5 ms·

>Apple's been fairly prominently resistant to government snooping of this nature, to the point of getting in a public fight with the FBI over it. Eh, that was

>Apple's been fairly prominently resistant to government snooping of this nature, to the point of getting in a public fight with the FBI over it. Eh, that was 2016. Half a decade later and Apple has since kowtowed to the Chinese government to allow spying on iCloud user data. Despite their privacy-centric branding campaigns, Profits >> Privacy for Apple. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-censorship-data.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/17/technology/apple-china-ce...

ceejayoz 5y ago
That's the standard Chinese setup - Google and Microsoft aren't going to be allowed to do any differently there - and only for Chinese users. I'd expect it to be entirely firewalled off from the rest of Apple's infrastructure. (Microsoft similarly has datacenters there, with the same legal requirements. Google only pulled out over bad PR, IMO.) If you're a Chinese citizen, you're surveilled by the Chinese government, regardless of which device you buy.
- bduerst 5y ago
  Except it is a complete 180 from the claim "Apple's been fairly prominently resistant to government snooping", because Apple hasn't. That whole article is about how Apple is giving in more and more to demands of the Chinese government. Google faced the same with project Dragonfly and employees chose to not kowtow to Chinese government spying. Apple had a choice, and chose profits over privacy by spying for the CCP with it's software.
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    The claim made upthread that I was responding to was "Apple's collusion with the American government is well-documented at this point" specifically; I said "fairly resistant", too, not "100% perfectly resistant". Unless I become a Chinese citizen/resident, Apple's dealings with China don't particularly concern me much.
    - bduerst 5y ago
      Right, but your personal preference doesn't change the fact that Apple is complicit with CCP government spying, counter to the claim that Apple isn't.
  - dwaite 5y ago
    > Apple had a choice, and chose profits over privacy by spying for the CCP with it's software Apple had a choice, and those chose to be able to operate in Chinese markets (including for manufacturing) over blatantly breaking Chinese law. Apple's fight with the FBI over the San Bernardino shooter phone instance was made possible by them having legal recourse in the US to do so. Remember that Apple is only a corporation because the government allows them to be one.
    - bduerst 5y ago
      The legality isn't relevant to choosing to kowtow to government spying. It would have also been legal for Google to operate project Dragonfly, but they chose user privacy instead.
      - dwaite 5y ago
        You say kowtow, I say keep essential manufacturing going. Upset the CCP enough, you might not even get parts out of China to assemble elsewhere. Perhaps why Apple has invested in having multiple sources for all of their components, multiple manufacturing facilities in different countries, etc.

ceejayoz 5y ago

That's the standard Chinese setup - Google and Microsoft aren't going to be allowed to do any differently there - and only for Chinese users. I'd expect it to be entirely firewalled off from the rest of Apple's infrastructure. (Microsoft similarly has datacenters there, with the same legal requirements. Google only pulled out over bad PR, IMO.) If you're a Chinese citizen, you're surveilled by the Chinese government, regardless of which device you buy.

bduerst 5y ago
Except it is a complete 180 from the claim "Apple's been fairly prominently resistant to government snooping", because Apple hasn't. That whole article is about how Apple is giving in more and more to demands of the Chinese government. Google faced the same with project Dragonfly and employees chose to not kowtow to Chinese government spying. Apple had a choice, and chose profits over privacy by spying for the CCP with it's software.
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  The claim made upthread that I was responding to was "Apple's collusion with the American government is well-documented at this point" specifically; I said "fairly resistant", too, not "100% perfectly resistant". Unless I become a Chinese citizen/resident, Apple's dealings with China don't particularly concern me much.
  - bduerst 5y ago
    Right, but your personal preference doesn't change the fact that Apple is complicit with CCP government spying, counter to the claim that Apple isn't.
- dwaite 5y ago
  > Apple had a choice, and chose profits over privacy by spying for the CCP with it's software Apple had a choice, and those chose to be able to operate in Chinese markets (including for manufacturing) over blatantly breaking Chinese law. Apple's fight with the FBI over the San Bernardino shooter phone instance was made possible by them having legal recourse in the US to do so. Remember that Apple is only a corporation because the government allows them to be one.
  - bduerst 5y ago
    The legality isn't relevant to choosing to kowtow to government spying. It would have also been legal for Google to operate project Dragonfly, but they chose user privacy instead.
    - dwaite 5y ago
      You say kowtow, I say keep essential manufacturing going. Upset the CCP enough, you might not even get parts out of China to assemble elsewhere. Perhaps why Apple has invested in having multiple sources for all of their components, multiple manufacturing facilities in different countries, etc.