6 ms·

Perhaps it is cynicism, but I'm pretty sure this is just Apple exploiting a competitive edge, and does not necessarily reflect his own opinion, he is speaking t

by tinco 8y ago

Perhaps it is cynicism, but I'm pretty sure this is just Apple exploiting a competitive edge, and does not necessarily reflect his own opinion, he is speaking to benefit the company. Of course, it's very nice that Apple made the decision to pick this edge, but they did it because they could not compete with Google on web services. So now they're publicly speaking to try and take the sting out of Google's edge. And that's healthy competition, the direct result will be that the consumer benefits, and I can agree we can be grateful to have these powerhouses fighting for our satisfaction.

joejerryronnie 8y ago
This is true but Apple is also vulnerable to the same type of "political" attack. I can imagine Google railing against the evils of employing a workforce of indentured servants to assemble high profit electronic devices. Facebook could begin publicly questioning the wisdom of supporting a technocratic dictator who may be the world's worst offender of oppression through the use of data. Hopefully, Tim is going down this road with his eyes wide open - glass houses and all.
- briandear 8y ago
  Indentured servants? What are you talking about? You do understand that Google’s Pixel 3 was built by the same Foxconn that built Apple devices right?
  - d1zzy 8y ago
    That is correct but it doesn't negate the statement about Apple just because others are also doing it.
parthdesai 8y ago
I'm always baffled how even the tech-literate crowd here continues to give Apple a pass. This is the same Apple that gave up its encryptions keys to Chinese government for the servers located in China. If it actually had user's privacy in mind, it wouldn't give those up.
- cal5k 8y ago
  I think that’s an over-simplistic view. Failing to adhere to Chinese law would mean exiting the Chinese market. If the US passed a similar law, Apple would be forced to comply with it (although they would at least have recourse through the courts to eventually show that such a law was, perhaps, unconstitutional).
  - parthdesai 8y ago
    Sure, but when you make blistering attack on "data industrial complex" and advocate privacy, you are held to the golden standard in the entire world. I personally believe that Apple complied to Chinese government's demands is because their bread and butter is in that country (the entire manufacturing of hardware devices).
    - hellofunk 8y ago
      Sounds like you are suggesting Apple should have simply stopped doing any business in China. Simple, right?
      - kodablah 8y ago
        As simple as asking a company built on data collection to stop collecting it. Maybe simpler.
      - parthdesai 8y ago
        No, just observing the hypocrisy in their pro-privacy statements. Or is it that privacy of Chinese users is not worth the same as that of wester users?
    - fhood 8y ago
      i.e. they don't have a choice?
      - parthdesai 8y ago
        So, maybe don't say hypocritical statements like this? Google's and Fb's core business is ad-tech. Do they have a choice when it comes to data-collection? (I say this as someone who has uninstalled both Messenger and Fb app)
DCKing 8y ago
> Perhaps it is cynicism, but I'm pretty sure this is just Apple exploiting a competitive edge, and does not necessarily reflect his own opinion, he is speaking to benefit the company. Of course. This is how all companies work. I just really like that this competitive edge exists in the first place. If this competitive edge exists and works, it might actually be stronger as Apple can continue maintaining this stance in the future. Although I'm not a big Apple user myself (I think/hope I can defend myself enough on other platforms that have a lower cost of entry), it's nice that you can point to iPhones if people are asking for on which they can take reasonable ownership of their privacy without needing to be very tech savvy.
jimbokun 8y ago
Apple is also the only major computing player that doesn't make its revenue primarily off of mining and exploiting user data. Maybe Microsoft, too? Certainly the rest of FAANG have huge financial temptations to misuse their data. So Apple is the one big technology player whose interests are most closely aligned with the consumer in terms of supporting data privacy.
- RestlessMind 8y ago
  Amazon, fwiw, has giant revenue streams (AWS, retail) that they can pile on the privacy bandwagon and attack Google / Facebook / rest of the shitty adtech. In fact, it would be great if Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Mozilla et al all combine their forces and propose strong privacy friendly regulations.
  - thinkling 8y ago
    Amazon has gotten into the advertising business [1] and I believe are growing quickly. I find it a disturbing move on their part; I have to trust that they're not mining my purchase history for ad targeting. If they do do so, it may be susceptible to targeted discovery. (Run ads with unique URLs for each selection keyword; everyone who sees the ad is apparently someone who bought that kind of product.) I hope Amazon is smart about the risks they take. [1] https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/09/23/amazon-is-now-the-third-largest-digital-ad-platfor.aspx https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/09/23/amazon-is-now-the-...
- PascLeRasc 8y ago
  Microsoft "lets you choose" between seeing ads and seeing targeted ads during setup. They're a joke.
- d1zzy 8y ago
  > So Apple is the one big technology player whose interests are most closely aligned with the consumer in terms of supporting data privacy. That's assuming that "the user" (whatever that means) is valuing their privacy more than the free services they receive. I don't think such a statement can generally be applied to the public at large. It's great to have options (ways to pay for services/phones/etc) that don't mean you have to give up your privacy and then let users decide what's best for them, but I wouldn't make generalizations that most users would definitely prefer one other over the other.
kstrauser 8y ago
> Perhaps it is cynicism, but I'm pretty sure this is just Apple exploiting a competitive edge, and does not necessarily reflect his own opinion, he is speaking to benefit the company. That's my favorite thing about it: I trust their motives. If Cook were saying this but we knew that the board was getting pissed off about it, I would worry that it was just a matter of time. But Apple is making billions by protecting its users' privacy, investors are raking in cash, and I'd bet the board is thrilled with this. That makes it much, much less likely that they're going to announce one morning that they're abandoning privacy and going all Facebook.
- mikestew 8y ago
  That makes it much, much less likely that they're going to announce one morning that they're abandoning privacy and going all Facebook. One other thing that I'm trusting to keep them from "going all Facebook" is that privacy is the only thing making them something other than "me, too". The day they jump in with the rest is the day I clean out a house full of Apple gear, and I'm pretty sure they know that (or likely more accurate, the day I quit buying more Apple gear). Apple's virtual assistants, mapping, and other services are arguably inferior to other offerings. I trust they won't bail on their one distinguishing feature.
d1zzy 8y ago
No, actually trying to "compete" by PR and stifle competitors through public pressure and new laws doesn't seem like "healthy" competition to me, you are essentially attempting to change the rules of the game because you don't think you'd win if you play the game. I mean sure, it's your right to do whatever you legally can, but it's not "healthy" competition at all IMO. EDIT: To see the equivalent from the "other side", timagine adtech companies starting a PR war against Apple's closed garden system, arbitrary app store decisions, labor conditions (I'm sure we can find some dirt somewhere in their vast business) to get laws enacted to regulate them on what they can do and not do.
- willstrafach 8y ago
  > timagine adtech companies starting a PR war against Apple's closed garden system, arbitrary app store decisions, labor conditions (I'm sure we can find some dirt somewhere in their vast business) to get laws enacted to regulate them on what they can do and not do. That sounds nice though.
threeseed 8y ago
Gay people are killed in many parts of the world for just being gay. Don't believe for a second that privacy isn't personal to him.

