Apple Took Out a CES Ad To Troll Its Competitors Over Privacy (engadget.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Took Out a CES Ad To Troll Its Competitors Over Privacy (engadget.com)

Posted by msmash on Sunday January 6, 2019 @05:20AM from the for-what-it-is-worth dept.

An anonymous reader shared a report: Historically, Apple hasn't had an official presence at CES. It's not surprising given the company's success at hosting and hyping its own product launch events -- long before the iPod and iPhone brought Apple to the top of the technology mountain, Steve Jobs keynotes were can't miss events. The company is also very deliberate about its marketing campaigns; when I see Apple billboard ads, they focus on new product close-ups with minimal messaging. This is why the giant ad banner I saw when I arrived in Las Vegas yesterday for CES 2019 caught my eye. Positioned not far from the convention center where CES takes place, the sign is a cheeky riff on the old "what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas" slogan -- and with just a few words, it casts an Apple-shaped shadow over the convention.

151 of 254 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Free pass over privacy by sinij · 2019-01-06 05:23 · Score: 5, Insightful

I don't understand why Google, Facebook, Twitter and a lot of other companies get a pass over privacy. It used to be that Apple, was a bad player in this area by unnecessary collecting data. While Apple didn't change, everyone else rushed into most outrageous abuses. So, sadly, now Apple is one of the better players in this area.
1. Re:Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-06 05:33 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  It's because people don't really care. I have to admit, I use an Android phone so I guess I am encouraging privacy violations. But the alternative is to lock myself into Apple's walled garden, inability to simply copy files to my phone, and instead have to use a format iTunes will be happy with or use a flaky in app transfer; I pick sacrificing my privacy.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
2. Re:Free pass over privacy by b0s0z0ku · 2019-01-06 05:34 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  Well said -- Apple practically invented the walled garden and computing as a prison. Prison is also a very private place (from the public, just not from the guards).
3. Re:Free pass over privacy by Presence+Eternal · 2019-01-06 05:50 · Score: 2
  
  I care, and I'd pay an extra fifty to have great privacy on my phone. I won't pay an extra five hundred though. Or put up with a screen with a wedge sliced out of it. Or no headphone jack. Or no microsd support. Or virtually no customization. Or...
4. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 06:00 · Score: 1
  
  It's actually extremely easy to copy files to an iPhone. You drag them to iCloud storage on your computer and then they show up under the iPhone "files" app.
5. Re: Free pass over privacy by b0s0z0ku · 2019-01-06 06:01 · Score: 1
  
  None. Motorola allows bootloader unlocking, so I can install vanilla Android or a cloudfree ROM without much effort.
6. Re:Free pass over privacy by b0s0z0ku · 2019-01-06 06:03 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  What if you don't want said files on Apple's servers? If it can't be copied cloudfree, it's worthless for privacy.
7. Re: Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-06 06:08 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think 'walled garden' means what you think it means. If you don't like those apps then just take them out of your home screen and don't use them.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
8. Re:Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-06 06:08 · Score: 1
  
  Then I would have to have my laptop connected to iCloud, which I do not want.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
9. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 06:13 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  You should make your own phone then. It will be exactly what you want.
10. Re:Free pass over privacy by b0s0z0ku · 2019-01-06 06:17 · Score: 1, Troll
  
  I have exactly what I want... Moto G4 Play.
  Removable battery? Check!
  Ability to install custom bootloaders for cloudfree storage? Check!
  Removable SD card? Check!
  Price point ($100) low enough to make losing/breaking it not a big deal? Check!
  Tim Cook can go fellate someone.
11. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 06:17 · Score: 2
  
  Similarly easy: email the files to yourself and open them on your phone. Or use an app that supports Box/Dropbox/OneDrive/etc.
  It's very, very easy for anyone without a long string of hangups or other random complaints about anything and everything.
12. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 06:22 · Score: 1, Offtopic
  
  Hurray for Internet crank phone!
  We non-cranks like our phones too.
13. Re:Free pass over privacy by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-06 06:27 · Score: 2
  
  "Free pass", as in hauled before Congress, Secrets leaked by the UK Parliament, multiple lawsuits, so bad they had to start taking out adverts to reassure people?
  You also need to understand what each of those companies is actually doing. I mean, Twitter's privacy invasion is pretty minimal. Google makes everything opt-in for the most part, at least in the EU where it is legally requires - maybe the US is worse. So really it's just Facebook, and Facebook is taking a lot of flak for it.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
14. Re:Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-06 06:31 · Score: 1
  
  Hint: using email to transfer files is a shitty workaround.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
15. Re:Free pass over privacy by thomst · 2019-01-06 06:31 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  b0s0z0ku applauded:
  
