3 ms·

Absolutely. Just like Amazon, Facebook, Uber, NSA and other employees have done so as well. The only reason Apple or Google employees might not do that is encry

by HWR_14 4y ago

Absolutely. Just like Amazon, Facebook, Uber, NSA and other employees have done so as well. The only reason Apple or Google employees might not do that is encryption and decent access controls, not because they are better people. It would not shock me in the least if a Google or Apple employee did something similar. It might shock me a little just because of the risk/reward if they were just snooping on random people. But not if it was exes/crushes/friends/etc.

rootusrootus 4y ago
Apple would be the most shocking, given their ingrained company culture of secrecy and compartmentalization.
- lostlogin 4y ago
  It would be harder for Apple employees to do too. Have you tried the Mail search? I can’t find things that are definitely there.
  - HWR_14 4y ago
    That's not unique to Apple. The same is definitely true of GMail.
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    > Have you tried the Mail search? I can’t find things that are definitely there. I hate the Mail search, because I know it misses all kinds of things. I have to go open up my gmail account in the web browser to find things that I know exist.
- aeyes 4y ago
  > Apple has paid a multi-million dollar settlement to a woman whose photos and videos were shared online by technicians repairing her iPhone. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57399627 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57399627
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    That's kinda like saying that Best Buy shared photos and videos from a customer's iPhone. Different from data ingested during normal operation and being processed by the corporation.
ynx 4y ago
Facebook has had access auditing tools for at least 15 years at this point, and it only got stricter with time. It was already a fireable offence back then, too, to improperly access someone's data without a business justification. From what I heard they did indeed have some LOVEINT problems before that i.e. an employee couple with a nasty breakup - but they were also orders of magnitude smaller.
- jjav 4y ago
  > It was already a fireable offence back then, too, to improperly access someone's data without a business justification. Is this supposed to be comforting? "without a business justification" means that if there is business justification (e.g. more revenue) they will violate privacy.

by HWR_14 4y ago

rootusrootus 4y ago

Apple would be the most shocking, given their ingrained company culture of secrecy and compartmentalization.

lostlogin 4y ago
It would be harder for Apple employees to do too. Have you tried the Mail search? I can’t find things that are definitely there.
- HWR_14 4y ago
  That's not unique to Apple. The same is definitely true of GMail.
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  > Have you tried the Mail search? I can’t find things that are definitely there. I hate the Mail search, because I know it misses all kinds of things. I have to go open up my gmail account in the web browser to find things that I know exist.
aeyes 4y ago
> Apple has paid a multi-million dollar settlement to a woman whose photos and videos were shared online by technicians repairing her iPhone. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57399627 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57399627
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  That's kinda like saying that Best Buy shared photos and videos from a customer's iPhone. Different from data ingested during normal operation and being processed by the corporation.

ynx 4y ago

Facebook has had access auditing tools for at least 15 years at this point, and it only got stricter with time. It was already a fireable offence back then, too, to improperly access someone's data without a business justification. From what I heard they did indeed have some LOVEINT problems before that i.e. an employee couple with a nasty breakup - but they were also orders of magnitude smaller.

jjav 4y ago
> It was already a fireable offence back then, too, to improperly access someone's data without a business justification. Is this supposed to be comforting? "without a business justification" means that if there is business justification (e.g. more revenue) they will violate privacy.