3 ms·

> Trust in software will continue to erode > there is an increasing discontent growing towards opt-out telemetry Really? That's news to me. What I observed is

> Trust in software will continue to erode > there is an increasing discontent growing towards opt-out telemetry Really? That's news to me. What I observed is people giving up more and more privacy every year (or "delegating" their privacy to tech giants).

codedokode 2y ago
One of the reasons is because telemetry and backdoors are invisible. If the phone was showing a message like "sending your data to Cupertino" then users were better aware of this. Sadly I doubt there will be a legal requirement to do this.
- j45 2y ago
  Anything is possible through lobbying for regulation and policy. It's the same way that bills come out to crack people's policy. Only people don't always know they can demand the opposite so it never gets messed with again, and instead get roped into fatigue of reacting to technology bills written by non-technology people.
latexr 2y ago
> What I observed is people giving up more and more privacy every year (or "delegating" their privacy to tech giants). Are people giving up their privacy? Looks to me it’s being taken without consent, via enormous legalese and techniques of exhaustion.
- j45 2y ago
  Totally. Individuals who grew up primarily as consumers of tech, also have consented to a relationship of being consumed, bought, and sold themselves as the product. Those who grew up primarily as creators with tech, have often experienced the difference. This creates a really big blind spot potentially.
m463 2y ago
Come on, being forced to give up privacy is eroding privacy and increasing discontent. forced can also mean the whole no privacy by default and dark patterns everywhere.
saghm 2y ago
Whether or not people in general are aware of this issue and care about it, I think it's pretty disingenuous to characterize people as willfully giving up their privacy because they own smartphone. When stuff like this is happening on both iOS and Android, it's not feasible to avoid this without just opting out of having a smartphone entirely, and representing as a binary choice of "choose privacy or choose not to care about privacy" is counterproductive, condescending, and a huge oversimplification.
- hn3er1q 2y ago
  Maybe not privacy in general but this is about location privacy. If you have a smartphone in your pocket, then, for better or worse, you're carrying a location tracker chip on your person because that's how they all work. The cell phone company needs to know where to send/get data, if nothing else. It seems disingenuous to put a tracker chip in your pocket and be up in arms that someone knows your location. Unless this kerfuffle is only about Apple.
isodev 2y ago
Do you honestly believe people understand what they’re doing? Nowhere in marketing materials or what passes for documentation on iOS we see an explanation of the risks and what it means for one’s identity to be sold off to data brokers. It’s all “our 950 partners to enhance your experience” bs.
- raincole 2y ago
  > Do you honestly believe people understand what they’re doing? No.
jchw 2y ago
Absolutely! The important bit is that users have no choice in the matter. They're pushed into agreeing to whatever ToS and updating to whatever software version. The backlash against Microsoft's Windows Recall should serve as a good indicator of just how deeply people have grown to distrust tech companies. But Microsoft can keep turning the screws, and don't you know it, a couple years from now everyone will be running Windows 11 anyways. It's the same for Android. If you really want your Android phone to be truly private, you can root it and flash a custom ROM with microG and an application firewall. Sounds good! And now you've lost access to banking apps, NFC payments, games, and a myriad of other things, because your device no longer passes SafetyNet checks. You can play a cat-and-mouse game with breaking said checks, but the clock is ticking, as remote attestation will remove what remains of your agency as soon as possible. And all of that for a notably worse experience with less features and more problems. (Sidenote: I think banking apps requiring SafetyNet passing is the dumbest thing on planet earth. You guys know I can just sign into the website with my mobile browser anyways, right? You aren't winning anything here.) But most users are never going to do that. Most users will boot into their stock ROM, where data is siphoned by default and you have to agree to more data siphoning to use basic features. Every year, users will continue to give up every last bit of agency and privacy so as long as tech companies are allowed to continue to take it.
- mormegil 2y ago
  Completely agree, just one minor point: > I think banking apps requiring SafetyNet passing is the dumbest thing on planet earth. You guys know I can just sign into the website with my mobile browser anyways, right? No, you're not. For logging in, you need a mobile app used as an authentication token. Do not pass go, do not collect $200... (The current state of affairs in Czechia, at least; you still _do_ have the option of not using the app _for now_ in most banks, using password + SMS OTP, but you need to pay for each SMS and there is significant pressure to migrate you from it. The option is probably going to be removed completely in future.)
  - jchw 2y ago
    Right now I don't think there's anything like this in the United States, at the very least. That said, virtually every bank here only seems to support SMS 2FA, which is also very frustrating.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Gigachad 2y ago
Apple seems to be the best option here too. They seem to have put in a huge effort to provide features people demand (searching by landmarks in this case) without having to share your private data. It would have been so much easier for them to just send the whole photo as is to a server and process it remotely like Google does.