  Well said -- Apple practically invented the walled garden and computing as a prison.
  Not even. Not at all, in fact.
  Once upon a time, there was a company called Wang that owned the word processing market. If you wanted to use computers to process words, there really wasn't any choice, at least in a corporate environment at the departmental level or above. And, much like Oracle's sales model, buying into Wang meant hiring ridiculously-overpriced consultants to create document templates and teach your staff how to use their proprietary, terminal-based network and software. You even had to buy printers from them, because there were no third-party products that worked with Wang's hardware ecosystem.
  Oh, and you didn't actually get to buy Wang systems - you could only lease them. And, boy, were they expensive to lease, even discounting things like support contracts and having to pay Wang technicians to install upgrades and patches.
  Before that, there was IBM and its competitors in the mainframe market, with their proprietary hardware and software systems and their own legions of consultants and product support engineers.
  Steve Jobs learned about closed computer ecosystems from the real pioneers in the field. In fact, it's only because in 1981, or thereabouts, the same IBM that kept such an iron grip on its mainframe environment inexplicably decided to open its PC architecture to third-party vendors that we've gotten used to open standards for personal computing hardware and the OSes that control it. Otherwise, closed gardens would be the rule, rather than the exception for the consumer and small-business computing markets.
  I don't have a lot of good things to say about the current version of Apple, but Steve Jobs isn't to blame for the walled garden concept - it existed long before he was even conceived ...
  
  --
  Check out my novel.
16. Re:Free pass over privacy by Graymalkin · 2019-01-06 06:31 · Score: 1
  
  When was Apple collecting unnecessary data and what data are you claiming they collected? I don't remember any news stories about Apple building a shadow profile of me or reading all my e-mail to show me "better" advertisements.
  
  --
  I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
17. Re:Free pass over privacy by Rockoon · 2019-01-06 06:31 · Score: 1
  
  You are a very strange kind of ignorant
  
  When the problem that uploading data to 3rd party servers removed private is brought up, you list other ways to upload data to 3rd party servers... fucking dumb shit
  
  --
  "His name was James Damore."
18. Re: Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-06 06:32 · Score: 1
  
  So you need to run a server on your phone, and you don't see a problem with that?
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
19. Re:Free pass over privacy by b0s0z0ku · 2019-01-06 06:32 · Score: 1
  
  Using Someone Else's Server(tm) is a shitty kludge. Direct transfer or go home.
20. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 06:37 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  It's a very easy workaround. But there's also Dropbox, etc.
  Regular people who don't have hangups about WTF-ever can use one of the dozen simple ways to get files onto their iPhone. Only people like you have trouble.
21. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 06:45 · Score: 2
  
  If it's too private for your email, then keep it on an isolated computer that's not connected to the Internet. Don't walk around with those files on your phone.
  You're afraid of every 3rd-party service. About 98% of everyone else isn't. I will admit I don't intuitively understand fringe sensibilities.
22. Re: Free pass over privacy by tepples · 2019-01-06 06:47 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  If you don't like those apps then just take them out of your home screen and don't use them.
  "Uninstall updates" doesn't recover the gigabyte of space that the outdated copies of these apps occupy in an Android device's read-only system partition.
23. Re:Free pass over privacy by tepples · 2019-01-06 06:49 · Score: 2
  
  Run a web server on your laptop, connect to said web server from your phone using a 10.x.x.x or 192.168.x.x IP address, and upload things that way.
24. Re:Free pass over privacy by b0s0z0ku · 2019-01-06 06:56 · Score: 1
  
  Direct wifi transfer would also be fine. No need for some other asshole's server as the middleman. Also, what's wrong with cables? They're always fast, relatively secure, and not slowed down by reasonable outside interference.
25. Re:Free pass over privacy by Btrot69 · 2019-01-06 06:56 · Score: 1
  
  MakerPhone is a popular Kickstarter:
  https://www.kickstarter.com/pr...
26. Re: Free pass over privacy by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-06 06:57 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  I kind of wonder if this is Apple's strategy to deflect shareholder's from paying attention to the fact that Apple's volume has been decreasing for years now, only sustaining their revenue numbers by raising the price. In effect, he's spent the last few years building a house of cards.
  Tim Cook keeps blaming it on repairs, and in the case of China, tariffs, but that doesn't at all reflect what third party research data is showing: In nearly all cases, people say they're too expensive and don't deliver enough value to justify that. Apple products, no matter how good or terrible, get rave reviews in magazines and such because Apple retaliates against any that don't give going reviews, even for the shitty homepod (that Apple claimed was a breakthrough, despite being 4th to market, leaving stains on wood tables, and having no interoperability even by Apple's own shit standards in that department.) House of cards indeed, or perhaps a house of bent iPad pros that reflect Apple's high quality standards.
27. Re:Free pass over privacy by LynnwoodRooster · 2019-01-06 06:58 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  Here you go. You don't have to use Google, Facebook, Twitter, or any of those if you want a smart phone with a secured, hardened OS. You can strip pretty much all Google tools out of Android, you don't need to use any of the social/data gathering platforms.
  
  --
  Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
28. Re:Free pass over privacy by LynnwoodRooster · 2019-01-06 07:01 · Score: 2
  
  I like to just plug a USB cable between $DEVICE and my phone, and just drag-and-drop files because my phone enumerates as a flash drive.
  
