4 ms·

What privacy protection from Apple? They refuse to show me how my data is being used. They refuse to allow me to control my own data. They refuse to set up the

What privacy protection from Apple? They refuse to show me how my data is being used. They refuse to allow me to control my own data. They refuse to set up their system in such a way that they can't abuse my data. They also have really close ties with at least one group that blatantly disregards privacy. Dont get me wrong, Android is a dumpster fire, but at least they give me some control over my OS.

grzm 9y ago
In other discussions we've had, I know you've chosen not to use Apple (and not even using Google's services, IIRC). That's fine, and completely your choice. In the interest of keeping the conversation as civil as possible (we all know how inflammatory OS and privacy matters can get even without added fuel), can we lower the rhetoric level a bit? You want the option to compile and install your own OS. You choose not to trust what Apple says they do (such as encrypting most (admittedly not all) of the data in flight and at rest, making it inaccessible to them. I don't think there are any reasonable people that would disagree with your choice to not use Apple because of your priorities. You can choose to phrase these things in the much more aggressive "They refuse...", or, if you're interested in reasonable, constructive discussion, you can choose to phrase it in a way that shows a bit more respect for the choices others may make based on their priorities and values, that they might reasonably make those decisions, just as I think you would want them to consider yours. As one HN member to another, please? (Don't worry: this is the last time I'll ask. I just hate watching conversations derail into people talking past each other.)
- CaptSpify 9y ago
  I guess I dont see what is wrong with what I'm saying. Apple does refuse to do these things. I'm not at all saying that people shouldn't have the right to choose. In fact, I stongly agree that if someone does want to use Apple's software, they should, and damned what I say. I'm just pointing out that the poster was continuing to spread a myth that we have no proof of, and in fact we have evidence pointing in opposition of. I stongly want people to make their own choices, but more importantly, I want them to be properly educated before making those choices.
  - grzm 9y ago
    This, and then I'm out: The way one phrases things can be just or more important than the content of what one is saying. "Shut up" and "Please, be quiet" can have very different effects. "Apple refuses to ..." as opposed to "I want to do ... because ... and I can't with Apple" can convey the same content while producing very different results. And the medium makes a difference as well: tone of voice and body language can temper otherwise aggressive language in person, but we don't have those extra channels online. And this can be even more important on contentious topics. You feel strongly about the topic, right? Likewise others do as well. And if you want them to actually listen to what you have to say, it's important not to put them on the defensive. It's even more important to pay attention if you want to have a reasonable, constructive discussion. That's one of the things that's good about HN, and one we need to protect.
    - CaptSpify 9y ago
      I guess that I dont see how "Apple refuses to let me manage my own data" is different from "I would like to manage my own data, but Apple refuses to let me". FWIW, I'm not dismissing what you are saying, but I genuinely dont see how it changes anything.
      - grzm 9y ago
        Responding because of "I guess that I dont see how..." for some specific examples. > "They refuse to show me how my data is being used." Apple includes a lot of information about what and how data is stored for their services. Nearly every service is optional, with the exception of getting OS updates and using the App Store for third-party apps. I can understand people who choose not to either believe Apple or want to connect to Apple for OS updates or apps, but that's pretty limited in terms of data. Reasonable people can believe that they do show you how your data is stored, so it's important to be more specific about what you're getting at. > "They refuse to allow me to control my own data." They refuse to allow you to control your data in arbitrary ways. Again, you don't need to use their services to store data, and you could chose to install your own software that manages your data pretty much how you see fit. Reasonable people can believe that they allow you to control your own data if you want to. > "They refuse to set up their system in such a way that they can't abuse my data." If you don't trust what they've documented, and require compiling your own software, yup, you're stuck. But if you do trust them, they encrypt nearly all of the data (if you chose to use their services) in flight and on disk, so they can't abuse your data. > "They also have really close ties with at least one group that blatantly disregards privacy." I think you should just come out and name whatever it is you're getting at here. In each of these cases, if you're specific about what you want to do, it does make a difference in how it comes across. Based on this and our previous discussion, I think it's more clear and accurate for you to say "I want to be able to audit and compile from source to confirm how my data is being used, and Apple refuses to allow me do that." Hard to disagree with that, if that's your position. Also makes clear your criteria for privacy and trust, without people possibly (incorrectly) thinking you're being deliberately obtuse or ignorant about Apple and privacy. Now I really, truly am done. Best.