codedokode 2y ago

One of the reasons is because telemetry and backdoors are invisible. If the phone was showing a message like "sending your data to Cupertino" then users were better aware of this. Sadly I doubt there will be a legal requirement to do this.

j45 2y ago
Anything is possible through lobbying for regulation and policy. It's the same way that bills come out to crack people's policy. Only people don't always know they can demand the opposite so it never gets messed with again, and instead get roped into fatigue of reacting to technology bills written by non-technology people.

latexr 2y ago

> What I observed is people giving up more and more privacy every year (or "delegating" their privacy to tech giants). Are people giving up their privacy? Looks to me it’s being taken without consent, via enormous legalese and techniques of exhaustion.

j45 2y ago
Totally. Individuals who grew up primarily as consumers of tech, also have consented to a relationship of being consumed, bought, and sold themselves as the product. Those who grew up primarily as creators with tech, have often experienced the difference. This creates a really big blind spot potentially.

m463 2y ago

Come on, being forced to give up privacy is eroding privacy and increasing discontent. forced can also mean the whole no privacy by default and dark patterns everywhere.

saghm 2y ago

Whether or not people in general are aware of this issue and care about it, I think it's pretty disingenuous to characterize people as willfully giving up their privacy because they own smartphone. When stuff like this is happening on both iOS and Android, it's not feasible to avoid this without just opting out of having a smartphone entirely, and representing as a binary choice of "choose privacy or choose not to care about privacy" is counterproductive, condescending, and a huge oversimplification.

hn3er1q 2y ago
Maybe not privacy in general but this is about location privacy. If you have a smartphone in your pocket, then, for better or worse, you're carrying a location tracker chip on your person because that's how they all work. The cell phone company needs to know where to send/get data, if nothing else. It seems disingenuous to put a tracker chip in your pocket and be up in arms that someone knows your location. Unless this kerfuffle is only about Apple.

isodev 2y ago

Do you honestly believe people understand what they’re doing? Nowhere in marketing materials or what passes for documentation on iOS we see an explanation of the risks and what it means for one’s identity to be sold off to data brokers. It’s all “our 950 partners to enhance your experience” bs.

raincole 2y ago
> Do you honestly believe people understand what they’re doing? No.

jchw 2y ago

Absolutely! The important bit is that users have no choice in the matter. They're pushed into agreeing to whatever ToS and updating to whatever software version. The backlash against Microsoft's Windows Recall should serve as a good indicator of just how deeply people have grown to distrust tech companies. But Microsoft can keep turning the screws, and don't you know it, a couple years from now everyone will be running Windows 11 anyways. It's the same for Android. If you really want your Android phone to be truly private, you can root it and flash a custom ROM with microG and an application firewall. Sounds good! And now you've lost access to banking apps, NFC payments, games, and a myriad of other things, because your device no longer passes SafetyNet checks. You can play a cat-and-mouse game with breaking said checks, but the clock is ticking, as remote attestation will remove what remains of your agency as soon as possible. And all of that for a notably worse experience with less features and more problems. (Sidenote: I think banking apps requiring SafetyNet passing is the dumbest thing on planet earth. You guys know I can just sign into the website with my mobile browser anyways, right? You aren't winning anything here.) But most users are never going to do that. Most users will boot into their stock ROM, where data is siphoned by default and you have to agree to more data siphoning to use basic features. Every year, users will continue to give up every last bit of agency and privacy so as long as tech companies are allowed to continue to take it.

mormegil 2y ago
Completely agree, just one minor point: > I think banking apps requiring SafetyNet passing is the dumbest thing on planet earth. You guys know I can just sign into the website with my mobile browser anyways, right? No, you're not. For logging in, you need a mobile app used as an authentication token. Do not pass go, do not collect $200... (The current state of affairs in Czechia, at least; you still _do_ have the option of not using the app _for now_ in most banks, using password + SMS OTP, but you need to pay for each SMS and there is significant pressure to migrate you from it. The option is probably going to be removed completely in future.)
- jchw 2y ago
  Right now I don't think there's anything like this in the United States, at the very least. That said, virtually every bank here only seems to support SMS 2FA, which is also very frustrating.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Gigachad 2y ago

Apple seems to be the best option here too. They seem to have put in a huge effort to provide features people demand (searching by landmarks in this case) without having to share your private data. It would have been so much easier for them to just send the whole photo as is to a server and process it remotely like Google does.