  --
  Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
29. Re: Free pass over privacy by LynnwoodRooster · 2019-01-06 07:03 · Score: 1
  
  I connect a USB cable. Or I can just click on the Bluetooth icon in my Windows system tray, and then drag and drop files to or from my phone. No need for a server, or 3rd party.
  
  --
  Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
30. Re:Free pass over privacy by 605dave · 2019-01-06 07:04 · Score: 1
  
  I've been following Apple since the 80s, when did they have a privacy scandal? Honest question, I don't remember one.
  
  --
  Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a difficult battle. - Plato
31. Re:Free pass over privacy by LynnwoodRooster · 2019-01-06 07:06 · Score: 1
  
  You don't remember too well... They used your phone and iTunes use to target ads on their iAds platform. Yes, iAds is gone - but do you think they're also no longer using your data to target other services towards you?
  
  --
  Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
32. Re:Free pass over privacy by 110010001000 · 2019-01-06 07:07 · Score: 1
  
  That is because they don't make it public. Please tell me people are not so naive that they believe that Apple isn't collecting user data!
33. Re:Free pass over privacy by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2019-01-06 07:09 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  You're seriously suggesting, in a discussion about online privacy, that a reasonable alternative to sharing your digital life with whoever makes your phone is to make your own phone?
  Here's an alternative suggestion: Makers of consumer devices are required by law to make all data collection and use of online services transparent, with notifications prominently displayed on the packaging and UI to legally mandated visibility standards. Moreover, any data sharing that is not essential for the device to operate must be optional, with user controls that stick once set and are set to full privacy by default. Likewise, the user must explicitly opt-in to activate any online service, even if it is essential for the use of the device. Penalty for failure to comply is 10% of global revenues from sales of the affected devices in the first year and the percentage doubles each year, in addition to any server ever touched without the correct user authority being subject to removal and destruction without compensation.
  See, anyone can propose severely one-sided rules for this game. The difference is that for some reason we're accepting the rules set by big business in an industry where competition isn't functioning effectively any more because the abuse is too profitable under current laws for any big player to offer an alternative that doesn't come with that abuse.
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
34. Re:Free pass over privacy by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2019-01-06 07:11 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Every method you've suggested so far involves transferring your files via a third party. There is absolutely no reason anyone should have to do that to transfer data between their personal devices that are sitting next to each other on a desk right in front of them, and your whole approach goes against the generally good principle of security and privacy by design and by default.
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
35. Re:Free pass over privacy by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2019-01-06 07:16 · Score: 1
  
  You're afraid of every 3rd-party service. About 98% of everyone else isn't.
  I'm not sure that's even close to true. People accepting the use of 3rd party services because they have no realistic alternative while still living a normal life does not mean the approve of those services and everything they do.
  Moreover, a big part of the problem is that the average non-geek user has no idea how much damage these data leaks can do. Meanwhile, ID theft is one of the fastest-growing crimes and has devastating effects on its victims, cyber-bullying is one of the biggest problems for young people today and something many parents struggle to protect their kids from, etc.
  At some point, those of us who do know how this stuff works and what is really happening has a moral obligation to step up, raise awareness, and campaign for businesses to do better, whether voluntarily or not.
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
36. Re:Free pass over privacy by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-06 07:16 · Score: 1
  
  ...and instead have to use a format iTunes will be happy with...
  Do you think AAC is a proprietary Apple-only format?
  You can buy a song on iTunes, drop it on an SD card, insert that SD card into an old Nintendo DSi and it will play the song just fine.
  Music videos, TV shows and movies are a different story, but Apple hasn't used DRM for music sold on iTunes for over a decade now.
37. Re:Free pass over privacy by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2019-01-06 07:18 · Score: 1
  
  You are correct. If you want to transfer files with a cable, in a ritualistic homage to historic data handling methods, then an iPhone is a poor choice.
  False dichotomy is false. There is no reason any number of local wireless alternatives couldn't be used instead. Apple just chooses not to support them, presumably to promote the lock-in effect within its own ecosystem. It's perfectly reasonable for privacy-conscious users to be wary of that and make another choice when buying a device.
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
38. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 07:19 · Score: 1
  
  Kickstarter is a third party service. Is there a way I can direct-transfer funds to MakerPhone?
  I have silver coins right here in an oiled leather pouch waiting for them. How do I get them to the MakerPhone people? (No third parties can be involved in the transaction because ... that would be bad somehow.)
39. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 07:21 · Score: 1
  
  That's how normal people transfer files. So yeah.
40. Re:Free pass over privacy by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2019-01-06 07:26 · Score: 1
  
  Normal people transfer files the way they are given, because they don't know any better.
  Normal people are also subject to identity theft, targeting marketing, and all the other risks that come with sharing potentially sensitive data with third parties unnecessarily.
  It is baffling to me that you seem to equate the common behaviour with good behaviour. Why on earth would anyone do that?
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
41. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 07:31 · Score: 2
  
