14 ms·

Apple said they've engineered the service such that Apple does not know what you're purchasing or even what vendors you're shopping at. If Apple doesn't know th

Apple said they've engineered the service such that Apple does not know what you're purchasing or even what vendors you're shopping at. If Apple doesn't know this, they can't very well apply arbitrary rules to it.

zaphirplane 8y ago
I wonder how you can challenge a fraudulent transaction when that information is missing
- ar0 8y ago
  My understanding was that Goldman Sachs will have that information and they will be responsible for fraud prevention etc. -- they just won't share it with Apple.
  - acjohnson55 8y ago
    Oh great, now I feel much better.
    - tyre 8y ago
      Goldman is a client of Apple's. It's possible that they do some shady shit, but it's also possible that they don't want to fuck up their relationship with the world's most valuable company or jeopardize their entry into the consumer space. Their profit motive might save them. Or it could be a disaster, who knows. My guess is that Goldman would trade on the aggregate data
      - tylerhou 8y ago
        Nit: world's most valuable publicly traded* company. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Aramco https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Aramco
        eridius 8y ago
        Non–state-owned enterprise, more like.
      - AaronFriel 8y ago
        Wasn't there a lawsuit that an investment bank (can't recall if it was Goldman Sachs or not) can deceive its clients and not disclose that it has a competing or directly contrary interest? And then there's this, and a dozen other stories about Goldman Sachs deceiving its clients in the past. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/goldman-sachss-long-history-of-duping-its-clients/2012/03/15/gIQAVlu3GS_story.html?utm_term=.a894a895a4c8 https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/goldman-sachss-long-...
        kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
        You're probably thinking about financial planners trying to avoid disclosure that they are not fiduciaries.
        mason55 8y ago
        FWIW, those rules are relatively nuanced. It's not like someone ruled that Goldman can deceive all clients at all times in all transactions. Typically it comes up in places where there's a question of whether the bank is responsible getting their client the best possible price in a transaction or whether the bank is acting as an arms-length counterparty who happens to be taking the other side of the transaction. It also depends on the sophistication of the client and whether it's a transaction where the client should expect Goldman to be bullshitting them. Goldman acting as a bank for the Apple credit card is completely different from Goldman acting as the counterparty in a large FX hedge or bond deal. Not that I like defending GS
      - JetSpiegel 8y ago
        > Goldman is a client of Apple's. It's possible that they do some shady shit, but it's also possible that they don't want to fuck up their relationship with the world's most valuable company It's hard to argue that Apple can keeps Goldman Sachs on a leash. GS can't get a worse reputation that it already has, shaming them is worthless.
    - 1337biz 8y ago
      In particular considering how consumer centric Goldman Sachs operates...
      - pmart123 8y ago
        I think they are trying to with the Marcus brand. Once Goldman became a bank holding company, it made it hard for them to operate a large prop trading unit and other more alternative areas. I think Goldman felt that since it had to operate more like a bank with a bank charter, why not become a bank? It would be interesting to see the financials behind the Apple & Goldman deal as Goldman probably needs Apple more than Apple needs Goldman given the CAC on banking is very high.
  - ams6110 8y ago
    But will Goldman know who the consumer is? Or is it just an opaque identity that they use to handle the accounts for Apple?
- deepGem 8y ago
  They said that the information is on your device, not on Apple servers. So I presume that they/GS can extract this information from the device under a valid legal claim.
  - eridius 8y ago
    Apple can't extract information from your device, even under subpoena. They'd have to push an OS update that explicitly changes what they do to start sending that info to Apple, but the US legal system doesn't allow the government to compel them to make that kind of change. That said, if the data is available in your iCloud backup in a form that can be read by other devices, Apple can presumably extract that data under subpoena. If it's in your iCloud backup but encrypted with a per-device key (like your non-iCloud keychain entries), Apple cannot extract that because decrypting the backup (which they can do) isn't sufficient to decrypt this per-device-encrypted data. All that said, if the government wants to know your spending history, it would be simpler just to subpoena Goldman Sachs.
