59 ms·
Tim Cook makes blistering attack on the “data industrial complex”
- tomelders 8y agoWell done everyone. Never let the actual content of an article get in the way of some good old Apple bashing. At the time of writing, I can only find one top level comment (by 'dvfjsdhgfv') that's making any attempt to discuss or expand upon the content of Cook's comments. This is one of the most important issues facing mankind, and the ball is very much in our court. We all get plenty of opportunities to criticise our favourite tech companies and their practices, but if every single mention of them becomes an invitation to shoehorn in our gripes and complaints then this entire endeavour is just a massive waste of time.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago> This is one of the most important issues facing mankind I'm not even sure it rates in the top 50 outside of paranoid tech workers with nothing more important to worry about.
- fhood 8y agoHmm, I mean I'll take climate change, racism, education, and some particularly nasty geopolitical issues above it, but other than that, I would say it ranks pretty high.
- tomelders 8y agoI'd argue that the weaponisation of personal data and hyper targeted advertisements/disinformation are making all of those issues worse. It's what has created the current wave of climate change denying nazi sympathising maniacs to grow.
- ilamont 8y ago“Our own information — from the everyday to the deeply personal — is being weaponized against us with military efficiency,” warned Cook. “These scraps of data, each one harmless enough on its own, are carefully assembled, synthesized, traded and sold. If personal data has value, and companies are making billions or even trillions of dollars from it, shouldn't these firms be paying the source (us) to use it? Real cash, as opposed to discounts or in-kind exchanges?
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y agoFor many of them, we get to use their services for free. That's the arrangement.
- ilamont 8y agoNot all. Certainly not brokers serving the ad industry, credit bureaus, and retailers. And for others such as Google business services and Microsoft, we pay them. Even for the "free" services, is it a fair exchange of value?
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y agoWe seem to be willing to pay it, meaning the market will bear it, so yes?
- miguelrochefort 8y agoPersonal information is extremely valuable. I don't understand why people are opposed to collecting and making use of it. Not doing so would be inefficient and foolish. While I believe that those who collect such data would make the world a better place if they freely distributed it, I don't think they should be forced to. I'm sure that whatever hypothetical problem that could result from such collection of data could be solved more efficiently in a different way.
- __m 8y agoProbably because of the word “personal”
- miguelrochefort 8y agoPersonal information is information about a person. We already collect information about things. Why not collect information about people, which are arguably more interesting?
- doctorstupid 8y agoWhy don't you start the trend now? Please post here your personal details.
- nosuchthing 8y agoMany people enjoy privacy. If your children were followed around with someone recording them with a personal video recorder as soon as they left their house, that’s just public information right? /s
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y agoWhile I agree with the sentiment and am also strongly against this mass surveillance, I don't think that a "please think of the children" argument helps our case here.
- ognarb 8y ago
- _Codemonkeyism 8y agoUntil Apple growth streak breaks and they start to use data like everyone else and using data is a good thing.
- Cthulhu_ 8y agoThat would mean they pivot from a hardware company to an advertising company; I don't see that happening myself.
- pbhjpbhj 8y agoI thought they were a design/branding company -- what proportion of hardware do they make themselves. Again I thought they outsourced [most of] that?
- saagarjha 8y agoThis is really a pedantic point. By your metric, most companies we know today as making “hardware” are not hardware companies because they don’t make every component that goes into their products themselves.
- pbhjpbhj 8y agoNot every component, I did put in specifiers to emphasise that. If I design a chip and you fab it then I'm a designer and you're a manufacturer. I'm not accusing them of white-labelling or anything. So, perhaps someone can say how much they manufacture in their own fabs/factories as I asked? Meta HN can be very anti-truth, just post "Apple actually own 95% of all their manufacturing", or whatever with a source -- surely the question is valid??
- mitchty 8y ago> I thought they were a design/branding company A design/branding company that designs their own chips? Sure then they are a design company. A company that builds brands, also sure. What proportion of hardware do they have to "make" themselves to be considered a hardware producer? Having TSMC fab silicon doesn't make Apple any less of a hardware company than BMW not being a car company because they buy ECU's from Bosch.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- trashtester 8y agoFirst response: This sounds good, maybe I should consider Apple for my next device? Second response: Was undermining Google the reason he held the speech in the first place?
- blinky1456 8y agoAlso my first response, 'is this just marketing?'. 'Buy apple products, we care about your data. We will help protect it. Encrypt it. Not share it. And block others form trying to get your data' But are Apple as benevolent as they say? Do you trust such a gigantic corporation? Are they colluding with governments instead of just advertisers?
- Cthulhu_ 8y agoYou can assume they have to cooperate with the US government at least, that's what Snowden risked his life for to share with us. The question you have to ask yourself is whether you care about that. I can see a near future internal conflict / civil war happening in the US though, in which case having the government - potentially your adversary - know everything about you is a bad thing.
- CaptainZapp 8y agoLet's put it this way: Apples' core business is not to violate your privacy left and right, which probably gives them an edge about the likes of Facebook and Google (at least in my book) in this sphere.
