4 ms·

Please tell me how Safari or Apple in general works against consumer privacy protection? This is yet again a too-simplistic view of things that seems very comm

Please tell me how Safari or Apple in general works against consumer privacy protection? This is yet again a too-simplistic view of things that seems very common with Americans. Some big companies do unethical things, and you translate that to "all big companies hate consumers and want to eat their children"

danieldk 9y ago
Please tell me how Safari or Apple in general works against consumer privacy protection? Safari is pretty good at privacy protection. Apple doesn't really have an interest in collecting your data and they have a history of implementing features improving privacy (cross-site tracking protection, build-in adblock API, etc.). The problem is that Safari is only available to the wealthiest in the world.
- seanp2k2 9y ago
  Not technically Safari but https://webkitgtk.org https://webkitgtk.org is a thing and WebKit itself is open source: https://github.com/WebKit/webkit https://github.com/WebKit/webkit “”” WebKit is a cross-platform web browser engine. On iOS and macOS, it powers Safari, Mail, iBooks, and many other applications. “”” Midori is also based on WebKit: http://midori-browser.org http://midori-browser.org AFAIK Safari does not provide more privacy protections than WebKit.
  - alwillis 9y ago
    Some of Safari’s privacy protection (Intelligent Tracking Prevention: https://webkit.org/blog/7675/intelligent-tracking-prevention/ https://webkit.org/blog/7675/intelligent-tracking-prevention...) uses APIs in iOS and macOS that aren’t part of WebKit.
seanp2k2 9y ago
Related: “””In the recent history of management ideas, few have had a more profound — or pernicious — effect than the one that says corporations should be run in a manner that “maximizes shareholder value.”””” https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/09/09/how-the-cult-of-shareholder-value-wrecked-american-business/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/09/09/how-t...
- calibration263 9y ago
  Also related, Tim Cook in a shareholder meeting after a proposal to remove environmental policies/focus: "We do things because they are right and just and that is who we are. That’s who we are as a company. I don’t…when I think about human rights, I don’t think about an ROI. When I think about making our products accessible for the people that can’t see or to help a kid with autism, I don’t think about a bloody ROI, and by the same token, I don’t think about helping our environment from an ROI point of view. ... If you only want me to make things, make decisions that have a clear ROI, then you should get out of the stock" http://mashable.com/2014/02/28/apple-ceo-tim-cook-climate-change/#4Syf5px5uuqK http://mashable.com/2014/02/28/apple-ceo-tim-cook-climate-ch...
Digital-Citizen 9y ago
Safari is nonfree software. The reasonable objection for software has nothing to do with corporations (despite that corporate power is too great and obviously hurts people). Users, no matter how willing or capable, aren't allowed to inspect what Safari does, not allowed to modify Safari to suit their needs, or share copies of Safari (modified or not) with others. This removes users' ability to help themselves or their community. All of these things are harmful in themselves not only for privacy protection but for self-determination and full control over one's own computer, something every computer user deserves. This lack of respect for a user's freedom makes Firefox objectively different and superior to Safari or any other nonfree browser. With Safari we can only guess if it's doing something to not protect a user's privacy whether on-accident, as all complex programs have bugs, or on-purpose. With Firefox we don't have to guess. We are allowed to verify what Firefox does and show what problems Firefox has, fix Firefox's problems, and make Firefox protect one's privacy. Firefox users can even disagree about precisely how to implement that protection and each user can choose how to do that for themselves in the way they find appropriate. Firefox being free software means we don't have to trust Mozilla's reputation. But since Safari is nonfree software we never really know if it is trustworthy until someone discovers it wasn't and we have only Apple's reputation to go on. There are many reasons to avoid doing business with Apple (see https://stallman.org/apple.html https://stallman.org/apple.html for a list) and Apple has a reputation for distributing malware (as https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.html https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.html gets into). One particular remotely exploitable problem with iTunes persisted for years and only Apple had permission to fix the problem because iTunes, like Safari, is nonfree (see http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/8912714/Apple-iTunes-flaw-allowed-government-spying-for-3-years.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/8912714/Apple-iT... for details). I can't be sure what state Safari is in or was in in past versions. That lack of information, combined with no good reason to trust software proprietors in general or Apple in particular, leads me to conclude that one should not trust Safari. A wiser way to protect one's privacy is to run a free software browser such as Firefox with no nonfree plugins/add-ons installed, on top of a completely free software system. This way the user has more control over their system and it's up to the user to determine whether and how to use that respect for their software freedom.

