> But only Apple and Google are big enough to fight the other bad actors. Sure, their interests may not always be aligned with mine, but we are much more likely

> But only Apple and Google are big enough to fight the other bad actors. Sure, their interests may not always be aligned with mine, but we are much more likely to be aligned than mine with the bad actors. So, I pay my money, and I get Apple to be my Big Brother who protects me from the bad actors. And if I decide that I no longer want Apple to play that role, then I can go buy an Andoproid device, or whatever. That's quite a Stockholm syndrome-y view. What protects users, first and foremost, are users themselves. Take the imaginary scenario of "WhatsApp requiring constant location data". On an open platform, other users will provide you tools to defeat these requirements, either by modifying the app code itself, adding code around it to provide it fake data, or simply not allow these APIs in the first place. If WhatsApp is really clever about it and detects all attempts at thwarting the surveillance, then users will develop and distribute an alternative messaging service (see Signal gaining serious traction after a way milder anti-user update by WhatsApp a few months ago). It's only in the context of a lack of competition that such bad behavior is tolerated by users.