by tinco 8y ago

joejerryronnie 8y ago

This is true but Apple is also vulnerable to the same type of "political" attack. I can imagine Google railing against the evils of employing a workforce of indentured servants to assemble high profit electronic devices. Facebook could begin publicly questioning the wisdom of supporting a technocratic dictator who may be the world's worst offender of oppression through the use of data. Hopefully, Tim is going down this road with his eyes wide open - glass houses and all.

briandear 8y ago
Indentured servants? What are you talking about? You do understand that Google’s Pixel 3 was built by the same Foxconn that built Apple devices right?
- d1zzy 8y ago
  That is correct but it doesn't negate the statement about Apple just because others are also doing it.

parthdesai 8y ago

I'm always baffled how even the tech-literate crowd here continues to give Apple a pass. This is the same Apple that gave up its encryptions keys to Chinese government for the servers located in China. If it actually had user's privacy in mind, it wouldn't give those up.

cal5k 8y ago
I think that’s an over-simplistic view. Failing to adhere to Chinese law would mean exiting the Chinese market. If the US passed a similar law, Apple would be forced to comply with it (although they would at least have recourse through the courts to eventually show that such a law was, perhaps, unconstitutional).
- parthdesai 8y ago
  Sure, but when you make blistering attack on "data industrial complex" and advocate privacy, you are held to the golden standard in the entire world. I personally believe that Apple complied to Chinese government's demands is because their bread and butter is in that country (the entire manufacturing of hardware devices).
  - hellofunk 8y ago
    Sounds like you are suggesting Apple should have simply stopped doing any business in China. Simple, right?
    - kodablah 8y ago
      As simple as asking a company built on data collection to stop collecting it. Maybe simpler.
    - parthdesai 8y ago
      No, just observing the hypocrisy in their pro-privacy statements. Or is it that privacy of Chinese users is not worth the same as that of wester users?
  - fhood 8y ago
    i.e. they don't have a choice?
    - parthdesai 8y ago
      So, maybe don't say hypocritical statements like this? Google's and Fb's core business is ad-tech. Do they have a choice when it comes to data-collection? (I say this as someone who has uninstalled both Messenger and Fb app)

