6 ms·

Tim Cook has been a single light of hope in this vast dark ocean of surveillance capitalism. I’m so tired of hearing the “nothing to hide, nothing to fear” type

Tim Cook has been a single light of hope in this vast dark ocean of surveillance capitalism. I’m so tired of hearing the “nothing to hide, nothing to fear” type responses. Privacy is not “hiding.” I shouldn’t have to hide to keep my business, well, my business. I believe I have the right to carry on with my life without this all-seeing eye recording every part of me and using it to con me into buying, or selling it to the highest bidder. I was such an idealist about freeing information and empowering people. And I’m no fan of government regulation. But we know business won’t regulate itself when it’s either the bottom line or what’s best for people. Yes, it’s time for action.

DennisAleynikov 8y ago
It's not the "nothing to hide" folks you fear, its the general crowd who couldn't give two shits that their tech is phoning home all the time until something they find private gets leaked and causes them embarrassment. suprisingly few people have been burned badly enough for anyone other than Apple to take this stance on privacy. Apple is doing a good deed fighting for privacy and data control being returned to the consumers but its a fight against human laziness and the willingness to go with the easier option, instead of chosing the platform that actually respects their privacy and rights to data. Apple by definition is in the minority when it comes to fighting for privacy and at this point its a little too late for anyone to care other than tech savvy apple users who intentionally chose apple for privacy. The rest of the market has traded privacy for all you can eat buffets of information and content. And people actually like all you can eat buffets, who would've thought?
- Silhouette 8y ago
  It's not the "nothing to hide" folks you fear, its the general crowd who couldn't give two shits that their tech is phoning home all the time until something they find private gets leaked and causes them embarrassment. I'm not sure that's a fair criticism. Among my non-technical friends, several have expressed concern or even active disapproval about things they know are happening in this area. They just don't see that they have any alternative. How do you buy any modern phone or participate in any modern social networks or buy any modern car -- all things most regular people need to integrate with society and live a normal life today -- without surrendering huge amounts of your personal privacy and potentially security?
- dingaling 8y ago
  Until Apple enables a user to deny all Internet access to an app then they haven't really committed to data control.
  - danieldk 8y ago
    This is a strange benchmark. Along those standards, Linux or BSD also haven't committed to data control. Like Linux or BSD, you can set up the packet filter to do so. Like Linux or BSD there are no user-friendly, out-of-the-box ways to do it. On macOS it is at least easy to do using third-party applications (e.g. Little Snitch or TripMode).
    - glennpratt 8y ago
      unshare -n
      - danieldk 8y ago
        Thank you for illustrating my point ;).
        glennpratt 8y ago
        It was mostly a joke, but at the same time this is what makes Docker, et al possible. A firewall alone is not much of a sandbox.
    - pdimitar 8y ago
      > Along those standards, Linux or BSD also haven't committed to data control. Well yes, they haven't. Not in a convenient way anyway. I've had a sysadmin friend explaining me the lenghts you have to go to to achieve such results. To him it was easy. I just said "feck that". The fact that every single app isn't sandboxed is also pretty disappointing.
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    I think this is a thing in China, where you can turn off all data access to apps?
cm2187 8y ago
My understanding is that it is only after Apple failed at setting up their own advertising business that they jumped into the privacy bandwagon. Now I agree that when you want to achieve something, there is nothing to be gained from questioning the motivations of powerful allies (which in this case I think are more about attacking the competition than guenine concerns about privacy). But it does mean that Apple’s stance could change quickly if its business interest evolves. Not complaining, I am all for privacy regulations, merely a word of caution.
- danieldk 8y ago
  My understanding is that it is only after Apple failed at setting up their own advertising business that they jumped into the privacy bandwagon. - Introduction iAd: 2010 - Introduction of iMessage with end-to-end encryption: 2011 - Introduction of the secure enclave: 2013 (iPhone 5s). Remember that Apple plans several years ahead, so the secure enclave was probably already in the cards ~2011. - Shutdown iAd: 2016 The timelines just don't match up. Apple has been pursuing a focus on encryption and privacy since at least 2011. Remember that Apple was the first to roll out an end-to-end encrypted messenger to hunderds of million users, years before WhatsApp. (I am not contesting that their focus on privacy is for marketing reasons. We don't know, it could be or Tim Cook has strong beliefs on this topic.)
- GeekyBear 8y ago
  iAd stood out because it didn't share customer data with advertisers as was the standard in the industry. >Apple has a lot of knowledge regarding its users,but what it doesn’t do with that data is share it with advertisers very freely. That makes Madison Avenue very mad. >rather than offering a cookie-based ad-tracking and targeting mechanism, it essentially requires partners to tell it what kind of audience it needs to reach, and then trust that Apple will handle the rest, AdAge says. And it’s well worth noting that Apple prioritizes customer privacy here over a big potential upside in ad revenue. >what it doesn’t do is hand over the keys to all that data and let advertisers plug into it directly with their own data-mining and targeting software. That’s not standard for the ad industry and that’s likely the reason a few Madison Avenue feathers are ruffled over their approach. https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/18/advertisers-not-thrilled-with-apples-practice-of-protecting-its-users-data/ https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/18/advertisers-not-thrilled-w... It's not impossible to sell ads without spying on users on behalf of your advertising customers, it's just less profitable.
redwall_hp 8y ago
Whether he's the origin or just fond of the sentiment, the "nothing to hide" argument is commonly attributed to Joseph Goebbels in the 1930s. I feel like that should be pointed out more. Perhaps it would make people question that line of thinking more...
jjeaff 8y ago
While I usually question the sincerity of the leadership of large ccompanies (whether they really believe what they are saying or if they are just trying to increase shareholder value). But it strikes me that Tim Cook, being a professional gay man of his age, almost certainly has had times in his past where privacy was a big concern. Especially during times when it was much less acceptable to be gay, especially in the corporate world. He likely intimately understands the reality of the "nothing to hide" farce.