danieldk 9y ago

Please tell me how Safari or Apple in general works against consumer privacy protection? Safari is pretty good at privacy protection. Apple doesn't really have an interest in collecting your data and they have a history of implementing features improving privacy (cross-site tracking protection, build-in adblock API, etc.). The problem is that Safari is only available to the wealthiest in the world.

seanp2k2 9y ago
Not technically Safari but https://webkitgtk.org https://webkitgtk.org is a thing and WebKit itself is open source: https://github.com/WebKit/webkit https://github.com/WebKit/webkit “”” WebKit is a cross-platform web browser engine. On iOS and macOS, it powers Safari, Mail, iBooks, and many other applications. “”” Midori is also based on WebKit: http://midori-browser.org http://midori-browser.org AFAIK Safari does not provide more privacy protections than WebKit.
- alwillis 9y ago
  Some of Safari’s privacy protection (Intelligent Tracking Prevention: https://webkit.org/blog/7675/intelligent-tracking-prevention/ https://webkit.org/blog/7675/intelligent-tracking-prevention...) uses APIs in iOS and macOS that aren’t part of WebKit.

seanp2k2 9y ago

Related: “””In the recent history of management ideas, few have had a more profound — or pernicious — effect than the one that says corporations should be run in a manner that “maximizes shareholder value.”””” https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/09/09/how-the-cult-of-shareholder-value-wrecked-american-business/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/09/09/how-t...

calibration263 9y ago
Also related, Tim Cook in a shareholder meeting after a proposal to remove environmental policies/focus: "We do things because they are right and just and that is who we are. That’s who we are as a company. I don’t…when I think about human rights, I don’t think about an ROI. When I think about making our products accessible for the people that can’t see or to help a kid with autism, I don’t think about a bloody ROI, and by the same token, I don’t think about helping our environment from an ROI point of view. ... If you only want me to make things, make decisions that have a clear ROI, then you should get out of the stock" http://mashable.com/2014/02/28/apple-ceo-tim-cook-climate-change/#4Syf5px5uuqK http://mashable.com/2014/02/28/apple-ceo-tim-cook-climate-ch...

Digital-Citizen 9y ago

Safari is nonfree software. The reasonable objection for software has nothing to do with corporations (despite that corporate power is too great and obviously hurts people). Users, no matter how willing or capable, aren't allowed to inspect what Safari does, not allowed to modify Safari to suit their needs, or share copies of Safari (modified or not) with others. This removes users' ability to help themselves or their community. All of these things are harmful in themselves not only for privacy protection but for self-determination and full control over one's own computer, something every computer user deserves. This lack of respect for a user's freedom makes Firefox objectively different and superior to Safari or any other nonfree browser. With Safari we can only guess if it's doing something to not protect a user's privacy whether on-accident, as all complex programs have bugs, or on-purpose. With Firefox we don't have to guess. We are allowed to verify what Firefox does and show what problems Firefox has, fix Firefox's problems, and make Firefox protect one's privacy. Firefox users can even disagree about precisely how to implement that protection and each user can choose how to do that for themselves in the way they find appropriate. Firefox being free software means we don't have to trust Mozilla's reputation. But since Safari is nonfree software we never really know if it is trustworthy until someone discovers it wasn't and we have only Apple's reputation to go on. There are many reasons to avoid doing business with Apple (see https://stallman.org/apple.html https://stallman.org/apple.html for a list) and Apple has a reputation for distributing malware (as https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.html https://www.gnu.org/proprietary/malware-apple.html gets into). One particular remotely exploitable problem with iTunes persisted for years and only Apple had permission to fix the problem because iTunes, like Safari, is nonfree (see http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/8912714/Apple-iTunes-flaw-allowed-government-spying-for-3-years.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/8912714/Apple-iT... for details). I can't be sure what state Safari is in or was in in past versions. That lack of information, combined with no good reason to trust software proprietors in general or Apple in particular, leads me to conclude that one should not trust Safari. A wiser way to protect one's privacy is to run a free software browser such as Firefox with no nonfree plugins/add-ons installed, on top of a completely free software system. This way the user has more control over their system and it's up to the user to determine whether and how to use that respect for their software freedom.