4 ms·

Apple privacy focus was always opportunistic: they couldn't get a foothold into online advertising so they decided to make that weakness a selling point instead

Apple privacy focus was always opportunistic: they couldn't get a foothold into online advertising so they decided to make that weakness a selling point instead. They'll ditch privacy in a second if they can sell you enough ads, just as they ditched privacy for Chinese customers when the Chinese government asked them to.

the_other 5y ago
> Apple privacy focus was always opportunistic: they couldn't get a foothold into online advertising so they decided to make that weakness a selling point instead. You could spin that the other way: Apple’s foray into advertising was opportunistic, but didn’t sit with their focus on privacy. You’d need internal memos to prove it went either way.
- marticode 5y ago
  You could, but it seems more likely that a mega corporation gave up on a huge market because it failed to succeed there rather than moral principles. It's not like Apple has showed a lot of moral standing when dealing with the CCP, or isn't ruthlessly crushing competition when it gets the chance.
  - TimTheTinker 5y ago
    I have a friend who knows Apple's head of user privacy. He vouches that the guy is deeply serious about security/privacy. Between that and Apple's principled stance against the FBI, I'm inclined to believe that at that time, they were making principled choices out of a real concern for user privacy. I suspect this time around they have a real concern for dealing with the growing child exploitation/abuse problem, but failed to prioritize system design principles in their zeal to pursue positive change in the world. I don't envy them: in their position, they have an incredible amount of pressure and the stakes are incredibly high. May cool heads and rational, principled thinking prevail.
- dangerface 5y ago
  The focus on privacy was new and only after their focus on advertising failed.

the_other 5y ago

> Apple privacy focus was always opportunistic: they couldn't get a foothold into online advertising so they decided to make that weakness a selling point instead. You could spin that the other way: Apple’s foray into advertising was opportunistic, but didn’t sit with their focus on privacy. You’d need internal memos to prove it went either way.

marticode 5y ago
You could, but it seems more likely that a mega corporation gave up on a huge market because it failed to succeed there rather than moral principles. It's not like Apple has showed a lot of moral standing when dealing with the CCP, or isn't ruthlessly crushing competition when it gets the chance.
- TimTheTinker 5y ago
  I have a friend who knows Apple's head of user privacy. He vouches that the guy is deeply serious about security/privacy. Between that and Apple's principled stance against the FBI, I'm inclined to believe that at that time, they were making principled choices out of a real concern for user privacy. I suspect this time around they have a real concern for dealing with the growing child exploitation/abuse problem, but failed to prioritize system design principles in their zeal to pursue positive change in the world. I don't envy them: in their position, they have an incredible amount of pressure and the stakes are incredibly high. May cool heads and rational, principled thinking prevail.
dangerface 5y ago
The focus on privacy was new and only after their focus on advertising failed.