- theshrike79 8y agoApple makes their money by selling expensive premium devices. They don't earn anything from selling your personal information or data about your usage patterns. Google on the other hand, is an advertising company that also makes software and a smartphone OS among others.
- simion314 8y agoI hope Google will at least analyze the idea of privacy, analyze what data they collect and if all of it needs to be collected or kept, when someone suggests let's collect everything there(and in other companies) should be some debate there before is implemented.
- huffmsa 8y agoApple blew it's lead with Siri and is now trying to hamstring it's competition from passing it by with features that aren't animated emotions or only allowing certified Apple parts in repairs.
- huffmsa 8y agoAnd can someone please fix the garbage fire iTunes desktop UI? It makes zero sense for the "description" bubble to be some tiny 20 character wide chat bubble for podcasts.
- nothrabannosir 8y agoIf they court customers with privacy over a voice assistant, consider me wooed.
- huffmsa 8y agoThirdly, Mr Cook should put some of that $250b cash mountain he sits on to work making this stuff happen. Prove that localized models built on small datasets work. Invest in cryptography and user anonymity technologies. Instead he's just sitting on it like smaug.
- saagarjha 8y ago> Prove that localized models built on small datasets work. > Invest in cryptography and user anonymity technologies. That’s what they literally do. Much of iOS’s “proactive” features are done on-device, as is things like photos analysis. And most of Apple’s products utilize at least some sort of cryptography and anonymized logging.
- huffmsa 8y agoClearly they're not doing enough, if they were, Siri wouldn't have fallen so far behind. I know it's a new and difficult field (I work in it) but it's also one where you could throw buckets of cash at the problem and get better results.
- thefounder 8y agoWell Apple can start by making Siri work locally/without internet and then I believe their stance.
- nemo846 8y agoIf they could I believe they would. They rather not be reliant on whoever is providing their speak recognition.
- Cthulhu_ 8y agoA limited subset of functionality should already be possible, especially if they can have the speech recognition trained specifically to the user.
- saagarjha 8y agoVoice Control does this, but it’s not particularly great. I doubt it’s seen significant updates in years.
- callalex 8y agoI get the impression that this is already happening to a certain extent and they are testing the water. On newer/faster devices, you’ll notice Siri transcribing on the screen nearly instantaneously, faster than any server round trip, but with poor accuracy. Then a few seconds later once the server connection is established you’ll see some of the transcription change to be more accurate.
- huffmsa 8y agoThey don't have the dataset needed to train the speech recognition engine, nor do they seem to be willing to deploy some of that $250b in cash to hire engineers smart enough to make a model which only needs the local user's input for training.
- saagarjha 8y agoApple has had stripped-down versions of this before on both iOS and macOS via Voice Control.
- izacus 8y agoIs that the same type of moral speech as he did when he said "Privacy is fundamental human right" and then gave keys to iCloud to Chinese government some time later? He's a CEO of a multi-billion publicly traded corporation. Content warning applies for everything he (or any such CEO/PR service) says.
- simonh 8y agoApple's stance has been completely consistent. They comply with the law while making their ethical beliefs and stance as a company clear where they disagree with it. What do you suggest Apple should do instead of comply with the law? Require it's employees to incriminate themselves?
- skc 8y agoIs this really true though? Has Tim Cook ever criticized the Chinese government or does he only ever speak on these issues when it comes to the US?
- enitihas 8y agoNope, he does the opposite. Here is his own words from a Chinese conference. “The theme of this conference -- developing a digital economy for openness and shared benefits -- is a vision we at Apple share,” Cook said. “We are proud to have worked alongside many of our partners in China to help build a community that will join a common future in cyberspace." Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-04/cook-kisses-the-ring https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-04/cook-kiss...
- chongli 8y agoWhat do you suggest Apple should do instead of comply with the law? Require it's employees to incriminate themselves? I'm not the GP but I've seen this exact form of complaint many times. I think the usual response is "stop doing business in China." I don't know how that's supposed to work, though, since Chinese companies make all of Apple's hardware.
- orbifold 8y agoIt's sad how the introduction of a new class of devices "smartphones" brought along with it a surveillance software platform in the form of Android. Where it is clear that the only incentive for google to develop it is exfiltration of as much personal data as they can. In contrast in the case of Apple you have a customer relationship with the company that sold you the device and they have an incentive to keep you as a customer without having a need to extract as much advertisement revenue as they can.
- stult 8y agoI would kill for a Linux phone, but until that happens I would settle for a phone that comes with root access (or at least allows technically capable users to get it) and let's me control my own data and device from the bare metal up. Because even if Apple has less incentive to exfiltrate data, I don't want to have to trust any company to do the right thing or to keep doing it.
- andkenneth 8y agoYou might be interested in this project. https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/ https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/
- sveme 8y agoHave you bought one? What are your experiences with PureOS as a phone OS, considering the underlying hardware? One issue with Firefox OS was the non-fit between phone hardware and OS hardware requirements...