    - lawnchair_larry 8y ago
      > but the US legal system doesn't allow the government to compel them to make that kind of change. Source? I’m pretty sure the legal system does allow that.
      - eridius 8y ago
        The legal system lets them say "you already have the information? Great, give it to me". It doesn't let them say "you have to redesign your systems to collect information that you explicitly told your users you aren't collecting". I don't have a direct citation for you, besides having seen this spoken about before, but a simple thought exercise should prove it: If the government could compel that sort of thing, then we wouldn't have end-to-end encrypted chat (including iMessage) and the government would have already compelled Apple to give the government a backdoor into iPhones.
        8y ago
- astura 8y ago
  Read here to learn about credit card partners, and how it works: https://www.doctorofcredit.com/everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know-about-credit-card-partners-how-much-they-make-more/ https://www.doctorofcredit.com/everything-you-ever-wanted-to... Essentially, in this case, the underlying bank (Goldman Sachs) handles all the finances and the partner (Apple) lends their name/brand and receives a small kickback on card activities.
  - arcticbull 8y ago
    Yeah, its basically an Apple co-branded card with some neat UI on top of it.
sandworm101 8y ago
Like de-listing vendors they do not like? CC processors can do that too, but they are nothing like the app store(s).
Liquix 8y ago
What do they gain from offering the card if they are not harvesting transaction data? Is it possible that this is some legal gymnastics (i.e. Goldman-Sachs receives the 'Apple doesn't know' data and promptly send it over to them under an opaque 'we share information with our affiliates' clause)? It does seem like a lot of work and potential risk if the sole purpose is to increase user dependency on the Apple ecosystem.
- freeone3000 8y ago
  They save merchant fees when the card is used on their products, and collect them when the card is used elsewhere. Same reason your bank issues a card, really. Though mastercard's still the payment processor here.
- hylaride 8y ago
  Credit Card issuers get a percentage of everything you spend, so Apple gains that.
- gerry_shaw 8y ago
  Agree that health skepticism is warranted here but it might also be that they are trying to re-think the credit card experience to improve it for everybody.
- larkost 8y ago
  They get a percentage of every transaction (small, but it is about the aggregate for them). Mostly for Apple this is about pushing people who are using ApplePay to back it with a credit card that Apple gets a piece of, rather than the one you already have a piece of. So they get the small chunk from being in the loop with ApplePay, and now a small chunk from being the sponsor of the card. Apple has been very focused on not being a big-data company. Any sort of back-end shenanigans would be so damaging to the brand of information safety that they have been building as to be unworth any potential profit.
  - Liquix 8y ago
    Ah, that makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the succinct explanation.
m-p-3 8y ago
Still at the mercy of Goldman Sachs.
Rebelgecko 8y ago
I don't quite understand that, since the linked article says Apple will "use machine learning and Apple Maps to label stores that you use in the app, and use that data to track purchases across categories like “food and drink” or “shopping.”"
- jldugger 8y ago
  They said it that all happens on the device itself, and won't be transmitted back to their servers.
  - Rebelgecko 8y ago
    So if your spouse is an authorized user of the card (or if you get a new phone), there's no display of your entire household's stats?
- Redoubts 8y ago
  The ML aspect happens "on device".
tooop 8y ago
Because of the card, data must be in the cloud but it is most likely encrypted and keys are on your device that is why Apple can claim that they don't know anything about what you buy. This doesn't change the fact that GS and MC does know where are you shopping. The only good thing about this card are fees and cashback, everything else is either nothing new or special (not sure about Apple card, but where i am from most CCs come with travel insurance as well).
- eridius 8y ago
  Fees, cashback, and the convenience, yeah.

