down the service in question until remediated. For an e-commerce company that can be even worse than the 4%. Being fully compliant with GDPR is a mountain of work even if you thought you were doing all the right things before. In practice, small companies/ start-ups might not be audited / reported / pursued very much but: a) you'll never know and b) at least all the big tech and e-commerce companies are smack on in the sights of several data protection and competition(!) authorities already. We're all scrambling to be compliant in time. Source: first hand account from running the GDPR compliance project in e-commerce company.
mrtksn 9y ago
I'm grateful for Google's work on Android but iOS or any closed source code being black box is ridiculous. Reverse engineering and analysis techniques gives us enough ways to look into that so called "black box" and see what's going on. So if Apple one day ships iOS with privacy intrusion built in, they will be caught. I prefer to trust the motives, i.e. Apple doing reasonable things and staying away from funny business because they want to sell me iPhones.
prawn 9y ago
"Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative." Isn't it likely to be more lucrative now? I imagine that the number of people choosing iOS over Android purely for security/privacy reasons is fairly low. I think the incentive exists for them now and they've ignored it.
djrogers 9y ago
> Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative. That’s not a great argument when you’re talking about the single most lucrative consumer product in the history of the world. At that point, the risk to your existing product by making an abrupt 180 like that is far too great.
Splines 9y ago
I don't understand people in this thread defending Apple when AOSP is clearly more open. Yes, Apple has done well so far, but at the end of the day what are you going to trust? A talking head, or the actual code running on your device? It smells of rationalization for anyone to say that it would not be in Apple's interest to collect personal information.
- blub 9y ago
  Trust: the company fighting for privacy due to among other things economic incentives. Don't trust: the company fucking privacy because of economic incentives. Quite simple.
  - virgilp 9y ago
    Add "temporarily" to both your statements, see how simple it really is. To add 2 more things that makes it even less simple: - "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both". - Apple is screwing over developers AS A BUSINESS MODEL (de-value your complements) - and you want me, a developer, to support them?
    - blub 9y ago
      Everything is temporary and the best smartphone choice for privacy (or rather best compromise) is subject to change. Android freedom is purely theoretical for most people, including my family and friends. iOS security and privacy support is real and practical. P.S: Apple is not screwing developers, they're keeping them under control. Time and time again developers have proven they don't care about security or privacy and they need to be forced to obey the will of the customers through APIs which can't be easily misused.
      - virgilp 9y ago
        > Apple is not screwing developers, they're keeping them under control Their entire business model is predicated on the idea that hardware is important/ worthy, and that software should be $0.99 with free updates forever. It's basically the opposite of Microsoft - what MS did to the OEMs, Apple does to the indie devs. Also: not sure about your family, but I can choose stuff like "what keyboard to use". For me, that's a kind of freedom too.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
KozmoNau7 9y ago