- boomboomsubban 8y agoThey aren't out yet, but it will have similar hardware requirements. Phone manufacturers don't value a free driver availability when building their phones, making it difficult for alternative operating systems to support.
- stuaxo 8y ago
- mark_l_watson 8y agoI like Tim Cook, I think his heart is in the right place and as much as a corporation can, Apple generally does the right thing. I was having lunch with several lawyers at my company a few weeks ago. One of them was talking strongly about quality devices and Apple’s strong privacy stance. He literally said that we as a society should be grateful for having Apple.
- compcoffee 8y ago>He literally said that we as a society should be grateful for having Apple. Which is utterly cringeworthy. iPhone user thinks iPhone is best thing since sliced bread. News at 11.
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y agoI'm not usually one for fanboyism (and I say this as a full time Linux desktop and Android user) but Apple really do seem to be trying to do right by their customers in most cases. Certainly more than the competition. I've been considering switching for a while, but it seems the quality of their hardware and to some extent their software has slowly been going downhill post-Jobs.
- compcoffee 8y agoThe cringe was more related to "we as a society should be grateful to Apple". It's an utterly laughable statement. Not surprised it upset a few worshipers of the Tech Overlords. Apple, the billionaires it produced and the people it employs should be grateful to the rest of society.
- nneonneo 8y agoiTunes wasn't fantastic while Jobs was around, either. The first versions of OS X downright sucked. The build quality and aesthetic of the iPhone X rival anything from the Jobs era in my view, and the recent improvements on mobile performance have been nothing short of amazing. I feel like people get these rose-tinted glasses when they look back on past Apple products, like they were all 100% perfect or something. Truth is - they all had little issues, but they were still often miles ahead of their competition.
- walterbell 8y agoHi Apple. Please: • add VPN on/off to control center • allow per-app VPN via Apple Configurator, without enterprise MDM • once the above two are available, we can use Tor, IDS, DPI or pihole on a per-application basis, to reduce data harvesting • bonus1: allow the open-source iOS MDM community OR the iOS Shortcuts community to make it easy for novice users to have one-click install of "privacy-plus configurations" • bonus2: provide open-source code for on-device, silicon-enabled voice recognition using Neural Engine. In the meantime, allow anonymous (no iCloud login) use of Siri via Tor on a per-application basis
- mtgx 8y agoIt would help if they decoupled the so-called "end-to-end encrypted" iMessage from automatic backups to centralized iCloud servers to which all governments have access.
- saagarjha 8y agoiMessage backups are not “automatic”. You must opt-in before they leave your device.
- blattimwind 8y ago• location data toggle in control center
- tananaev 8y agoThis is my most desired feature in iPhone. Disabling location service, when you don't need it, helps with both battery consumption and privacy. I don't understand why Apple doesn't want to implement an easy switch option, unless they want to track your location for some reason.
- macintux 8y agoI would wager they think it's confusing and possibly dangerous. How many people would leave it on as they drive away from home, and then struggle with their phones as they're driving? Apple doesn't generally expose more options than it thinks a substantial number of people need. That's a UX decision, not a "Apple wants to track you forever" evil business decision. I'll admit I wouldn't mind an option like this, but I'm fine with three levels of location service controls for apps.
- andy_ppp 8y agoSeeing as Google pays Apple $12bn to be the default search engine on iOS devices I’m tempted to call hypocrisy here... http://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search-engine/ http://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search-eng...
- martimarkov 8y agoI do get your point and agree but most users are uneducated and will most likely have problems with DuckDuckGo and be confused to what happened to their Google and why is it deleted. So I guess it’s another side to consider. That’s no excuse thou. Apple should at least ask the question in the onboarding.
- akuji1993 8y agoAlso you can't just forget the point, that you will not find the same results on DuckDuckGo and Bing and others that you find on Google. That is my #1 problem with switching to another search engine. It doesn't show me the results that I need, especially for technical questions. Google does.
- stewartm 8y agoIf it is a while since you last tried the switch, startpage is worth a go. I recently built a new laptop and set it as the default, after several failed attempts in the past. I now rarely find myself struggling with tech related searches as I had done previously. Consequently, it has stuck this time. YMMV obvs.
- dvfjsdhgfv 8y agoThat's very good. The more high-profile people speak up against what's happening, the more the general public realizes what's really going on. Frankly, most non-technical users have no idea how they're profiled and what the real and potential dangers are. You know what's funny? We reached a point where 100% private conversation between two endpoints is finally possible, without the dependence on any third party (be it the Post Office, GSM operators,, Google, Apple, or anyone else). That's a huge step for communication privacy. And yet, most people choose the other way, they prefer to share their most intimate details with Facebook via Messenger and WhatsApp, with Google via Gmail, with Microsoft via Skype... Mostly because they're unaware of how things work and that other, more secure ways are available. So kudos to Cook for helping that cause just a bit.
- Y_Y 8y agoWhatsApp is (we are told) end-to-end encrypted using the same protocol as Signal.
- akuji1993 8y agoAs far as I understand this, correct me if this is wrong, this means the content of your messages is encrypted. There is still important data to fetch about who you talk to, how much and when.
