4 ms·

> has "the market" shown any serious signal that it cares about privacy? Depends on what you consider a serious signal of care. If 'voting with you wallet' is

> has "the market" shown any serious signal that it cares about privacy? Depends on what you consider a serious signal of care. If 'voting with you wallet' is the measure, increasing levels of income inequality, stagnant wages, weakening employee rights through the gig-economy, etc. are effectively taking away that choice, as most market participants cannot afford to make the choice. Also, what is the paid alternative to Apple or Google photos that allows me to have the same end user experience, without giving up my privacy? "the market" doesn't even have such an offer that I can see. The closest I can find (and that's through here) is photostructure.com, and even that's lacking all the local-ML-foo that makes Apple/Google photos a compelling option over anything else. > Take Samsung putting ads on their "smart" TV's UI and screenshotting what people are watching for profiling, that's been known for a while now. Known by who? I'd wager a year's salary that >50% of Samsung TV owners (and bump that number up to >75% of Samsung TV users) do not know this is happening.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
zepto 6y ago
Income inequality and stagnant wages etc are not the consequences of Apple and Google.
- sudosysgen 6y ago
  No one suggested they are. But they still make it much less likely for the average Joe to put money and effort to protect their privacy, and this is known to those that make major pricing decisions.
  - kortilla 6y ago
    We’re talking about Apple here. People who can afford a Mac over a cheap pc/chrome book already have disposable income and are making trade-offs with it.
    - sudosysgen 6y ago
      That is not really true. Many people of lower income will buy a Mac after their cheap laptops break because they perceive them, correctly or not, to be the most reliable and thus less expensive on the long term laptops. Sometimes even second hand. Also, Chromebooks are not viable alternatives for many people especially of lower income. Having to rely on being always online is an issue when you can't always guarantee having internet. Been there, done that.
      - kortilla 6y ago
        > That is not really true. Many people of lower income will buy a Mac after their cheap laptops break because they perceive them, correctly or not, to be the most reliable and thus less expensive on the long term laptops. This is not true. The tiny user-base of OSX compared to Windows is already evidence that most people are not buying MacBooks.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

zepto 6y ago

Income inequality and stagnant wages etc are not the consequences of Apple and Google.

sudosysgen 6y ago
No one suggested they are. But they still make it much less likely for the average Joe to put money and effort to protect their privacy, and this is known to those that make major pricing decisions.
- kortilla 6y ago
  We’re talking about Apple here. People who can afford a Mac over a cheap pc/chrome book already have disposable income and are making trade-offs with it.
  - sudosysgen 6y ago
    That is not really true. Many people of lower income will buy a Mac after their cheap laptops break because they perceive them, correctly or not, to be the most reliable and thus less expensive on the long term laptops. Sometimes even second hand. Also, Chromebooks are not viable alternatives for many people especially of lower income. Having to rely on being always online is an issue when you can't always guarantee having internet. Been there, done that.
    - kortilla 6y ago
      > That is not really true. Many people of lower income will buy a Mac after their cheap laptops break because they perceive them, correctly or not, to be the most reliable and thus less expensive on the long term laptops. This is not true. The tiny user-base of OSX compared to Windows is already evidence that most people are not buying MacBooks.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]