5 ms·
I think looking at Apple as saviour of Privacy, is for lack of better term just wrong. They have always favoured closed systems even if didn't provide privacy a
by Abishek_Muthian 7y ago
I think looking at Apple as saviour of Privacy, is for lack of better term just wrong. They have always favoured closed systems even if didn't provide privacy advantages or as in this case was counter-intuitive for privacy.
I feel the comparison of Apple with data companies such as Google, Facebook is by itself at fault. Apple like any computer company of 70's was not into data, just because Internet itself didn't exist at that point like it does now. 'Apple didn't choose to be in data' is projected as altruistic, instead of just a marketing ploy(they didn't choose, because it wasn't available).
Apple doesn't receive even the fraction of scrutiny Google, Facebook receive (which they should). e.g. iCloud hack, Apple's response to iOS vulnerabilities targeted by state actors, Newer Safari being incompatible with privacy extensions such as uBO etc.
Personally I feel good that Apple is not into data, just because I feel if they are into data; they might be more evil than Google or Facebook aided by their walled garden.
- lcfcjs2 7y agoGoogle is bad, and facebook is worst.
- Arnt 7y agoThis is webkit, which is open source. Apple took an existing HTML/CSS/DOM engine, rewrote it, renamed it, and opensourced its version, too. It's compiled using LLVM, which also contains thousands of lines of open source code by Apple. Of course you might argue that these examples don't prove your sweeping statement false, but please read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman before arguing.
- testtesttest 7y agoOpen source is not the same as open. You can't run Firefox on an iPhone.
- tekstar 7y agoSure you can https://apps.apple.com/ca/app/firefox-private-safe-browser/id989804926 https://apps.apple.com/ca/app/firefox-private-safe-browser/i...
- summerlight 7y agoSure you can't. That's not Firefox, but Firefox-branded Safari.
- anticensor 7y agoYou can run real Firefox too, if you jailbreak first.
- Abishek_Muthian 7y agoBefore someone says I have Firefox/Chrome on my iPhone; they are just skins for Safari. Same vulnerabilities which exist on Safari(Webkit) can be exploited there as well since they aren't allowed to use their browser engine.
- Arnt 7y agoIf I understand you correctly, "open source" is not a kind of openness and should be disregarded. Assuming that is so, for the sake of argument, what does count as openness?
- Jasper_ 7y agoIt was open sourced as WebKit because it derived from KHTML, which was copyleft, and it took lawyers getting involved before Apple played ball and released it as open source.
- diggan 7y agoI think looking at ANY company as the savior of privacy is a waste of time. Companies have proven time and time again that they are unable to self-regulate this. Only way forward is to introduce legislation that makes it illegal to track users using privacy-invasive practices, otherwise we'll never get rid of it. A company can be privacy-preserving today, but then the leadership changes or acquisition happens, and now they change their practices, without informing users. I simply see no technological solution to this problem, it'll always be a cat-and-mouse game, until governments catch up and makes it illegal. I'm eager to hear if someone here does have any solution to this problem though.
- thefounder 7y ago>> I simply see no technological solution to this problem, it'll always be a cat-and-mouse game, until governments catch up and makes it illegal. Then you we will have privacy-avoidance companies just like we have tax avoidance. Problem solved!
- diggan 7y agoExactly, and when they get caught, they get fines or prison. Sounds good to me, let's ship it.
- thefounder 7y agoLet me correct that for you: When they get caught thet get a small fine(somewhere close to 1% of their profit) or no fine at all.
- FreakyT 7y agoAgreed — Apple’s trying to project a high-minded motivation here, but their real motivation is likely to try and limit web technologies so that companies must still invest in native iOS apps and remain within their walled garden.
- saagarjha 7y ago> They have always favoured closed systems even if didn't provide privacy advantages Yes. > or as in this case was counter-intuitive for privacy I fail to see how this is counter-intuitive for privacy. > iCloud hack Targeted spearphising? > Apple's response to iOS vulnerabilities targeted by state actors https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20897368 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20897368 > Newer Safari being incompatible with privacy extensions such as uBO etc. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21025252 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21025252
- anchpop 7y ago> I fail to see how this is counter-intuitive for privacy. It makes it impossible to have an app that stores data in localstorage reliably, instead requiring it to be backed up on the app's servers.
- saagarjha 7y agoIn the browser, sure. But it prevents a number of issues with advertisements tracking people around the web.
- millstone 7y agoWhen you use Apple Maps, Apple doesn't know who you are, where you go. There's not even a way to sign in. It's not incompetence. When you request a route, your iPhone breaks up the request into separate, unrelated segments so Apple doesn't even know your total route. They've done work to avoid tracking you. Call it a "marketing ploy" or "altruism" or whatever, but the fact is that Google wants to know where you go, and Apple doesn't.