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y agoIndeed. Besides, the app itself has access to the full content of your conversations so what happens in-between is pretty much irrelevant.
- dvfjsdhgfv 8y agoI don't know why you're downvoted because that's exactly the point: the creators of closed-source applications may claim whatever they want, but you have no way of verifying their claims. Especially if the owner is the company whose income is based on profiling you, and the fight over FB<->WhatsApp profile linking is no longer a secret now.
- pluma 8y agoI read this as "military industrial complex" and was positively surprised to see such a strong sociopolitical statement coming from Tim Cook, then I noticed the article talks about "data industrial complex" and realised this is still tame enough to count as aggressive marketing.
- varjag 8y agoApple can effect data industrial complex, unlike the military industrial complex. Doing the opposite would be empty posturing.
- brainwad 8y agoCook is only making this statement because it's in Apple's business interest to cripple ad-based competitors by convincing policy makers to hobble them with regulation. He's not a neutral observer.
- rubyfan 8y agoDoes Apple really compete with Facebook and ad platforms? Does Apple even really compete with Google? Isn’t the Android competition mostly not Google, e.g. Samsung?
- pluma 8y agoBut non-stock Android still typically uses Google services and these integrations are built into the OS. So whether the Android devices are sold by Google or Samsung doesn't really make much of a difference, Google still gets the data it wants.
- varjag 8y agoA neutral observer would never pick sides, that's for sure.
- danaris 8y agoWhile I'm sure that's a consideration, it's incredibly cynical to claim that that's the only reason Cook is saying this. Apple has been extremely firm and open about their commitment to privacy, when they could easily have just gone along with the crowd and harvested data, too. I think it's highly likely that they could have made significantly more money doing that than they do from the people who choose Apple products specifically because of their privacy stance. Cynicism can make you feel really superior, 'cause you can see through all the BS everyone's spouting to the cold dead hearts inside, while all the people around you think that people actually care about anything but money and power. But, see, there are actually people who care about something more. And when you fail to recognize that, you enable those who don't, those who benefit from all the not-caring, just that little bit more.
- torgian 8y agoDamn. This makes me gain a bit more faith in apple, even though I can’t see myself buying a new Apple product anytime soon.
- kopo 8y agoGood to see. Also nice to watch Facebook and Twitter and Youtube employees being called out for what they have enabled. If you are smart enough to get a job anywhere, why even work to keep these toxic machines propped up? Time to bail before things get worse. Or read a book about the decline of Yahoo.
- nyxtom 8y agoI originally took this opportunity to critique the idea that Cook can stand to take a strong stance on privacy because their business model relies on selling an actual product and said product can only be affordable if you leverage cheap labor (and given historical context: very questionable working conditions). However, for the sake of maintaining consistency with the article and staying relevant I have revised this post. Tim Cook is there to give a speech at a Privacy conference. I thought his comments were consistent with how Apple has been presenting itself over the last years. This gives me some confidence that Cook will continue to lead and push for stronger privacy laws while fighting against politicians who look to weaken encryption
- schuke 8y agoYou're mistaking Apple for Hooli.
- nneonneo 8y agoI'd like to take this opportunity to point out that Apple was in fact aware of those issues, and has in fact worked both on documenting them and fixing them: https://www.apple.com/supplier-responsibility/ https://www.apple.com/supplier-responsibility/ This is transparency - following through and actually giving a damn about things like child labor. They found 2 cases of underage labor in 2017 after auditing 756 facilities and over 1.3M workers. They made it a core violation of their supplier code, meaning that if and when underage labor is found via audit, that supplier loses its business with Apple. Go read the report - you might find that Apple is a pretty damn thorough company when it comes to responsible labor. Is there more they could do? Yes, there always is - but they're doing quite well so far.
- nyxtom 8y agoIndeed, my original comment referenced the transparency reporting that I have grown to appreciate from Apple. I wish more companies did as thorough job showing every piece of the supply chain. I revised the comment because I felt like it was just bashing without relevance to the actual article content. Thanks for the follow up comment to further clarify the transparency aspect. I know not every company wants to show exactly where they get their material from, but it is pretty incredible to see where material is sourced from and how it is manufactured and ultimately made into a product. Supply chains need to be this transparent
- EastSmith 8y agoI have owned couple of google phones (Nexus and Pixel). Today for the first time ever I am considering buying an iPhone. I would pay premium for privacy on Google devices if they make it available. And we now know what the price is - $40 in EU. Just sell it like this Google.
- gaius 8y agohave owned couple of google phones (Nexus and Pixel). Today for the first time ever I am considering buying an iPhone I was a BlackBerry die-hard until they switched to Android. A privacy-focused phone using a Google OS, what a joke. Switched to iPhone and it’s pretty good, only thing I miss is the real keyboard.