  ...your whole approach goes against the generally good principle...
  The complaint was about inability to transfer files, not about failure to optimize upon such a principle. You want files protected optimally, don't transfer them at all. You want easy transfer of files, then there are easy ways.
  You want some in-between thing that's partly optimized for one thing and partly optimized for an entirely contrary thing, then no one can guess which amount of optimization you want for which side of the balance, so no one can offer a suggestion for that. Too bad.
42. Re:Free pass over privacy by WaffleMonster · 2019-01-06 07:33 · Score: 1
  
  It's because people don't really care. I have to admit, I use an Android phone so I guess I am encouraging privacy violations. But the alternative is to lock myself into Apple's walled garden, inability to simply copy files to my phone, and instead have to use a format iTunes will be happy with or use a flaky in app transfer; I pick sacrificing my privacy.
  Android is a open source operating system with a Linux kernel.
  The problem is not the operating system it's software bundled with it. Most notably Google Play Services which magically transforms anything running Android into malware.
  Alternative images freely available and regularly maintained can be downloaded for many devices here: https://lineageos.org/
43. Re:Free pass over privacy by WaffleMonster · 2019-01-06 07:36 · Score: 1
  
  It's actually extremely easy to copy files to an iPhone. You drag them to iCloud storage on your computer and then they show up under the iPhone "files" app.
  LOL
44. Re:Free pass over privacy by magusxxx · 2019-01-06 07:37 · Score: 1
  
  Acquired with extreme prejudice. ;)
  
  --
  Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
45. Re:Free pass over privacy by Solandri · 2019-01-06 07:38 · Score: 2
  
  The best compromise is a rooted Android device. No walled garden, and you can use something like AFWall+ to block apps from sending info over the network unless you explicitly allow it. Or you can use XPrivacyLua to feed the privacy-invading apps fake data to pollute what they collect. e.g. Make Facebook think you're located in the South Pacific. The root hiding tools are mostly effective at running apps which normally refuse to run on rooted devices (e.g. Netflix).
  
  That said, some privacy must be given up for functionality. I had to mull over giving Google my location data for several months. In the end, I gave it to them because I use Google Maps' current traffic conditions heavily. The traffic updates are generated by phones sending their locations to Google in real-time; so if everyone chose to protect their location data, there would be no live traffic on Maps. I could either participate in helping provide the service I use, or I could become a leech - using but not giving. I decided I was morally obligated to participate.
46. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 07:38 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Normal people transfer files the way they are given, because they don't know any better.
  Also because it works. Then they go on with their lives instead of worrying about ethereal threats.
  
  Normal people are also subject to identity theft, targeting marketing, and all the other risks that come with sharing potentially sensitive data with third parties unnecessarily.
  That's a good reason to use iCloud.
  
  It is baffling to me that you seem to equate the common behaviour with good behaviour. Why on earth would anyone do that?
  Because it was about transferring files to an iPhone, not about passing a purity test on forensic data handling.
47. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 07:56 · Score: 1
  
  IPhone doesn't support uucp or rsync over stunnel or whatever other scheme you have in mind.
48. Re:Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-06 07:58 · Score: 1
  
  I just want to use the method that makes the most sense, is the most secure, and is the simplest. A USB cable and a filesystem copy.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
49. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 08:01 · Score: 1, Offtopic
  
  Hurray for Internet crank phone!
  We non-cranks like our phones too.
  Sad to see jealous fanboys making fun of common sense feature sets and pricing that offer real value.
  You cannot accept the fact my 6 year old Android cost me 10x less and has more storage and 5x battery capacity of a top of a line iPhone XS ripoff device without throwing little fanboy tantrums blurting out "normal people" this "crank" that... quite sad.
  I can accept whatever about your phone. I like my phone better though. I get the features I want. You get to feel good about saving some money. No problem with either one of those.
50. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 08:04 · Score: 1
  
  So you require support for Microsoft's FAT32 filesystem in your phone.
51. Re:Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-06 08:10 · Score: 1
  
  It doesn't have to be fat32 to be compatible with most devices.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
52. Re: Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 08:11 · Score: 1
  
  Celebrities should use 2-factor.
53. Re:Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-06 08:13 · Score: 1
  
  You don't remember the iCloud leak? How many images would have been there to leak if Apple didn't make uploads to their servers practically automatic? How many people even knew those pictures were on their servers?
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
54. Re:Free pass over privacy by gnasher719 · 2019-01-06 08:22 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  It used to be that Apple, was a bad player in this area by unnecessary collecting data.
  
  Could you give some examples of that? Google is a company whose sole purpose is to collect data about you and hire it out to advertisers. Apple's purpose is to make devices and sell them to end users.
  
  Google was the company who quite accidentally added code to their ads when running on a Microsoft browser that went around the user's privacy settings, and quite accidentally added different code when running on Safari that went around the Safari user's privacy settings.
55. Re:Free pass over privacy by grumpy-cowboy · 2019-01-06 08:23 · Score: 1
  
  Purism Librem 5 phone : https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/
  
  --
  Will $CURRENT_YEAR be the year of the Linux Desktop?
56. Re: Free pass over privacy by gnasher719 · 2019-01-06 08:28 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Celebrities should use 2-factor.
  Now seriously, while I need a password that cannot be cracked when it turns up in a 10 million password collection that hackers have "liberated", any celebrity trying to protect things that they _really_ don't want to be seen needs a password that cannot be cracked by someone who investigates their lives, finds all the schools they have been to, the names of all pets they owned, and so on and so on.
  
