4 ms·
I would be more positively disposed to believing they're doing this for the greater good had they not circulated an internal memo calling the opposition to this
by beezischillin 5y ago
I would be more positively disposed to believing they're doing this for the greater good had they not circulated an internal memo calling the opposition to this the "screeching voices of minority". I will admit, I am extremely cynical when it comes to the topic of privacy and tech but I lean towards the belief that a company's internal communication is more honest about what their attitude is to these topics and features than the words of their PR department.
- Klonoar 5y agoThat memo was not an Apple memo, it was written by the NCMEC.
- beezischillin 5y agoI did not say it was an Apple memo, I said it was a memo circulated inside Apple, exactly as it was reported.
- Klonoar 5y agoThat's not really what you said, but sure. >I would be more positively disposed to believing they're doing this for the greater good had they not circulated an internal memo calling the opposition to this the "screeching voices of minority". I will admit, I am extremely cynical when it comes to the topic of privacy and tech but I lean towards the belief that a company's internal communication is more honest about what their attitude is to these topics and features than the words of their PR department. Your comment is worded in such a way that it represents the internal memo to be Apple's position, which is misleading to read.
- beezischillin 5y agoI don't understand your point, despite your italics. Apple circulated a memo inside their company, even if it's written by someone else. Why would you say they did that? Because they don't agree with it, at least a bit? Generally we see really harsh crackdown on internal communication that doesn't represent a company's, or at least a division's view on something. _But sure._