4 ms·

I don't think it's surprising to anyone how much apple tracks its own users. They actually have a page on it and what they're tracking, https://www.apple.com/pr

I don't think it's surprising to anyone how much apple tracks its own users. They actually have a page on it and what they're tracking, https://www.apple.com/privacy/labels/ https://www.apple.com/privacy/labels/. It's also clearly stated that a lot of data collected isn't anonymized at all. You're right there is no oversight for compliance to their own terms and that is the real issue. It is also an issue if they're getting a competitive edge by bypassing their own rules. It wouldn't be surprising to me if they were but based on the articles there isn't a whole lot of proof.

runnerup 4y ago
I'm somewhat surprised. I had bought into the "all machine-learning is done on-device" messaging and thought that Apple Maps was taking pains to anonymize data by only sending small chunks of your route data for traffic congestion analysis/etc. When Apple was starting their machine learning division I'd heard they had trouble retaining top talent because the engineers would show up and "okay! where's the data?" and Apple would reply "uhh, we don't have any it all stays on-device". But with Apple getting into advertising I don't think this could stay this way, if it ever actually was in the first place.
- fibers 4y ago
  then what is the point of having such a powerful processor on device?
FireBeyond 4y ago
> It is also an issue if they're getting a competitive edge by bypassing their own rules. And it's not like that would be the first time they've done that. Pretty common on all sorts of levels. My "favorite" was the ability of Apple apps on macOS to bypass most of the TCP/IP stack and send traffic directly, regardless of on-device filtering or firewalling. Apple claimed it was "a temporary measure while they dealt with updating software", but I'm still at a loss to explain why an app like TextEdit would have ever needed a kernel network extension in the first place. That to me was almost certainly a post-facto attempt at justification when they were caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

runnerup 4y ago

I'm somewhat surprised. I had bought into the "all machine-learning is done on-device" messaging and thought that Apple Maps was taking pains to anonymize data by only sending small chunks of your route data for traffic congestion analysis/etc. When Apple was starting their machine learning division I'd heard they had trouble retaining top talent because the engineers would show up and "okay! where's the data?" and Apple would reply "uhh, we don't have any it all stays on-device". But with Apple getting into advertising I don't think this could stay this way, if it ever actually was in the first place.

fibers 4y ago
then what is the point of having such a powerful processor on device?

FireBeyond 4y ago

> It is also an issue if they're getting a competitive edge by bypassing their own rules. And it's not like that would be the first time they've done that. Pretty common on all sorts of levels. My "favorite" was the ability of Apple apps on macOS to bypass most of the TCP/IP stack and send traffic directly, regardless of on-device filtering or firewalling. Apple claimed it was "a temporary measure while they dealt with updating software", but I'm still at a loss to explain why an app like TextEdit would have ever needed a kernel network extension in the first place. That to me was almost certainly a post-facto attempt at justification when they were caught with their hand in the cookie jar.