  I have passwords that resist random or dictionary attacks, but that could be cracked if someone investigated my life very thoroughly. That's fine because no hacker does that. Not if I was a celebrity.
57. Re:Free pass over privacy by gnasher719 · 2019-01-06 08:30 · Score: 1
  
  It's a very easy workaround. But there's also Dropbox, etc.
  If someone doesn't want to transmit files through Apple's servers, suggesting to use Dropbox instead is rather lame. Apart from fears that companies could intentionally cheat on you and your privacy, sharing files through iTunes is _intended_ not to be shared with others, while DropBox is _intended_ to be shared, so it is more likely that hackers might be able to "share" your data.
58. Re:Free pass over privacy by gnasher719 · 2019-01-06 08:33 · Score: 1
  
  Do you think AAC is a proprietary Apple-only format?
  Some people think AAC means "Apple Apple Crap", when in reality it means "Advanced Audio Codec". Among other things it is what all DVDs have been using. And as other says, MP3's work just fine.
59. Re:Free pass over privacy by apoc.famine · 2019-01-06 08:39 · Score: 2
  
  That's not remotely true. Encrypt your data, transfer via the cloud, then unencrypt.
  Unless you're using a very outdated encryption method, the absolute worst that can happen is that they keep your data for as long as it takes for that method to get broken or for computing to advance far enough that it can be brute forced. And about the only people willing to do that are the intelligence agencies of nation states, and if you're on their radar, you're probably fucked in a dozen different ways anyway.
  
  --
  Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
60. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 08:45 · Score: 1
  
  The point is that it's easy. I admit I don't understand fringe sensibilities that keep otherwise capable people from using the simplest, most straightforward, most widely-used ways to do ordinary things like transfer files.
61. Re:Free pass over privacy by phantomfive · 2019-01-06 08:53 · Score: 2
  
  Airdrop worked fine last time I tried it.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
62. Re:Free pass over privacy by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2019-01-06 10:05 · Score: 1
  
  You want some in-between thing that's partly optimized for one thing and partly optimized for an entirely contrary thing, then no one can guess which amount of optimization you want for which side of the balance, so no one can offer a suggestion for that.
  There's nothing contrary about wanting secure local transfer of data between devices. We've been doing it for decades, and no paradox is involved. A whole range of different connections and protocols exist for this purpose, and almost every other popular device can do it right now. But with Apple gear...
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
63. Re: Free pass over privacy by dgatwood · 2019-01-06 10:13 · Score: 1
  
  Tim Cook keeps blaming it on repairs, and in the case of China, tariffs, but that doesn't at all reflect what third party research data is showing: In nearly all cases, people say they're too expensive and don't deliver enough value to justify that.
  Particularly now. I can't help but find it ironic that Apple is lecturing the rest of us about privacy just a few short months after they moved all their Chinese users onto servers in mainland China — one of the most dubiously privacy-risking moves in the history of the industry.
  And now, their sales in China are weak. Imagine that. It's almost like after years of Apple using privacy as a selling point, their users actually care about privacy.
  Just saying.
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
64. Re:Free pass over privacy by thegarbz · 2019-01-06 10:16 · Score: 1
  
  get a pass over privacy
  They don't get a pass over privacy. They deliver a product and or service in return for people giving up privacy. It's like asking why Apple gets a pass for accepting money.
65. Re:Free pass over privacy by thegarbz · 2019-01-06 10:20 · Score: 1
  
  but Steve Jobs isn't to blame for the walled garden concept
  He certainly is to blame. The examples you cite are from an archaic time and were limited to specific contracts between specific people. These situtations existed as corporate contracts and affected few people outside of large corporations.
  Computing evolved into a more general case and the world ended up with devices at the fingertips of every normal person. Steve Jobs is to blame from introducing the walled garden concept at this general level which is orders of magnitude worse than a few ultra rich companies trying to screw each other out of service contracts.
66. Re:Free pass over privacy by dgatwood · 2019-01-06 10:26 · Score: 1
  
  If someone doesn't want to transmit files through Apple's servers, suggesting to use Dropbox instead is rather lame. Apart from fears that companies could intentionally cheat on you and your privacy, sharing files through iTunes is _intended_ not to be shared with others, while DropBox is _intended_ to be shared, so it is more likely that hackers might be able to "share" your data.
  That's arguable. Dropbox has a system designed specifically to provide access to specific users authorized to access a given file, and requires the other party to know about the file, whereas iCloud is designed to automatically share files with any device tied to the account, complete with a mechanism for easily adding new devices to the account. So the question becomes one of which is more likely: Dropbox getting their ACL programming wrong or Apple having a bug that allows injecting a new device into an iCloud account.
  I'm not saying you're wrong, because it's really anybody's guess which is more likely. Either way, I don't think it is necessarily safe to assume that a site designed for secure public sharing is more likely to leak data than a site designed for secure inter-device sharing within a single account. I actually suspect that the odds are about the same.
  