- mdm_ 8y agoI have a Key2 which I bought because I like the physical keyboard, battery life, features, and physical appearance/feel, but I don't buy any of the security/privacy marketing for a second. The phone runs a boatload of services from Google and BlackBerry which I don't know what they're actually doing and you can't turn off or disable without breaking features. I operate under the assumption that Google can (and does) track what I'm doing and where I'm going, even though I've disabled as much of this tracking as the settings allow, and that BlackBerry could decrypt my "secure" file storage locker and bypass my fingerprint/PIN in an instant if they wanted/were compelled to.
- andygates 8y agoI guess Tim's blatant sales pitch found a mark, eh?
- EastSmith 8y agoI guess you are correct. It is Google's turn now.
- robocat 8y agoAnother price point: "Seeing as Google pays Apple $12bn to be the default search engine on iOS devices" divided by number of devices Google paid for. The $40 should just be a number that would pass the lowest threshold the antitrust regulators will accept. My guess is that $40 doesn't have much to do with lost advertising revenue.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- runn1ng 8y agoI know this is a little unrelated, but Apple makes me agree to giant EULAs and "terms of use" every time they update their damned iTunes store. I wish that would go away and the Apple EULAs and agreements would get shorter instead of getting longer.
- pizzasword 8y agoTranslation: "Please outlaw our competitors' clever software so no one will have any reason to buy anything else. Also people should not have the option to use free service which will further improve our margins, thanks". If nothing else he gets free advertising from a fawning noncritical press.
- Lio 8y agoI think that it's ironic that Techcrunch make it so hard to read the article without agreeing to surveillance when they could just look at the Do Not Track headers.
- icebraining 8y agoIt actually works very well if you disable JS - unlike many other sites, you get a nice view of the article, without any distractions.
- SSLy 8y agoAt least the website is cooperative with a fully loaded uMatrix.
- qubax 8y agoI don't get Tim Cook and especially the PR style love of him and apple here. 1. Tim Cook accepts billions to make google the default search on apple products. 2. Tim Cook works with/colludes with the chinese government to sell apple products ( god knows what info they are sharing with the chinese government ) 3. Tim Cook loves exploiting near-slave chinese labor ( some who commit suicide ). https://www.bbc.com/news/business-30532463 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-30532463 4. Apple intentionally avoids taxes via offshoring loopholes and tax shelters. 5. Apple itself is one of the largest "data industrial complex". Just because apple doesn't sell data at the moment, doesn't mean they don't collect it. In the pantheon of evil corporate enterprises, Apple is right up there with everyone else. If Tim Cook is serious about what he says rather than just playing the PR game, then fix Apple.
- dang 8y agoPlease do not post in the flamewar style to HN, regardless of how you feel about someone or a company.
- pentae 8y agoIt must be difficult to uphold such strong principles for the free world while routing all your Chinese customer data through government surveillance servers. I guess it's better than the alternative- not selling in your (2nd?) largest market.
- Ensorceled 8y agoThe only problem is that Apple is the Mercedes of mobile devices. We really need a Honda and Kia version, a more affordable device that doesn’t track you. Apple is never going to give up their premium position.
- carlmr 8y ago>Apple is never going to give up their premium position. It would be stupid of them.
- Waterluvian 8y agoThat's exactly the problem I have. I don't want the unblockable ads and spying but I need my phone to be some cheap thing I don't have to respect or worry about. Once I started buying $150 phones every 2-3 years, I realised how much I need a device that I don't lose any sleep over it getting beaten to death and possibly replaced prematurely.
- singularity2001 8y agoGet an iphone se with protector
- stephenr 8y agoBuy second hand iPhones. A 5S will still run the latest iOS, and with a new battery wont be under “performance management” mode, so it should be quite fast to use.
- snowwrestler 8y agoI'll second this. I'm still using an iPhone 6s and it works great. I just checked and there are a couple hundred listed on my local Craigslist for $100-$150.
- Waterluvian 8y agoI'm open to this idea. I discarded it early on because I thought it would either be too expensive or be too "used" to run cleanly for another 3 years. Are you suggesting some official refurbishment route or just find them on Craigslist or Ebay?
- IBM 8y agoFun fact: I emailed Tim Cook in August after reading this story in the NYT, asking him to publicly oppose a weak federal privacy bill in the US [1]. I thought they might do it when Bud Tribble, Apple's privacy czar, testified in Congress at the hearing about privacy [2]. He was mostly non-committal until about the time when someone asked if California's law should be preempted, and he answered 'yes' but only if the law is strong enough, so I kind of had a feeling that Apple would at least advocate for it in a minor way. Now it makes sense why he was so non-committal, they were saving it for Tim Cook. This is a full-on endorsement of GDPR in the best possible forum for this, a keynote speech at a conference for data privacy regulators. This is more than I could have hoped for. Crucially, this removes any possibility of a united front as the ad-tech lobbying machine kicks into gear. I don't know if this was already planned or if it was my email, but I'm ecstatic either way. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/26/technology/tech-industry-federal-privacy-law.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/26/technology/tech-industry-... [2] https://www.c-span.org/video/?451963-1/google-apple-amazon-tech-companies-testify-data-privacy https://www.c-span.org/video/?451963-1/google-apple-amazon-t...
