3 ms·
> A common refrain in arguments that we don't need laws to protect privacy is that the market will take care of it. Stronger privacy laws hurt Google, Facebook
by ogre_codes 6y ago
> A common refrain in arguments that we don't need laws to protect privacy is that the market will take care of it.
Stronger privacy laws hurt Google, Facebook, and Amazon far more than Apple. Most of Apple's privacy gaffs are just bonehead moves like this one which shouldn't happen, but also don't drive revenue.
- tonyedgecombe 6y agoI've always thought Apple's focus on privacy (putting aside the current incident) is rather clever as Google have no way to respond. Any improvements to privacy undermine their business model.
- refulgentis 6y agoYou'd think that'd be how it worked out, but funnily enough, it's net negative even when Google actively tries to enhance privacy! Using Apple's privacy-sensitive ad blocker standard made people protest the limitations of a fixed count of sites, and competitors spun it into a way for Google to advantage themselves (details on that somewhat murky, i.e. nonexistent) We have a long way to go as an industry on keeping users _well_ informed on their privacy, and I'm afraid Apple's set us back years by morphing it into an advertising one-liner over actually helping users along.
- kelnos 6y agoI don't look at it that way. I think privacy is secondary to Apple, and that they use privacy as a selling point when it suits them. Their overall goal is tight control over the entire computing experience, and in places where that degrades privacy, so be it.
- ogre_codes 6y agoTheir goal is making money. On the iPhone, that means keeping the system's reputation for security and ease of use trumps more or less everything else. On the Mac? Not so much. For Apple, privacy is a cheap giveaway because unlike Google or Facebook, the way Apple makes money doesn't require they know when my last BM was.