4 ms·
I think they missed one of the more valuable potential ones that I'd like to see, and it would be yet another extension of something Apple has made a pretty cor
by xoa 8y ago
I think they missed one of the more valuable potential ones that I'd like to see, and it would be yet another extension of something Apple has made a pretty core selling point: privacy and security, specifically enhancing Face ID with a very natural coercion code type system. If a future Face ID 2.0/3.0 system is capable of fast and wide field enough facial and expression/sentiment recognition, then it could be possible to not merely have a binary lock/unlock based on face and attention, but add in expression/sentiment as something else as well, and give it other levels of transparent unlock. So it'd be possible for users to make a full unlock require a specific expression, or alternately (or additionally) have it recognize another expression and trigger other actions. This could at a minimum include disabling Face ID (similarly to pressing a button 5 times) or even triggering an erase, but even better could also leverage Apple's improvements to their granular data encryption system to "unlock like normal" except that apps and content the user had marked as sensitive would not be decrypted and simply not show up on the system in any way at all.
Of course this could be done with PIN codes too and I hope that would be an addition, but it'd particularly natural using faces and having the system be able to actively look for signs of distress. Apple is in a real position to do this in an extremely user friendly way and it'd be a huge boon for personal privacy and security.
In fact leveraged even farther and using more data points (even just GPS and time of day) I think Apple could make a framework that could go beyond just privacy/security and into helping everyone better handle their usage of mobile devices (which is something else they are clearly at least aware of). Imagine being able to create "views", where underneath granular key release is utilized to allow a user to make any arbitrary set of apps/data be visible or unavailable, and then be able to assign arbitrary trigger conditions for what view the phone shows at any given time. It'd be possible to have a device with personal entertainment, social media, communications and such and also work related material and hobby material and create hard barriers between all them. At work entire or certain times of day entire bits of distraction would simply vanish, totally transparently and without effort, while at home vice versa could happen. While traveling everything but a few key travel apps could go. Users could set it so that financial apps could only be accessed easily at secure geographic locations. All under the control of the owner, and it'd help with self control and information overload, allowing owners to pick the right set of data to take their attention for the right setting. And of course it'd ensure that even if threatened sensitive material could have been made unavailable ahead of time.
I'd love that, I think it'd leverage a lot of Apple's strengths and existing frameworks anyway, and that it'd be a real step forward for getting a handle on the ever increasing amount of stuff being thrown at us.
- macintux 8y ago“How did you accidentally erase your phone?” “I sneezed at the wrong time.” Apple makes secure devices but doesn’t go for the type of customizable security you’re interested in, I imagine because the number of people compelled to unlock their phone under duress is so small as to be negligible. I hope.
- xoa 8y ago>“How did you accidentally erase your phone?” “I sneezed at the wrong time.” This seems like an exceptionally and unfairly reductionist, close minded and bad faith reading. I only gave that as one example option, and if you actually consider it it's easy to imagine that there could be restrictions like "You must have Backups on to enable this option". Or it could just not go that far, it wouldn't subtract from the overall feature at all. >I imagine because the number of people compelled to unlock their phone under duress is so small as to be negligible. I don't think that's a safe assumption at all, particularly outside the first world (or even in the first world considering how borders are hardening). Apple like anyone (more then many corps in fact given their startup-type org structure) must prioritize features and build up, and considers new things as the world changes and as their foundations continue to improve. They didn't always have FDE at all. They didn't always have the network lockdown to discourage theft. They didn't have biometric auth, until they did. They spent a lot of time and effort building up their HSM implementations, it wasn't there day 1. They are only now in iOS 12 apparently planning to push out a lock down of the wired port. Etc etc. Finally, you completely ignored how these same measures would fit into another major current public issue and just announced Apple effort: allowing people to get "digital addiction"/information overload under control. There are multiple compelling lines here of which privacy/security are just one angle. [EDIT] - Edited to add an example of the above from just this past WWDC: HN discussion on "iOS 12 introduces new features to reduce interruptions and manage Screen Time": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17230469 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17230469 "Views" or however Apple chose to convey/brand it would be a great extension of that. "While I'm doing X, I only want to see Y" with a nice GUI is something that makes intuitive sense, it's how our lives tend to be ordered anyway IRL. GUIs got started by leveraging real world systems and symbols, and while that of course can be overdone and be too restrictive I don't think it's played out yet either at all. Lots of people don't bring work home with them or home to work but rather try to maintain a separation. Why shouldn't our digital devices be capable of automatically supporting that partitioning?