- rajacombinator 8y ago“Those Google guys are really evil! Here, buy our privacy-first $9 DRM dongle!”
- zmmmmm 8y agoI wish I could separate his position from Apple's marketing stance. Unfortunately here he seems to use such hyperbolic language that it puts me on the side of "this is marketing". It seems very hard to separate cause and effect (is Apple's market strategy because of his beliefs on privacy, or is it the other way around?). But this kind of tilts me towards the latter.
- oddevan 8y agoWhy not both? Apple's market strategy was already primed towards a privacy-focused stance, since their profit center is selling physical devices. Thus, when privacy becomes a Big Deal in the world, Tim doesn't have to push hard to get Apple to line up with his beliefs. If Apple had been an advertising-focused company before Snowden, I doubt we'd be seeing as hard a push as they're giving right now.
- simias 8y agoSometimes the stars align. Clearly Apple is in a good position to take this stance because they don't have a lot to lose if stronger privacy protecting regulations are enacted while their competitors, especially Google, would take a significant hit. That being said I can totally believe that he genuinely believes what he says. Actually I'd wager that most tech people, including at Google and Facebook, see that we're having a problem with "big data" and the compulsive profiling of their users. The potential for abuse is tremendous. Regardless of ulterior motives I think we should rejoice, having a behemoth like Apple taking such a clear stance on this issue could generate enough momentum to have an actual change in mentalities.
- burtonator 8y agoI'd like to think I'm one of the good guys here. I was one of the inventors of RSS and Atom and worked to push open content and social media. I started a social data search platform named Datastreamer (http://www.datastreamer.io/ http://www.datastreamer.io/) which is basically a petabyte-scale content indexing engine. We provide API feeds to search engines and social media analytics companies needing bulk data but don't want to have to build a crawler. For the last 5 years we've had major problems with customers coming to us asking for data which we felt was unethical (at best). We actually had Saudi Arabia approach us... It was clear that they were intending to something pretty evil with the data. Their RFP questions were a bit frightening: - can you track people by religion? - can you give us their email address? - can you provide their address? - can your provide their ethnicity? - can you provide their social connections? We're actually losing business to other companies that are performing highly unethical and probably illegal techniques. We just can't compete with data at that type of fidelity. If you're a researcher and you want to access bulk data for combating this type of non-sense WE WILL PROVIDE DATA AT COST. We can provide up to 1PB of data but for now we have to charge for the shipping and handling of that data. We're reaching out to some other companies like Google and also the Internet Archive to see if we can provide more cost effective solutions. I'm working on more tools to give the power back to the users. Polar (https://getpolarized.io/ https://getpolarized.io/) is a web browser which allows people to control their own data. The idea is that I can keep a local repository of data and eventually build our own cloud platform based on open systems like IPFS and encrypt the data using group encryption.
- microcolonel 8y agoUltimately, I think there are far too many actors involved to rely on the ethics of third parties to protect your privacy. If Saudi Arabia wanted to track down gays and apostates by mining the same data you did, they could do it themselves. The first line of defense against this is, and always will be, not publishing so much information about yourself. They can not mine what you do not provide. We can argue all day about the ethics of the conduct of companies and states looking at these data, but it's a non-issue if the data simply don't exist.
- 8y ago
- hmans 8y agoiOS still sucks tho
- rfinney 8y agoDwight Eisenhower's Farewell Address ... We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. .... Yet in holding scientific discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite. [ source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenhower%27s_farewell_address https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenhower%27s_farewell_addres... ]
- buboard 8y agoWhy doesn't he put the the money where his mouth is? I haven't seen Apple making any attempts to create funding model for publishers, even though the success of their products depends on the wide availability of free content.
- cromwellian 8y agoSmells like Regulatory capture by a competitor.
- diegoperini 8y agoIs there a video of the talk I can watch?
- yash1th 8y agoSomeone provided this link above https://www.ped30.com/2018/10/24/tim-cook-brussels-data-security/ https://www.ped30.com/2018/10/24/tim-cook-brussels-data-secu...
- diegoperini 8y agoAppreciated. :)
- fareesh 8y agoPretty rich to hear about ethics from Tim Cook considering the criminal enterprise that is Apple's repair scam
- 51Cards 8y agoWhile I agree with this in principle let's also be frank and say that this is a much simpler stance to take when your company doesn't exist based on data.
- smokeyj 8y agoWindows 10 doesn’t need your data but they still scoop it up. Let’s be frank, Apple is a superior company morally and technologically.
- bunnycorn 8y agoWhat's hard is to not base a company on data. When you have more than a billion of active users, and you don't have just another app, you have the entire operating system and you are the sole gatekeeper to third party applications. How many investors did Apple lose for not data mining users? Look at the P/E of Google and Facebook and then look at the P/E of Apple... Apple sweats every dime of their $1T valuation.