  --
  Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
67. Re:Free pass over privacy by antdude · 2019-01-06 10:32 · Score: 1
  
  In Windows? :P
  
  --
  Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
68. Re:Free pass over privacy by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-06 10:36 · Score: 1
  
  Since you can't sideload on Apple products, you can only install Apple approved encryption which is worthless if you are trying to not trust Apple.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
69. Re:Free pass over privacy by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-06 10:41 · Score: 1
  
  Makers of consumer devices are required by law to make all data collection and use of online services transparent, with notifications prominently displayed on the packaging and UI to legally mandated visibility standards. Moreover, any data sharing that is not essential for the device to operate must be optional, with user controls that stick once set and are set to full privacy by default. Likewise, the user must explicitly opt-in to activate any online service, even if it is essential for the use of the device. Penalty for failure to comply is 10% of global revenues from sales of the affected devices in the first year and the percentage doubles each year, in addition to any server ever touched without the correct user authority being subject to removal and destruction without compensation.
  You just described GDPR.
  Opt-in on everything is mandatory. Companies can't force you to opt-in just to use a service unless it's absolutely essential to providing that service. And if they don't comply it's 2% of global turnover.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
70. Re:Free pass over privacy by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2019-01-06 11:23 · Score: 1
  
  You just described GDPR.
  Sadly, I didn't. I might have described something close to what GDPR was meant to be. What it actually is does not provide such strong guarantees to data subjects but does cause significant overheads even for businesses that have no interest in these kinds of creepy data-mining activities.
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
71. Re:Free pass over privacy by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-06 11:35 · Score: 1
  
  Can you give a specific example of that? I don't know what you are referring to.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
72. Re:Free pass over privacy by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2019-01-06 11:41 · Score: 1
  
  Which aspect, the guarantees not being as strong as a lot of people seem to be assuming or the (possibly unintended) consequences in terms of overheads?
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
73. Re:Free pass over privacy by Kohath · 2019-01-06 12:13 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  That you consider yourself a "non-crank" after the above, and everything else you've ever whined/lied about here, lol.
  I'm not the least bit cranky.
  What's wrong with anything posted in this discussion? These guys are trying to say it's a big problem copying data to an iPhone when it's actually very easy. Kids and old people can do it, but these Slashdot readers (of all people) have trouble.
  And they're trying to claim that's because everyone else is doing it wrong...? That's hard to relate to. You'd think some self-awareness would eventually be realized. Doesn't seem to be happening though.
74. Re: Free pass over privacy by aleck7 · 2019-01-06 15:39 · Score: 1
  
  AirDrop works for me and my family.
75. Re: Free pass over privacy by cyber-vandal · 2019-01-06 18:06 · Score: 1
  
  The simplest and most widely used method is via a USB cable. Why is that not possible on Apple devices?
76. Re:Free pass over privacy by shilly · 2019-01-06 18:45 · Score: 1
  
  Despite the huge amounts of nonsense talked about below, there is a spectacularly easy method to copy files to your phone. It's called AirDrop and it uses TLS encryption to directly transfer data, peer-to-peer. The WiFi radios of the two devices communicate directly.
  But of course neither you nor anyone else in this thread could be expected to know about this. I mean it's only been around for the last seven years. And it's not llke Slashdot is a tech site.
77. Re:Free pass over privacy by shilly · 2019-01-06 18:47 · Score: 1
  
  Direct wifi transfer exists. It's called AirDrop. It's been around since iOS 7!
78. Re:Free pass over privacy by shilly · 2019-01-06 19:09 · Score: 1
  
  This is wrong on multiple levels. iCloud is a cloud storage service offered by Apple. Obviously, Apple receives the data you put on iCloud, because that is what the service is.
  But iCloud encrypts the data at rest and in transit (there's one complicated exception for email). Some data (eg Home, Health, payment, etc) is end-to-end encrypted.
  If you bother reading Apple's privacy policy *carefully*, you will see that Apple collects location data "in a form that does not, on its own, permit direct association with any specific individual". It goes on to spell out that "Unless you provide consent, this location data is collected anonymously in a form that does not personally identify you and is used by Apple and our partners and licensees to provide and improve location-based products and services."
  Siri isn't discussed in the privacy policy. It's discussed elsewhere, extensively, and it doesn't work the way you think it does. "The longer you use Siri and Dictation, the better they understand you and improve. To help them recognize your pronunciation and provide better responses, certain information such as your name, contacts, music you listen to, and searches is sent to Apple servers using encrypted protocols. Siri and Dictation do not associate this information with your Apple ID, but rather with your device through a random identifier. Apple Watch uses the Siri identifier from your iPhone. You can reset that identifier at any time by turning Siri and Dictation off and back on, effectively restarting your relationship with Siri and Dictation. When you turn Siri and Dictation off, Apple will delete the User Data associated with your Siri identifier, and the learning process will start all over again."
  The FBI case was nothing like what you describe. The iPhone in question had iCloud enabled. But the FBI had the corporate owner of the iPhone reset the iCloud password, which meant new data couldn't be backed up to iCloud.
  How do you get to be so confidently wrong about everything?!
79. Re:Free pass over privacy by tlhIngan · 2019-01-06 20:12 · Score: 1
  