DCKing 8y ago

> Perhaps it is cynicism, but I'm pretty sure this is just Apple exploiting a competitive edge, and does not necessarily reflect his own opinion, he is speaking to benefit the company. Of course. This is how all companies work. I just really like that this competitive edge exists in the first place. If this competitive edge exists and works, it might actually be stronger as Apple can continue maintaining this stance in the future. Although I'm not a big Apple user myself (I think/hope I can defend myself enough on other platforms that have a lower cost of entry), it's nice that you can point to iPhones if people are asking for on which they can take reasonable ownership of their privacy without needing to be very tech savvy.

jimbokun 8y ago

Apple is also the only major computing player that doesn't make its revenue primarily off of mining and exploiting user data. Maybe Microsoft, too? Certainly the rest of FAANG have huge financial temptations to misuse their data. So Apple is the one big technology player whose interests are most closely aligned with the consumer in terms of supporting data privacy.

RestlessMind 8y ago
Amazon, fwiw, has giant revenue streams (AWS, retail) that they can pile on the privacy bandwagon and attack Google / Facebook / rest of the shitty adtech. In fact, it would be great if Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Mozilla et al all combine their forces and propose strong privacy friendly regulations.
- thinkling 8y ago
  Amazon has gotten into the advertising business [1] and I believe are growing quickly. I find it a disturbing move on their part; I have to trust that they're not mining my purchase history for ad targeting. If they do do so, it may be susceptible to targeted discovery. (Run ads with unique URLs for each selection keyword; everyone who sees the ad is apparently someone who bought that kind of product.) I hope Amazon is smart about the risks they take. [1] https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/09/23/amazon-is-now-the-third-largest-digital-ad-platfor.aspx https://www.fool.com/investing/2018/09/23/amazon-is-now-the-...
PascLeRasc 8y ago
Microsoft "lets you choose" between seeing ads and seeing targeted ads during setup. They're a joke.
d1zzy 8y ago
> So Apple is the one big technology player whose interests are most closely aligned with the consumer in terms of supporting data privacy. That's assuming that "the user" (whatever that means) is valuing their privacy more than the free services they receive. I don't think such a statement can generally be applied to the public at large. It's great to have options (ways to pay for services/phones/etc) that don't mean you have to give up your privacy and then let users decide what's best for them, but I wouldn't make generalizations that most users would definitely prefer one other over the other.

kstrauser 8y ago

> Perhaps it is cynicism, but I'm pretty sure this is just Apple exploiting a competitive edge, and does not necessarily reflect his own opinion, he is speaking to benefit the company. That's my favorite thing about it: I trust their motives. If Cook were saying this but we knew that the board was getting pissed off about it, I would worry that it was just a matter of time. But Apple is making billions by protecting its users' privacy, investors are raking in cash, and I'd bet the board is thrilled with this. That makes it much, much less likely that they're going to announce one morning that they're abandoning privacy and going all Facebook.

mikestew 8y ago
That makes it much, much less likely that they're going to announce one morning that they're abandoning privacy and going all Facebook. One other thing that I'm trusting to keep them from "going all Facebook" is that privacy is the only thing making them something other than "me, too". The day they jump in with the rest is the day I clean out a house full of Apple gear, and I'm pretty sure they know that (or likely more accurate, the day I quit buying more Apple gear). Apple's virtual assistants, mapping, and other services are arguably inferior to other offerings. I trust they won't bail on their one distinguishing feature.

d1zzy 8y ago

No, actually trying to "compete" by PR and stifle competitors through public pressure and new laws doesn't seem like "healthy" competition to me, you are essentially attempting to change the rules of the game because you don't think you'd win if you play the game. I mean sure, it's your right to do whatever you legally can, but it's not "healthy" competition at all IMO. EDIT: To see the equivalent from the "other side", timagine adtech companies starting a PR war against Apple's closed garden system, arbitrary app store decisions, labor conditions (I'm sure we can find some dirt somewhere in their vast business) to get laws enacted to regulate them on what they can do and not do.

willstrafach 8y ago
> timagine adtech companies starting a PR war against Apple's closed garden system, arbitrary app store decisions, labor conditions (I'm sure we can find some dirt somewhere in their vast business) to get laws enacted to regulate them on what they can do and not do. That sounds nice though.

threeseed 8y ago

Gay people are killed in many parts of the world for just being gay. Don't believe for a second that privacy isn't personal to him.