- calimac 8y agoLong: Apple & salesforce Short: alphabet fb axiom and Experian
- reacharavindh 8y agoDisclaimer: I use Apple products, and trust them slightly more than anything Google/FaceBook/startups because they don't have a business front selling my data to advertisement companies or 3rd party miners(as much as I know of). But, I'm baffled by this PR as if they are the privacy messiah. Didn't they just sellout their Chinese users icloud data to the Chinese government? Yeah. "It's the law, and Apple has to obey the law" is an argument, but here is a company that is willing to compromise their user's privacy in order to be able to sell phones in China. So, if US govt finds a way to say "it's the law" to reveal user data, I'm sure they'll bend over. This grand stand in media is just sickening and theatric. /rant.
- s3r3nity 8y agoI struggle with Apple's China situation as well, but the more I turn it over in my head, the more I think it's that Tim is pulled between two parties: 1) His team + Apple Directors that I firmly believe, both in words AND in their action, are strong proponents of privacy of the user 2) The Apple Board + Sharedholders that would revolt if the privacy principles from (1) prevented access to a market of ~1.4 billion people, and potentially gave a competitor like Huawei a further leg up. In this scenario, I don't see it as "grand-standing," but more of a necessary public act that US should move more in the policy direction of the EU, in spite of steep lobbying from most of the Valley / FANG group that would benefit from less-strict privacy regulations.
- reacharavindh 8y agoYes, I agree that there is a nuance to it. But, if they said "We'd like the United States to stand up for the privacy of its citizens and create a law like that if GDPR. Apple is in full support of it because it helps our business too(it is our competitor's weakness)" I'd agree that they are talking the truth. But, writing that we "absolutely" care about your privacy, and that "caring for privacy is in our DNA" and so on just to turn around and give up the same principles to an authoritarian government(one that is building Social credit system nevertheless) is just plain hypocrisy IMO. I know several American and European friends that trust Apple as if they're infallible, and will protect their data in a war. That's what I think is wrong. Apple will give up its users, DNA, principles if there is enough money to be made or leverage to be taken.
- MaysonL 8y agoVideo available here: https://www.ped30.com/2018/10/24/tim-cook-brussels-data-security/ https://www.ped30.com/2018/10/24/tim-cook-brussels-data-secu...
- move-on-by 8y agoIf anyone is interested in watching the Keynote speech for themselves and form your own opinions, it can be watched on YouTube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVhOLkIs20A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVhOLkIs20A Warning, Google will be tracking that you watch this speech :P
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- breatheoften 8y agoI think that framing these new requirements as rights is a really good approach. Being able to find out what data is being collected and how it is being used is a prerequisite for any accountable system of balances that could create negative incentivizes for abusive practices. Obviously preventing all abuse will prove impossible just as preventing all crimes of any other type is impossible — but as with other kind of crime, undesirable outcomes can definitely be reduced when deliberate will is informed by wisdom and fueled by effort ...
- writepub 8y agoAnd how would this announcement have looked if Apple's iAd platform actually succeeded? While the weaponization of data is a legitimate cause for concern, Apple - the company that maintains a score on you - is hardly the one to be believed as a defender of your data or privacy
- krrrh 8y ago"Why iAD failed" > Advertisers grew increasingly frustrated with Apple’s unwillingness to grant them access to the wealth of data the company possessed from its customers and Apple’s hundreds of millions of iTunes accounts. Every decision in advertising is born in data — 70 percent of agencies and 73 percent of brands use data to target the desired audience. Strong analytics tools are becoming ever more important as advertisers strive to keep ads relevant. From: https://techcrunch.com/2016/03/28/the-downfall-of-the-walled-garden-heres-why-iad-failed/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/03/28/the-downfall-of-the-walled...
- writepub 8y agoThis is an opinion, not a fact. It's likely that the incumbents, Google & Facebook, were both much further ahead and entrenched for Apple to break through. Apple also tried social networking (ping) and failed. And self diving cars. I don't see any real evidence for Apple not sharing data out of some moral high ground. If they could actually boost their bottom line and not drive away existing customers, they'd do it. They rolled over like a timid puppy when China asked for all, that's ALL of China's iCloud data. They could've walked away from the China business if they had a sliver of moral turpitude, but they obviously don't, which is also evident from their tacit tolerance of child labor and unreasonable working conditions from their suppliers in China
- mugwort13 8y agoDeflection much, Cook? https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/17/apples-icloud-user-data-in-china-is-now-handled-by-a-state-owned-mobile-operator/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/17/apples-icloud-user-data-in...
- iMuzz 8y agoThen why take a check from google for $12B so that they can remain the default search engine?[0] [0] http://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search-engine/ http://fortune.com/2018/09/29/google-apple-safari-search-eng...