zaphirplane 8y ago

I wonder how you can challenge a fraudulent transaction when that information is missing

ar0 8y ago
My understanding was that Goldman Sachs will have that information and they will be responsible for fraud prevention etc. -- they just won't share it with Apple.
- acjohnson55 8y ago
  Oh great, now I feel much better.
  - tyre 8y ago
    Goldman is a client of Apple's. It's possible that they do some shady shit, but it's also possible that they don't want to fuck up their relationship with the world's most valuable company or jeopardize their entry into the consumer space. Their profit motive might save them. Or it could be a disaster, who knows. My guess is that Goldman would trade on the aggregate data
    - tylerhou 8y ago
      Nit: world's most valuable publicly traded* company. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Aramco https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Aramco
      - eridius 8y ago
        Non–state-owned enterprise, more like.
    - AaronFriel 8y ago
      Wasn't there a lawsuit that an investment bank (can't recall if it was Goldman Sachs or not) can deceive its clients and not disclose that it has a competing or directly contrary interest? And then there's this, and a dozen other stories about Goldman Sachs deceiving its clients in the past. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/goldman-sachss-long-history-of-duping-its-clients/2012/03/15/gIQAVlu3GS_story.html?utm_term=.a894a895a4c8 https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/goldman-sachss-long-...
      - kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
        You're probably thinking about financial planners trying to avoid disclosure that they are not fiduciaries.
      - mason55 8y ago
        FWIW, those rules are relatively nuanced. It's not like someone ruled that Goldman can deceive all clients at all times in all transactions. Typically it comes up in places where there's a question of whether the bank is responsible getting their client the best possible price in a transaction or whether the bank is acting as an arms-length counterparty who happens to be taking the other side of the transaction. It also depends on the sophistication of the client and whether it's a transaction where the client should expect Goldman to be bullshitting them. Goldman acting as a bank for the Apple credit card is completely different from Goldman acting as the counterparty in a large FX hedge or bond deal. Not that I like defending GS
    - JetSpiegel 8y ago
      > Goldman is a client of Apple's. It's possible that they do some shady shit, but it's also possible that they don't want to fuck up their relationship with the world's most valuable company It's hard to argue that Apple can keeps Goldman Sachs on a leash. GS can't get a worse reputation that it already has, shaming them is worthless.
  - 1337biz 8y ago
    In particular considering how consumer centric Goldman Sachs operates...
    - pmart123 8y ago
      I think they are trying to with the Marcus brand. Once Goldman became a bank holding company, it made it hard for them to operate a large prop trading unit and other more alternative areas. I think Goldman felt that since it had to operate more like a bank with a bank charter, why not become a bank? It would be interesting to see the financials behind the Apple & Goldman deal as Goldman probably needs Apple more than Apple needs Goldman given the CAC on banking is very high.
- ams6110 8y ago
  But will Goldman know who the consumer is? Or is it just an opaque identity that they use to handle the accounts for Apple?
deepGem 8y ago
They said that the information is on your device, not on Apple servers. So I presume that they/GS can extract this information from the device under a valid legal claim.
- eridius 8y ago
  Apple can't extract information from your device, even under subpoena. They'd have to push an OS update that explicitly changes what they do to start sending that info to Apple, but the US legal system doesn't allow the government to compel them to make that kind of change. That said, if the data is available in your iCloud backup in a form that can be read by other devices, Apple can presumably extract that data under subpoena. If it's in your iCloud backup but encrypted with a per-device key (like your non-iCloud keychain entries), Apple cannot extract that because decrypting the backup (which they can do) isn't sufficient to decrypt this per-device-encrypted data. All that said, if the government wants to know your spending history, it would be simpler just to subpoena Goldman Sachs.
  - lawnchair_larry 8y ago
    > but the US legal system doesn't allow the government to compel them to make that kind of change. Source? I’m pretty sure the legal system does allow that.
    - eridius 8y ago
      The legal system lets them say "you already have the information? Great, give it to me". It doesn't let them say "you have to redesign your systems to collect information that you explicitly told your users you aren't collecting". I don't have a direct citation for you, besides having seen this spoken about before, but a simple thought exercise should prove it: If the government could compel that sort of thing, then we wouldn't have end-to-end encrypted chat (including iMessage) and the government would have already compelled Apple to give the government a backdoor into iPhones.
      - 8y ago
astura 8y ago
Read here to learn about credit card partners, and how it works: https://www.doctorofcredit.com/everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know-about-credit-card-partners-how-much-they-make-more/ https://www.doctorofcredit.com/everything-you-ever-wanted-to... Essentially, in this case, the underlying bank (Goldman Sachs) handles all the finances and the partner (Apple) lends their name/brand and receives a small kickback on card activities.
- arcticbull 8y ago
  Yeah, its basically an Apple co-branded card with some neat UI on top of it.

sandworm101 8y ago

Like de-listing vendors they do not like? CC processors can do that too, but they are nothing like the app store(s).

Liquix 8y ago

What do they gain from offering the card if they are not harvesting transaction data? Is it possible that this is some legal gymnastics (i.e. Goldman-Sachs receives the 'Apple doesn't know' data and promptly send it over to them under an opaque 'we share information with our affiliates' clause)? It does seem like a lot of work and potential risk if the sole purpose is to increase user dependency on the Apple ecosystem.

freeone3000 8y ago
They save merchant fees when the card is used on their products, and collect them when the card is used elsewhere. Same reason your bank issues a card, really. Though mastercard's still the payment processor here.
hylaride 8y ago
Credit Card issuers get a percentage of everything you spend, so Apple gains that.
gerry_shaw 8y ago
Agree that health skepticism is warranted here but it might also be that they are trying to re-think the credit card experience to improve it for everybody.
larkost 8y ago
They get a percentage of every transaction (small, but it is about the aggregate for them). Mostly for Apple this is about pushing people who are using ApplePay to back it with a credit card that Apple gets a piece of, rather than the one you already have a piece of. So they get the small chunk from being in the loop with ApplePay, and now a small chunk from being the sponsor of the card. Apple has been very focused on not being a big-data company. Any sort of back-end shenanigans would be so damaging to the brand of information safety that they have been building as to be unworth any potential profit.
- Liquix 8y ago
  Ah, that makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the succinct explanation.

m-p-3 8y ago

Still at the mercy of Goldman Sachs.

Rebelgecko 8y ago

I don't quite understand that, since the linked article says Apple will "use machine learning and Apple Maps to label stores that you use in the app, and use that data to track purchases across categories like “food and drink” or “shopping.”"

jldugger 8y ago
They said it that all happens on the device itself, and won't be transmitted back to their servers.
- Rebelgecko 8y ago
  So if your spouse is an authorized user of the card (or if you get a new phone), there's no display of your entire household's stats?
Redoubts 8y ago
The ML aspect happens "on device".

tooop 8y ago

Because of the card, data must be in the cloud but it is most likely encrypted and keys are on your device that is why Apple can claim that they don't know anything about what you buy. This doesn't change the fact that GS and MC does know where are you shopping. The only good thing about this card are fees and cashback, everything else is either nothing new or special (not sure about Apple card, but where i am from most CCs come with travel insurance as well).

eridius 8y ago
Fees, cashback, and the convenience, yeah.