grzm 9y ago

In other discussions we've had, I know you've chosen not to use Apple (and not even using Google's services, IIRC). That's fine, and completely your choice. In the interest of keeping the conversation as civil as possible (we all know how inflammatory OS and privacy matters can get even without added fuel), can we lower the rhetoric level a bit? You want the option to compile and install your own OS. You choose not to trust what Apple says they do (such as encrypting most (admittedly not all) of the data in flight and at rest, making it inaccessible to them. I don't think there are any reasonable people that would disagree with your choice to not use Apple because of your priorities. You can choose to phrase these things in the much more aggressive "They refuse...", or, if you're interested in reasonable, constructive discussion, you can choose to phrase it in a way that shows a bit more respect for the choices others may make based on their priorities and values, that they might reasonably make those decisions, just as I think you would want them to consider yours. As one HN member to another, please? (Don't worry: this is the last time I'll ask. I just hate watching conversations derail into people talking past each other.)

CaptSpify 9y ago
I guess I dont see what is wrong with what I'm saying. Apple does refuse to do these things. I'm not at all saying that people shouldn't have the right to choose. In fact, I stongly agree that if someone does want to use Apple's software, they should, and damned what I say. I'm just pointing out that the poster was continuing to spread a myth that we have no proof of, and in fact we have evidence pointing in opposition of. I stongly want people to make their own choices, but more importantly, I want them to be properly educated before making those choices.
- grzm 9y ago
  This, and then I'm out: The way one phrases things can be just or more important than the content of what one is saying. "Shut up" and "Please, be quiet" can have very different effects. "Apple refuses to ..." as opposed to "I want to do ... because ... and I can't with Apple" can convey the same content while producing very different results. And the medium makes a difference as well: tone of voice and body language can temper otherwise aggressive language in person, but we don't have those extra channels online. And this can be even more important on contentious topics. You feel strongly about the topic, right? Likewise others do as well. And if you want them to actually listen to what you have to say, it's important not to put them on the defensive. It's even more important to pay attention if you want to have a reasonable, constructive discussion. That's one of the things that's good about HN, and one we need to protect.
  - CaptSpify 9y ago
    I guess that I dont see how "Apple refuses to let me manage my own data" is different from "I would like to manage my own data, but Apple refuses to let me". FWIW, I'm not dismissing what you are saying, but I genuinely dont see how it changes anything.
    - grzm 9y ago
      Responding because of "I guess that I dont see how..." for some specific examples. > "They refuse to show me how my data is being used." Apple includes a lot of information about what and how data is stored for their services. Nearly every service is optional, with the exception of getting OS updates and using the App Store for third-party apps. I can understand people who choose not to either believe Apple or want to connect to Apple for OS updates or apps, but that's pretty limited in terms of data. Reasonable people can believe that they do show you how your data is stored, so it's important to be more specific about what you're getting at. > "They refuse to allow me to control my own data." They refuse to allow you to control your data in arbitrary ways. Again, you don't need to use their services to store data, and you could chose to install your own software that manages your data pretty much how you see fit. Reasonable people can believe that they allow you to control your own data if you want to. > "They refuse to set up their system in such a way that they can't abuse my data." If you don't trust what they've documented, and require compiling your own software, yup, you're stuck. But if you do trust them, they encrypt nearly all of the data (if you chose to use their services) in flight and on disk, so they can't abuse your data. > "They also have really close ties with at least one group that blatantly disregards privacy." I think you should just come out and name whatever it is you're getting at here. In each of these cases, if you're specific about what you want to do, it does make a difference in how it comes across. Based on this and our previous discussion, I think it's more clear and accurate for you to say "I want to be able to audit and compile from source to confirm how my data is being used, and Apple refuses to allow me do that." Hard to disagree with that, if that's your position. Also makes clear your criteria for privacy and trust, without people possibly (incorrectly) thinking you're being deliberately obtuse or ignorant about Apple and privacy. Now I really, truly am done. Best.