- no_wizard 8y agoI generally agree with Tim Cook's words here as I also believe the large amassing of personal data and the aggregation of it there of is potentially (and I believe as to many others, already is) very dangerous territory indeed. We have already seen the downsides of this with things like Cambridge Analytica for instance. I have to call out Apple on something here, and this is something that Tim Cook could personally do something about very actively, however. And it has nothing to do with customer/consumer privacy, which I think Apple does a wonderful job with, typically. It has more to do with the ethos of the corporation. Apple is just as guilty as anyone else about actually buying and using this data. It may not always be the case that is sourced from wherever, but they use the same tactics in their hiring and keeping tabs on employees that they are so deride in the media. For instance, if any of you are Apple employees, go ahead and check out the HR policy and procedure for publishing your information including your salary. I think you'll find that to be very eye opening. I can't recall the firms name off the top of my head, but they report that information to one of these firms that aggregates this information and in turn sells it in turn. Oh and use a personal device at work? Apple's own employee contract states that if you connect a personal device to their network, even once, they have the right to demand any contents of that device subject to termination. I get some of that is for secrecy, don't get me wrong. I understand that i'm highlighting things from a point of view that I don't agree with these policies and that I'm not, and it is quite intentional, discussing why these policies may be in place. For what its worth, I'm okay with secrecy, in the sense of protecting investments, IP, etc. I get business need. What I don't understand is why Apple's own policies don't reflect these values they often tout in public. I personally feel like they have this dual face a lot, where they say things publicly that I agree with but I know `privately`, if you will, the corporation does not reflect these values when its not convenient for doing business Don't even get me started on Apple not being at the forefront of the Net Neutrality debates, where I think Apple could have real impact (the general population as a whole tends to listen to Apple/Tim Cook more so than any other CEO I can recall in recent memory, as do politicians of all stripes, its quite a trip how must esteem they hold in the public mind, which is why I think its so important they talk about something that should, at least according to their public statements, be right in line with their ethical underpinnings Tim Cook talks about very often). Rubs me the wrong way, I guess. Am I glad he's at least a CEO of a huge public company that has weight and is talking about this in a way that is agreeable (mostly) and likely far better for the average person? Yes, yes I am, but I think its important we remember the other facts too. Disclaimer: I did work at Apple, and for what its worth I left on good terms, and I would generally recommend working there, I just want to be honest about the things I saw and felt. There is a lot of good too, believe me.
- tqi 8y agoIf Apple is serious about the data practices of these companies, why don't they ban them from their platform?
- mattferderer 8y agoAre there any good resources or studies on the effects of laws against technology that is widely available & easy to implement? I would imagine a culture's history has a great effect to. Guns in America for example. I am curious how one would police data privacy when it's incredibly easy to collect data secretly. Do you only go after the big offenders?
- HissingMachine 8y agoAnd regular people won't care thanks to years and years of "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry"-type bs.
- nappy 8y agoThis is pretty much a textbook example of an attempt at regulatory capture, though more explicitly aimed at hurting competition than normal.[0] It's hard to take Apple as sincerely looking out for the best interests of consumers given their stance against repairs. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
- ChuckMcM 8y agoIt would be interesting if there were a civil penalty accessible to individuals if their personal data was divulged by someone to collected it. Lets say that it was $1,000 to $10,000. And that individuals need only file a simple form with the appropriate agency naming the company, identifying themselves, and the information divulged and get paid. The amount would vary based on how detailed the information was, more detail more penalty. So someone like Equifax would be on the hook for $1.4T in civil penalties for losing the data on 143 million customers. That would have effectively put them out of business. If you set up such a system, then it is very easy for engineering in an organization to explain why they need to invest in the security safeguards they need, and it is very hard for product managers to argue for collecting even more detailed information. All because you have created an existential threat to the company if they screw up.
- kodablah 8y agoCan I waive the company's liability for my data? Regardless of the answer, herein lies the problem.
- ux-app 8y ago> Regardless of the answer, herein lies the problem. don't pursue damages?
- kapad 8y agoI think the point being made was companies would add a statement in their terms of service. As always, you would likely agree to this without reading it and one the clauses would have you waive your right to sue for damages. and then we're back to square one.
- crowbahr 8y agoI know this is old but I'm catching up: Note that with Equifax you never signed any sort of permission or ToS for the data collected, so they'd be hit with a fine regardless. Many companies collect data on people without a contract. So this would still have teeth even with waived rights.
- a-dub 8y agoHe's right. Apple's schtick has long been "technology without the bullshit"- and well, the behavioral data gold rush is basically bullshit for consumers, so sure, they're on the privacy bandwagon in the interests of their own company and it's market strategy. Regardless, it does not make him any less right.
- quadcore 8y agoWe should celebrate the transformative work of the European institutions tasked with the successful implementation of the GDPR. We also celebrate the new steps taken, not only here in Europe but around the world — in Singapore, Japan, Brazil, New Zealand. In many more nations regulators are asking tough questions — and crafting effective reform. I disagree, I think technology should solve that pproblem, like Tim Berners-Lee's.
- whyagaindavid 8y agoWell overall Cook is right but... apple needs to provide alternatives to the common people! 1. There is no equivalent for Facebook and apple cannot build a one with privacy 2. There is none from Google-Search and apple has not built one 3. About WhatsApp? (iMessages - yes only within walled garden!) 4. Google groups-? 5. Browser? Safari? 6. Calendar -> Even creating a icloud account needs iDevice 7. Cant create more than 2 Apple account from same iphone!