  Since you can't sideload on Apple products, you can only install Apple approved encryption which is worthless if you are trying to not trust Apple.
  You can sideload in iOS since iOS 8 - nearly 4 years ago.
  Sure you need a Mac, and Apple requires you to compile the code yourself, but there is a very healthy collection of apps that Apple never approves (all open-source of course).
  More dodgy sites will let you sideload any app from MacOS and Windows (typically used to install pirated apps).
  Sideloading has been available and accessible for years now.
80. Re:Free pass over privacy by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-06 21:05 · Score: 1
  
  The guarantees, for example. It would also be interesting to hear how in your model they could be stronger, yet result in lower overhead.
  I'll feed any good ideas through to my MEP.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
81. Re:Free pass over privacy by houghi · 2019-01-06 22:41 · Score: 1
  
  It is because people don't really have a choice. Either you give up your privacy, or you give up your freedom. Sure, some people will be able to root their phone. Big whoop. 99.9% of the people are unable to do that.
  It is like picking if they cut off your left or your right pinky. They might think it is a choice, but it really isn't.
  
  --
  Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
82. Re:Free pass over privacy by thomst · 2019-01-07 01:01 · Score: 1
  
  I stated:
  
  but Steve Jobs isn't to blame for the walled garden concept
  Which prompted thegarbz to respond:
  
  He certainly is to blame. The examples you cite are from an archaic time and were limited to specific contracts between specific people. These situtations existed as corporate contracts and affected few people outside of large corporations.
  Computing evolved into a more general case and the world ended up with devices at the fingertips of every normal person. Steve Jobs is to blame from introducing the walled garden concept at this general level which is orders of magnitude worse than a few ultra rich companies trying to screw each other out of service contracts.
  As far as I'm concerned, you're drawing a distinction without a meaningful difference.
  Granted that, in the 1970's and early 80's the computing world and the business world were, from a commercial perspective, practically identical, my point is that the walled garden as a business plan was utterly ubiquitoius. It wasn't the dominant paradigm - it was the only paradigm. All Jobs did was to appropriate that business model and apply it to the consumer market. Others (including what was left of Wang, interestingly enough) attempted it, but their products tended to be aimed at niche markets, rather than at affluent consumers, and they weren't lucrative enough to let those players get very fat, or grow very large.
  Jobs simply realized that certain types of users would see his walled garden as a positive thing - and that those very users were the ones who were most willing to pay a premium price for computer devices whose interfaces were designed to be as simple and non-threatening as possible. So he built a prison for them that's so plush they never see the bars - and they paid him handsomely for that favor.
  It wasn't built for you. It sure as Hell wasn't built for me. But the people for whom it was built love it, and would fight you, if you tried to take it away from them ...
  
  --
  Check out my novel.
83. Re:Free pass over privacy by jarlsberg71 · 2019-01-07 01:10 · Score: 1
  
  I can copy any files I want via USB to a desktop or email and save as if it's a giant USB drive.
  
  --
  E8B8B
84. Re:Free pass over privacy by thegarbz · 2019-01-07 01:10 · Score: 1
  
  without a meaningful difference
  Hundreds of millions of people disagree. A few 10s of thousands would agree with you though.
  I'm not saying Jobs invented the model. I'm saying that Jobs adopting it was significant and had an affect on people. For all intents and purposes Apple invented the walled garden as it affects the hundreds of millions of people impacted by it today.
85. Re:Free pass over privacy by Falconhell · 2019-01-07 01:50 · Score: 1
  
  Ive recently gone to a Sony Z3 android phone, after many years of iPhones, the differences are marginal at best, and the Sony camera is very good. It really makes no difference at all in day to day use. The cost saving was 80%.
86. Re:Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-07 03:51 · Score: 1
  
  And AirDrop works with Linux/Windows/Android right? This is a tech site and we normally have a lot of platforms, so we need something that works with all our devices.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
87. Re:Free pass over privacy by shilly · 2019-01-07 04:17 · Score: 1
  
  AirDrop and Android -- this makes no sense. You were talking about transferring data from an iOS phone to a laptop.
  AirDrop and Linux -- no, you use a method like this: http://www.libimobiledevice.or...
  AirDrop and Windows -- no, you use one of the methods here https://it.toolbox.com/blogs/a...
  AirDrop is designed for secure and private transfer of data between Apple devices. The whole point of the Apple proposition is to be able to offer solutions that take advantage of the tight integration of software and hardware. So they are inherently non-cross-platform. Affecting shock or dismay at this situation is just stupid.
  And why you are fussed about transferring data securely and privately if you're just going to move it to an insecure platform that doesn't protect privacy is beyond me.
  As a tech person, was it really so difficult for you to search for this stuff?
88. Re:Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-07 04:22 · Score: 1
  