Using F-Droid and Yalp and avoiding the Google Play Store is only an option if your needs are very limited. As far as I know, there are no widely-adopted mobile payment apps anywhere else, certainly the de facto standard mobile payment app in my country is only available on the official app stores. The same goes for banking apps and all official store membership and coupon apps, just to mention a few categories of apps you will have to do without.
- dTal 9y ago
  >de facto standard mobile payment Is called cash :) It's accepted everywhere. >official store membership and coupon apps Should all be burned anyway. Plastic cards and bits of paper worked fine for decades, you don't suddenly need to run arbitrary code on my pocket supercomputer. >banking apps Safer to use the website. My bank authenticates you by having you enter your PIN into a card reader - although they have created a mobile app, the security is strictly inferior as phones do not come with card readers (and the passcode is different from your PIN, making you more likely to write it down). The basic pattern is, it's either important enough to be worth being a stickler over, or trivial enough to ditch entirely. Personally, I find "not being on F-Droid" as a very strong signal that I should not want to use an app in the first place. It steers me away from malicious code and proprietary lockin. And I never, ever see an ad on my phone!
  - KozmoNau7 9y ago
    >Is called cash :) It's accepted everywhere. A lot of people refuse to carry any significant amount of cash. It is a risk factor, especially when at events and shows or just during busy shopping hours, due to pickpockets. An app with verified identity (using the national 2FA login system in my country) is significantly more secure. >Should all be burned anyway. Plastic cards and bits of paper worked fine for decades, you don't suddenly need to run arbitrary code on my pocket supercomputer. It's a bunch of silly plastic cards that I then I have to carry around in my wallet or remember to bring from home when going shopping, as opposed to having the app on my phone, which I carry around with me anyway. The app automatically calculates bonuses and rebate collection marks. >Safer to use the website. My bank authenticates you by having you enter your PIN into a card reader - although they have created a mobile app, the security is strictly inferior as phones do not come with card readers (and the passcode is different from your PIN, making you more likely to write it down). My mobile banking app is perfectly secure, it uses the Danish national 2FA login system, used for all public services.
bryanrasmussen 9y ago
true, however given that Apple's business model is specifically not based on privacy intrusion and Google's is the likelihood of this happening is probably pretty negligible.
m3kw9 9y ago
Maybe is different then what Android is already doing to you. There will always be maybe to anything
madeofpalk 9y ago
Alternatively, _this_ version of Android is 'open'* which you still don't have control over and has these privacy issues.
bardan 9y ago
I finally switched to LineageOS yesterday after hearing this news and it's working fine. It feels great to have a Google-free phone, but I'm shocked by how many Android apps require Google's proprietary services to function these days.
k3a 9y ago
Yes, with Android we at least have this option of running AOSP/Lineage and F-Droid. If only HW and chip manufacturers released Linux sources (or ideally had support in the mainline Linux branch) soon with proper drivers (ideally open)... Manyfacurers keep releasing lots of closed junk smartphones every year :/ but as long as people will continue buying it, nothing will change.
willstrafach 9y ago
> Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative. And this would be swiftly called out by someone soon after release, putting a very ugly stain on Apple's reputation. There is absolutely no advantage they would gain from this which could outweigh the PR nightmare.

