4 ms·

Good I hope they get racked over for this nearly every one of there "privacy" features has a massive, often undisclosed, caveat or is sidestepped by there own s

Good I hope they get racked over for this nearly every one of there "privacy" features has a massive, often undisclosed, caveat or is sidestepped by there own software.

bilbo0s 4y ago
We have to be a bit careful here. I can hear it now: "We're not being anti-competitive. Our users, and US courts are demanding we lock down our users' privacy. We have no choice but to comply. Maybe Google and Facebook can work out some other way to make money?" "Oh, yeah, I guess you're right? They are pretty big competitors. Pity that. Oh well, what's to be done? We're all obligated to operate within the confines of the current legal environment after all.'
- polyomino 4y ago
  Apple's competitors are capable of competing with them, so long as Apple doesn't preference itself unfairly
  - dev_tty01 4y ago
    Apple entered the smartphone market in 2007. At that time Apple had no way to preference itself unfairly. They went from zero to capturing 75% of smartphone profits in 2021 and dramatically increased the size of the overall market. I think Apple is quite capable of competing without preference. Are they more successful now due to eco-system lock-in? Sure, but to conclude that that is the only reason they have are competitive is just not considering all of the facts. [0] https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-handset-market-operating-profit-q2-2021/ https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-handset-market-o...
    - Nevermark 4y ago
      Apple lock-in may not be the only reason Apple remains so wildly successful. But, Apple lock-in, and other self-serving restrictions, may be the reason we don’t hear about many potential products that never make it. Anti-competitiveness protects margins in the long term by avoiding pesky upstarts and challengers that might change the playing field. (Not critiquing any privacy issue with this comment. Just competitive issues from Apples view, and the view of all the non-Apples, in the abstract and the real.)
      - bilbo0s 4y ago
        Material point is that giving Apple an excuse to be even more draconian with their users' privacy will do nothing to help out these increasingly hypothetical "upstarts".
        Nevermark 4y ago
        Apple can be draconian with privacy, and still leave a level playing field, iff it applies the same privacy restrictions to itself that it does for third parties. This is where its dominance may require antitrust action at some level. Or Apple is unlikely to appreciate restricting itself equally to others.
brookst 4y ago
You hope they get “racked over” for saying they won’t sell your data, and then not selling your data? Apple is very clear when data is collected. Are you saying they shouldn’t be allowed to collect data unless they sell it to third parties?
- fbdab103 4y ago
  I was just given three free months of Apple TV, and I thought it cute how I needed to opt-out of data collection. It might be the best privacy-aware option available, but that does not mean it is especially good. Merely the least bad option.
- ksec 4y ago
  You mean their Terms and Condition, in specifics and in the rare occasion of using the word "personalization" ? Except most people goes by what they said in the Ads, in their PRs, submarine articles, in their Marketing Speech, and everything else. And Apple collecting "Data", is against the image of what the public believe they ( Apple ) said or led to believe. Remember, Apple led and fueled the campaign of Data Collection and Tracking equals violation of Privacy in the first place, regardless of whether it was First Party or Third Party. And it was the same even on HN during 2018 - 2021. People who disagree might want to read through all the comments on the subject during that period. I could count single handedly the people who stood up for the difference between First and Third Party "Data Collection".
- m463 4y ago
  You are bullied into getting your data collected. It starts when you buy an iphone - you can't use it without activating it with apple. Then it starts with a screen that tells you apple will use your data, with no choice. You can turn off some things, but what apple decides you can. I would like to firewall my phone, honestly. People need little snitch for their phone (ungimped) Really, if apple actually let me into my own phone, I would buy all kinds of stuff without limitation. I remember what matt ridley said in "the rational optimist" - when there is trust, there are no limits to trade.

Good I hope they get racked over for this nearly every one of there "privacy" features has a massive, often undisclosed, caveat or is sidestepped by there own software.

bilbo0s 4y ago

We have to be a bit careful here. I can hear it now: "We're not being anti-competitive. Our users, and US courts are demanding we lock down our users' privacy. We have no choice but to comply. Maybe Google and Facebook can work out some other way to make money?" "Oh, yeah, I guess you're right? They are pretty big competitors. Pity that. Oh well, what's to be done? We're all obligated to operate within the confines of the current legal environment after all.'

polyomino 4y ago
Apple's competitors are capable of competing with them, so long as Apple doesn't preference itself unfairly
- dev_tty01 4y ago
  Apple entered the smartphone market in 2007. At that time Apple had no way to preference itself unfairly. They went from zero to capturing 75% of smartphone profits in 2021 and dramatically increased the size of the overall market. I think Apple is quite capable of competing without preference. Are they more successful now due to eco-system lock-in? Sure, but to conclude that that is the only reason they have are competitive is just not considering all of the facts. [0] https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-handset-market-operating-profit-q2-2021/ https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-handset-market-o...
  - Nevermark 4y ago
    Apple lock-in may not be the only reason Apple remains so wildly successful. But, Apple lock-in, and other self-serving restrictions, may be the reason we don’t hear about many potential products that never make it. Anti-competitiveness protects margins in the long term by avoiding pesky upstarts and challengers that might change the playing field. (Not critiquing any privacy issue with this comment. Just competitive issues from Apples view, and the view of all the non-Apples, in the abstract and the real.)
    - bilbo0s 4y ago
      Material point is that giving Apple an excuse to be even more draconian with their users' privacy will do nothing to help out these increasingly hypothetical "upstarts".
      - Nevermark 4y ago
        Apple can be draconian with privacy, and still leave a level playing field, iff it applies the same privacy restrictions to itself that it does for third parties. This is where its dominance may require antitrust action at some level. Or Apple is unlikely to appreciate restricting itself equally to others.

brookst 4y ago

You hope they get “racked over” for saying they won’t sell your data, and then not selling your data? Apple is very clear when data is collected. Are you saying they shouldn’t be allowed to collect data unless they sell it to third parties?

fbdab103 4y ago
I was just given three free months of Apple TV, and I thought it cute how I needed to opt-out of data collection. It might be the best privacy-aware option available, but that does not mean it is especially good. Merely the least bad option.
ksec 4y ago
You mean their Terms and Condition, in specifics and in the rare occasion of using the word "personalization" ? Except most people goes by what they said in the Ads, in their PRs, submarine articles, in their Marketing Speech, and everything else. And Apple collecting "Data", is against the image of what the public believe they ( Apple ) said or led to believe. Remember, Apple led and fueled the campaign of Data Collection and Tracking equals violation of Privacy in the first place, regardless of whether it was First Party or Third Party. And it was the same even on HN during 2018 - 2021. People who disagree might want to read through all the comments on the subject during that period. I could count single handedly the people who stood up for the difference between First and Third Party "Data Collection".
m463 4y ago
You are bullied into getting your data collected. It starts when you buy an iphone - you can't use it without activating it with apple. Then it starts with a screen that tells you apple will use your data, with no choice. You can turn off some things, but what apple decides you can. I would like to firewall my phone, honestly. People need little snitch for their phone (ungimped) Really, if apple actually let me into my own phone, I would buy all kinds of stuff without limitation. I remember what matt ridley said in "the rational optimist" - when there is trust, there are no limits to trade.