3 ms·

Or, you know, you could do both. If it's politically achievable to safeguard people's private data from private companies, then why not do that? This is the old

by Osmium 13y ago

Or, you know, you could do both. If it's politically achievable to safeguard people's private data from private companies, then why not do that? This is the old "why bother with solving x when people are starving in y?" argument, which has never been too convincing. And, for the record, I'm very interested to know what Apple's interpretation of the law is, because that could be what informs the design of their products.

kevinpet 13y ago
No this isn't "how can you worry about iphones while children are starving in Africa". If he had written a letter that only addressed the issues of whether Apple was exposing customers to security problems or future impersonation, then your criticism would be valid. Half his questions are about domestic spying and how the fingerprint reader impacts it. You can read the actual letter here: http://www.franken.senate.gov/files/documents/130919AppleTouchID.pdf http://www.franken.senate.gov/files/documents/130919AppleTou...
- somebehemoth 13y ago
  "Half his questions are about domestic spying..." Only 3 of the 12 questions mention domestic spying laws. 1 question refers to "any government". Every single question seems legitimate to me. I can't understand why anyone concerned with privacy would be against asking Apple to answer these questions. Your concern appears to be fixated on the "far left" and government spying. I can understand that concern, but I think the role of private corporations handling personal data should not be ignored. Lastly, I'd like to point out that the far left and Al Franken likely did not author the laws referenced. Neither do the far left and Al Franken have the power to change these laws without support of moderates, Republicans, and the American public. Franken is pointing out, in a very open and public way, how these laws could be used to abuse TouchId. If nothing else it shines a much needed light on the relationship of spying laws to private corporations.
baddox 13y ago
> If it's politically achievable to safeguard people's private data from private companies, then why not do that? Because a government with the power to do that can and most likely will use that power to do things that aren't good for anyone but themselves and their stakeholders.
- somebehemoth 13y ago
  But the government already does set rules on how businesses can use their customers' personal data. In the absence of such rules isn't it fair to say that corporations will use their customers' personal data in a way that only serves themselves and their shareholders? Not trusting the government with regards to privacy is understandable; trusting corporations to do the right thing for anyone but their shareholders is not.
  - baddox 13y ago
    You're assuming that the government has a net positive effect for consumers (versus corporations), which I doubt.

by Osmium 13y ago

kevinpet 13y ago

No this isn't "how can you worry about iphones while children are starving in Africa". If he had written a letter that only addressed the issues of whether Apple was exposing customers to security problems or future impersonation, then your criticism would be valid. Half his questions are about domestic spying and how the fingerprint reader impacts it. You can read the actual letter here: http://www.franken.senate.gov/files/documents/130919AppleTouchID.pdf http://www.franken.senate.gov/files/documents/130919AppleTou...

somebehemoth 13y ago
"Half his questions are about domestic spying..." Only 3 of the 12 questions mention domestic spying laws. 1 question refers to "any government". Every single question seems legitimate to me. I can't understand why anyone concerned with privacy would be against asking Apple to answer these questions. Your concern appears to be fixated on the "far left" and government spying. I can understand that concern, but I think the role of private corporations handling personal data should not be ignored. Lastly, I'd like to point out that the far left and Al Franken likely did not author the laws referenced. Neither do the far left and Al Franken have the power to change these laws without support of moderates, Republicans, and the American public. Franken is pointing out, in a very open and public way, how these laws could be used to abuse TouchId. If nothing else it shines a much needed light on the relationship of spying laws to private corporations.

baddox 13y ago

> If it's politically achievable to safeguard people's private data from private companies, then why not do that? Because a government with the power to do that can and most likely will use that power to do things that aren't good for anyone but themselves and their stakeholders.

somebehemoth 13y ago
But the government already does set rules on how businesses can use their customers' personal data. In the absence of such rules isn't it fair to say that corporations will use their customers' personal data in a way that only serves themselves and their shareholders? Not trusting the government with regards to privacy is understandable; trusting corporations to do the right thing for anyone but their shareholders is not.
- baddox 13y ago
  You're assuming that the government has a net positive effect for consumers (versus corporations), which I doubt.