wyager 9y ago

> Apple provides a black box with iOS And google does it with Google Play Services. All we have to go on is the historical record of the manufacturer, and apple’s is vastly better. Obviously a high-quality open-source smartphone would be preferable, but I’m not aware of such a thing (Although I’m hopeful that purism’s phone will be good).

chappi42 9y ago

Agree. Another sensible way (if you are prepared to 'phone' a bit more frugal) is a Sony Xperia X with Sailfish. (But check together first.)

JonFish85 9y ago

"Apple provides a black box with iOS, they have full control. Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative." This is true, but it's also potentially worthwhile to consider that Apple has positioned themselves as a hardware company (i.e. the majority of their money is based on selling units of hardware), whereas their main competitor here (Google) is an ad company (i.e. the majority of their money comes from selling their users' data). Apple has chosen to highlight their commitment to privacy partially because they feel it helps their market position, whereas for Google, it would hurt it. Certainly it doesn't mean that Apple is infallible, just that I think it makes it easier to accept that Apple is more likely to protect privacy more than Google. I'm pretty biased towards Apple, so obviously this may not work for everyone; if you need source code to feel secure, then by all means, go for it. For people who are looking for less work but some of the benefits, I think that Apple is a decent way to go.

growse 9y ago
> This is true, but it's also potentially worthwhile to consider that Apple has positioned themselves as a hardware company (i.e. the majority of their money is based on selling units of hardware), whereas their main competitor here (Google) is an ad company (i.e. the majority of their money comes from selling their users' data). Apple has chosen to highlight their commitment to privacy partially because they feel it helps their market position, whereas for Google, it would hurt it. But this is all just marketing, whereas the reality is that Apple could also be hoovering up location data and you may never know. You may have good reasons to trust Apple more than Google, which is great. Others may reverse that position of trust (perhaps they had their iCloud account hacked into and photographs leaked on the internet).
- horsecaptin 9y ago
  "But this is all just marketing, whereas the reality is that Apple could also be hoovering up location data and you may never know." It isn't just marketing. This is how the alignment of incentives works. A company's incentives are aligned with the people who pay them. Apple's are aligned with those that buy phones. Google and Facebook's are aligned with those that buy ads.
  - slaman 9y ago
    The parent argument is that without transparency it's difficult to actually know. Apple's true incentive is to provide value for their shareholders. If they can improve the value provided to shareholders by hoovering up information while also maintaining consumer confidence and sales then why would they not? I think that Apple's incentives are better aligned with my desires for privacy, but it's only an assumption.
    - rayiner 9y ago
      It would be a ballsy play of limited utility. For one, you're talking about Apple risking epic legal liability if they got caught. For the other, they'd be doing so for limited upside. They can only sell ads on the premise that they don't have all this inside information on their users.

eridius 9y ago

> Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative. Apple has demonstrated time and time again their commitment to privacy and to protecting user data. Apple does not see user data as something to be hoarded. They see user data as a liability and work very hard to collect as little as possible in order to provide the services they do. The idea that Apple is going to discard all of this and add privacy intrusion into iOS, doing a completely 180° on their business model and discarding all of their corporate principles, is extremely unlikely.

whyagaindavid 9y ago
Can you post a link to close my appleID? Yes, you can close a Google/ Microsoft account with few clicks
- bjelkeman-again 9y ago
  It should be available, at least in the EU, by May, if it isn’t already. I think it is a requirement of GDPR.
  - ATsch 9y ago
    Similar measures have been implemented in a number of european countries for years, I think originally in France. As far as I am aware, GDPR only standardises these laws and applies them to all EU states. Plus it adds a fine large enough for companies to actually care.
    - smueller1234 9y ago
      The fines are indeed substantial: up to 4% of annual turnover. On top of thay they can force you to shut down the service in question until remediated. For an e-commerce company that can be even worse than the 4%. Being fully compliant with GDPR is a mountain of work even if you thought you were doing all the right things before. In practice, small companies/ start-ups might not be audited / reported / pursued very much but: a) you'll never know and b) at least all the big tech and e-commerce companies are smack on in the sights of several data protection and competition(!) authorities already. We're all scrambling to be compliant in time. Source: first hand account from running the GDPR compliance project in e-commerce company.

mrtksn 9y ago

I'm grateful for Google's work on Android but iOS or any closed source code being black box is ridiculous. Reverse engineering and analysis techniques gives us enough ways to look into that so called "black box" and see what's going on. So if Apple one day ships iOS with privacy intrusion built in, they will be caught. I prefer to trust the motives, i.e. Apple doing reasonable things and staying away from funny business because they want to sell me iPhones.

prawn 9y ago

"Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative." Isn't it likely to be more lucrative now? I imagine that the number of people choosing iOS over Android purely for security/privacy reasons is fairly low. I think the incentive exists for them now and they've ignored it.

djrogers 9y ago

> Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative. That’s not a great argument when you’re talking about the single most lucrative consumer product in the history of the world. At that point, the risk to your existing product by making an abrupt 180 like that is far too great.

Splines 9y ago

I don't understand people in this thread defending Apple when AOSP is clearly more open. Yes, Apple has done well so far, but at the end of the day what are you going to trust? A talking head, or the actual code running on your device? It smells of rationalization for anyone to say that it would not be in Apple's interest to collect personal information.