DennisAleynikov 8y ago

It's not the "nothing to hide" folks you fear, its the general crowd who couldn't give two shits that their tech is phoning home all the time until something they find private gets leaked and causes them embarrassment. suprisingly few people have been burned badly enough for anyone other than Apple to take this stance on privacy. Apple is doing a good deed fighting for privacy and data control being returned to the consumers but its a fight against human laziness and the willingness to go with the easier option, instead of chosing the platform that actually respects their privacy and rights to data. Apple by definition is in the minority when it comes to fighting for privacy and at this point its a little too late for anyone to care other than tech savvy apple users who intentionally chose apple for privacy. The rest of the market has traded privacy for all you can eat buffets of information and content. And people actually like all you can eat buffets, who would've thought?

Silhouette 8y ago
It's not the "nothing to hide" folks you fear, its the general crowd who couldn't give two shits that their tech is phoning home all the time until something they find private gets leaked and causes them embarrassment. I'm not sure that's a fair criticism. Among my non-technical friends, several have expressed concern or even active disapproval about things they know are happening in this area. They just don't see that they have any alternative. How do you buy any modern phone or participate in any modern social networks or buy any modern car -- all things most regular people need to integrate with society and live a normal life today -- without surrendering huge amounts of your personal privacy and potentially security?
dingaling 8y ago
Until Apple enables a user to deny all Internet access to an app then they haven't really committed to data control.
- danieldk 8y ago
  This is a strange benchmark. Along those standards, Linux or BSD also haven't committed to data control. Like Linux or BSD, you can set up the packet filter to do so. Like Linux or BSD there are no user-friendly, out-of-the-box ways to do it. On macOS it is at least easy to do using third-party applications (e.g. Little Snitch or TripMode).
  - glennpratt 8y ago
    unshare -n
    - danieldk 8y ago
      Thank you for illustrating my point ;).
      - glennpratt 8y ago
        It was mostly a joke, but at the same time this is what makes Docker, et al possible. A firewall alone is not much of a sandbox.
  - pdimitar 8y ago
    > Along those standards, Linux or BSD also haven't committed to data control. Well yes, they haven't. Not in a convenient way anyway. I've had a sysadmin friend explaining me the lenghts you have to go to to achieve such results. To him it was easy. I just said "feck that". The fact that every single app isn't sandboxed is also pretty disappointing.
- saagarjha 8y ago
  I think this is a thing in China, where you can turn off all data access to apps?

cm2187 8y ago

My understanding is that it is only after Apple failed at setting up their own advertising business that they jumped into the privacy bandwagon. Now I agree that when you want to achieve something, there is nothing to be gained from questioning the motivations of powerful allies (which in this case I think are more about attacking the competition than guenine concerns about privacy). But it does mean that Apple’s stance could change quickly if its business interest evolves. Not complaining, I am all for privacy regulations, merely a word of caution.

danieldk 8y ago
My understanding is that it is only after Apple failed at setting up their own advertising business that they jumped into the privacy bandwagon. - Introduction iAd: 2010 - Introduction of iMessage with end-to-end encryption: 2011 - Introduction of the secure enclave: 2013 (iPhone 5s). Remember that Apple plans several years ahead, so the secure enclave was probably already in the cards ~2011. - Shutdown iAd: 2016 The timelines just don't match up. Apple has been pursuing a focus on encryption and privacy since at least 2011. Remember that Apple was the first to roll out an end-to-end encrypted messenger to hunderds of million users, years before WhatsApp. (I am not contesting that their focus on privacy is for marketing reasons. We don't know, it could be or Tim Cook has strong beliefs on this topic.)
GeekyBear 8y ago
iAd stood out because it didn't share customer data with advertisers as was the standard in the industry. >Apple has a lot of knowledge regarding its users,but what it doesn’t do with that data is share it with advertisers very freely. That makes Madison Avenue very mad. >rather than offering a cookie-based ad-tracking and targeting mechanism, it essentially requires partners to tell it what kind of audience it needs to reach, and then trust that Apple will handle the rest, AdAge says. And it’s well worth noting that Apple prioritizes customer privacy here over a big potential upside in ad revenue. >what it doesn’t do is hand over the keys to all that data and let advertisers plug into it directly with their own data-mining and targeting software. That’s not standard for the ad industry and that’s likely the reason a few Madison Avenue feathers are ruffled over their approach. https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/18/advertisers-not-thrilled-with-apples-practice-of-protecting-its-users-data/ https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/18/advertisers-not-thrilled-w... It's not impossible to sell ads without spying on users on behalf of your advertising customers, it's just less profitable.

redwall_hp 8y ago

Whether he's the origin or just fond of the sentiment, the "nothing to hide" argument is commonly attributed to Joseph Goebbels in the 1930s. I feel like that should be pointed out more. Perhaps it would make people question that line of thinking more...

jjeaff 8y ago

While I usually question the sincerity of the leadership of large ccompanies (whether they really believe what they are saying or if they are just trying to increase shareholder value). But it strikes me that Tim Cook, being a professional gay man of his age, almost certainly has had times in his past where privacy was a big concern. Especially during times when it was much less acceptable to be gay, especially in the corporate world. He likely intimately understands the reality of the "nothing to hide" farce.