3 ms·

There is no fundamental difference. The difference is that at this point in time, it's more profitable for Apple to not collect and posses data than the other w

There is no fundamental difference. The difference is that at this point in time, it's more profitable for Apple to not collect and posses data than the other way around. That is not a given. The only future-proof way around this is to be in control of the software (and hardware) you use, something Apple is not very comfortable with.

vkou 8y ago
There is another, more future-proof way around this - legislature similar to GDPR.
- zyang 8y ago
  Seeing how Do Not Call registry has failed, I have little faith in a GDPR like legislation being properly enforced. The likes of Google and FB can easily lobby/bribe their way out of it, or simply just pay the fines and business as usual. Unfortunately having a company like Apple with the aligned financial incentives is best defense we have.
  - BonesJustice 8y ago
    Even Google can’t count on being able to ‘bribe’ their way out of GDPR compliance, as complaints can be brought individually. And the fines have to be large, as a percentage of revenue, or they are useless. GDPR is pretty strong on this, but I would have liked the ceilings on fines to be even higher. I have zero hope that we’ll get anything remotely comparable in the USA, though.
- Bud 8y ago
  This solution posits the permanent existence of an authority structure that is willing to regulate aggressively in this area, and also competent to do so. Good luck with that!
- woolvalley 8y ago
  GDPR does not fix bigco bad behavior, because they can afford compliance or nation state intelligence agencies for that matter, the real scary actors.
Skunkleton 8y ago
Controlling 100% of the hardware and software you work with is not practical. Even with 100% OSS/HW, you would need to either fully audit, or pay someone to fully audit the source to ensure privacy. There are plenty of instances of OSS sharing more that one might like. The moment you touch the internet, you are probably sharing more than you would like regardless of the privacy focus of your browser. You can only protect your privacy 1) by remaining completely anonymous or 2) by trusting those your share your information with not to abuse it. It seems that Apple does not currently have much in the way of personally identifiable information on their customers. Whether you choose to believe them is up to you. Personally I feel like Apple's stance on privacy is self-serving, but still valuable. In the future, I believe that we will need to decide as a society how individual privacy should be handled and enact new laws and social norms.
- j88439h84 8y ago
  My level of confidence in my privacy is a matter of degree, and relative to a risk model. I don't personally pay someone to audit my hardware, because I don't see a significant risk from that direction.

vkou 8y ago

There is another, more future-proof way around this - legislature similar to GDPR.

zyang 8y ago
Seeing how Do Not Call registry has failed, I have little faith in a GDPR like legislation being properly enforced. The likes of Google and FB can easily lobby/bribe their way out of it, or simply just pay the fines and business as usual. Unfortunately having a company like Apple with the aligned financial incentives is best defense we have.
- BonesJustice 8y ago
  Even Google can’t count on being able to ‘bribe’ their way out of GDPR compliance, as complaints can be brought individually. And the fines have to be large, as a percentage of revenue, or they are useless. GDPR is pretty strong on this, but I would have liked the ceilings on fines to be even higher. I have zero hope that we’ll get anything remotely comparable in the USA, though.
Bud 8y ago
This solution posits the permanent existence of an authority structure that is willing to regulate aggressively in this area, and also competent to do so. Good luck with that!
woolvalley 8y ago
GDPR does not fix bigco bad behavior, because they can afford compliance or nation state intelligence agencies for that matter, the real scary actors.

Skunkleton 8y ago

Controlling 100% of the hardware and software you work with is not practical. Even with 100% OSS/HW, you would need to either fully audit, or pay someone to fully audit the source to ensure privacy. There are plenty of instances of OSS sharing more that one might like. The moment you touch the internet, you are probably sharing more than you would like regardless of the privacy focus of your browser. You can only protect your privacy 1) by remaining completely anonymous or 2) by trusting those your share your information with not to abuse it. It seems that Apple does not currently have much in the way of personally identifiable information on their customers. Whether you choose to believe them is up to you. Personally I feel like Apple's stance on privacy is self-serving, but still valuable. In the future, I believe that we will need to decide as a society how individual privacy should be handled and enact new laws and social norms.

j88439h84 8y ago
My level of confidence in my privacy is a matter of degree, and relative to a risk model. I don't personally pay someone to audit my hardware, because I don't see a significant risk from that direction.