blub 9y ago
Trust: the company fighting for privacy due to among other things economic incentives. Don't trust: the company fucking privacy because of economic incentives. Quite simple.
- virgilp 9y ago
  Add "temporarily" to both your statements, see how simple it really is. To add 2 more things that makes it even less simple: - "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both". - Apple is screwing over developers AS A BUSINESS MODEL (de-value your complements) - and you want me, a developer, to support them?
  - blub 9y ago
    Everything is temporary and the best smartphone choice for privacy (or rather best compromise) is subject to change. Android freedom is purely theoretical for most people, including my family and friends. iOS security and privacy support is real and practical. P.S: Apple is not screwing developers, they're keeping them under control. Time and time again developers have proven they don't care about security or privacy and they need to be forced to obey the will of the customers through APIs which can't be easily misused.
    - virgilp 9y ago
      > Apple is not screwing developers, they're keeping them under control Their entire business model is predicated on the idea that hardware is important/ worthy, and that software should be $0.99 with free updates forever. It's basically the opposite of Microsoft - what MS did to the OEMs, Apple does to the indie devs. Also: not sure about your family, but I can choose stuff like "what keyboard to use". For me, that's a kind of freedom too.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

KozmoNau7 9y ago

Using F-Droid and Yalp and avoiding the Google Play Store is only an option if your needs are very limited. As far as I know, there are no widely-adopted mobile payment apps anywhere else, certainly the de facto standard mobile payment app in my country is only available on the official app stores. The same goes for banking apps and all official store membership and coupon apps, just to mention a few categories of apps you will have to do without.

dTal 9y ago
>de facto standard mobile payment Is called cash :) It's accepted everywhere. >official store membership and coupon apps Should all be burned anyway. Plastic cards and bits of paper worked fine for decades, you don't suddenly need to run arbitrary code on my pocket supercomputer. >banking apps Safer to use the website. My bank authenticates you by having you enter your PIN into a card reader - although they have created a mobile app, the security is strictly inferior as phones do not come with card readers (and the passcode is different from your PIN, making you more likely to write it down). The basic pattern is, it's either important enough to be worth being a stickler over, or trivial enough to ditch entirely. Personally, I find "not being on F-Droid" as a very strong signal that I should not want to use an app in the first place. It steers me away from malicious code and proprietary lockin. And I never, ever see an ad on my phone!
- KozmoNau7 9y ago
  >Is called cash :) It's accepted everywhere. A lot of people refuse to carry any significant amount of cash. It is a risk factor, especially when at events and shows or just during busy shopping hours, due to pickpockets. An app with verified identity (using the national 2FA login system in my country) is significantly more secure. >Should all be burned anyway. Plastic cards and bits of paper worked fine for decades, you don't suddenly need to run arbitrary code on my pocket supercomputer. It's a bunch of silly plastic cards that I then I have to carry around in my wallet or remember to bring from home when going shopping, as opposed to having the app on my phone, which I carry around with me anyway. The app automatically calculates bonuses and rebate collection marks. >Safer to use the website. My bank authenticates you by having you enter your PIN into a card reader - although they have created a mobile app, the security is strictly inferior as phones do not come with card readers (and the passcode is different from your PIN, making you more likely to write it down). My mobile banking app is perfectly secure, it uses the Danish national 2FA login system, used for all public services.

bryanrasmussen 9y ago

true, however given that Apple's business model is specifically not based on privacy intrusion and Google's is the likelihood of this happening is probably pretty negligible.

m3kw9 9y ago

Maybe is different then what Android is already doing to you. There will always be maybe to anything

madeofpalk 9y ago

Alternatively, _this_ version of Android is 'open'* which you still don't have control over and has these privacy issues.

bardan 9y ago

I finally switched to LineageOS yesterday after hearing this news and it's working fine. It feels great to have a Google-free phone, but I'm shocked by how many Android apps require Google's proprietary services to function these days.

k3a 9y ago

Yes, with Android we at least have this option of running AOSP/Lineage and F-Droid. If only HW and chip manufacturers released Linux sources (or ideally had support in the mainline Linux branch) soon with proper drivers (ideally open)... Manyfacurers keep releasing lots of closed junk smartphones every year :/ but as long as people will continue buying it, nothing will change.

willstrafach 9y ago

> Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative. And this would be swiftly called out by someone soon after release, putting a very ugly stain on Apple's reputation. There is absolutely no advantage they would gain from this which could outweigh the PR nightmare.