  As a tech person, I have better things to spend my time om and not be led by the nose to use some protocol that works with nothing because Apple wanted people to buy other Apple devices.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
89. Re:Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-07 04:24 · Score: 1
  
  I'm just thankful osx still works with samba. I guess that's all I'm allowed to ask for.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
90. Re:Free pass over privacy by shilly · 2019-01-07 09:00 · Score: 1
  
  You can ask for what you like. What you get is not guaranteed.
91. Re:Free pass over privacy by shilly · 2019-01-07 09:09 · Score: 1
  
  That sentence doesn't make sense. You're not going to be led by the nose to use AirPlay because you don't have a Mac so it doesn't work for you. But for your Windows and Linux laptops, I've suggested solutions.
  A thank you would have been nice. But then, that would have required you to recognise that someone was offering you some help for a problem you professed to have.
92. Re:Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-07 09:13 · Score: 1
  
  Installing an open source software library is not an alternative to a usb cable. I hope you can see some ways in which installing an open source software library is more complex than the desired solution here.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
93. Re:Free pass over privacy by shilly · 2019-01-07 10:54 · Score: 1
  
  I didn't promise that it was easy or straightforward to transfer files from an iOS device to a Linux laptop! I said it was easy to transfer files via AirDrop. You said "what about Linux". I said "here's a solution for Linux". I didn't promise easy. It really shouldn't be a surprise to you that iOS to MacOS file transfer is easier, more secure etc than iOS to Linux. Nor is it immoral of Apple to have this be the case, as you seem to think.
  Do you, in fact, have a Linux laptop to which you wish to transfer files from an iOS device, or is this all completely theoretical?
94. Re:Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-07 10:58 · Score: 1
  
  My main media library is a linux machine and I have several linux VMs.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
95. Re:Free pass over privacy by fluffernutter · 2019-01-07 11:01 · Score: 1
  
  Listen, it's all a moot point. There is just no simple way to do file copies to an iphone via a cable.
  
  --
  Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
96. Re:Free pass over privacy by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2019-01-07 15:08 · Score: 1
  
  OK, so one of the main uncertainties with GDPR is that you have to have a lawful basis for each type of processing you do. The acceptable bases are specifically enumerated, but one of them is the catch-all "legitimate interests". This is open to interpretation, and in practice that means organisations intending to perform data processing against their users' legitimate interests frequently continue to do so appealing to that basis for their legal authority. Perhaps in time the regulators will act on that more effectively, but their official guidance has generally been late and often quite unhelpful so far.
  Meanwhile, the exact same provision creates significant uncertainty for better organisations that are trying to play by the rules and not interested in doing anything particularly unpleasant or risky in privacy terms, because it's not clear whether a lot of processing that many of us (including the affected data subjects) would probably consider fair and reasonable is actually covered.
  This led to quasi-paradoxical behaviour like many organisations emailing people on their contact lists to ask them to re-confirm their consent. That one is ironic because those mails would themselves in many cases have fallen foul of even the previously existing rules had such consent not already been granted. But even that wasn't clear cut, because the new rules had more specific requirements for informed consent that weren't the common practice for a long time even among responsible organisations, which meant that for example even organisations sending only genuinely relevant emails to people who genuinely intended to receive them might not have been covered.
  This is just one small example of the broader issue of uncertainty under the legitimate interests basis, and that basis in turn is just one example of the general problem with the GDPR of being well-intentioned but causing much uncertainty and overhead for organisations that weren't actually doing anything scummy in the first place while simultaneously leaving plenty of wriggle room for those that were. Given how many businesses that covers, not to mention all the charities, government departments, etc, it's likely that the UK economy alone has lost literally billions of pounds in productivity as a result of the GDPR, much of it spent on little more than legal fees, consultancy fees and compliance red tape by organisations that required little if anything to be changed about their actual data processing activities.
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
97. Re:Free pass over privacy by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-07 21:23 · Score: 1
  
  That's a fair point, but I'm not sure it could be any other way because the law can't hope to enumerate every possible legitimate use of data. At best it would stifle innovation. In Europe this is the usual way of handling such situations, e.g. the law generally doesn't define what an "obscene publication" is and allows regulators and courts to hash it out, with the definition changing over time as society becomes more liberal.
  All they need to do to confirm that some use is legal is ask. I don't have an issue with companies being over-cautious with asking permission. That's the way to deal with uncertainty - just ask for permission. If you failed to do that before GDPR and are now scrambling to get it, that is probably a hint.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
98. Re:Free pass over privacy by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2019-01-07 22:05 · Score: 1
  
  That's a fair point, but I'm not sure it could be any other way because the law can't hope to enumerate every possible legitimate use of data.
  Of course not. I'm just illustrating the problem, not claiming there was some sort of perfect alternative solution available. But if you're going to make laws, and those laws are going to cost a lot of organisations a lot of time and money, the laws you actually make matter a lot more than any noble intentions you might have had.
  
  All they need to do to confirm that some use is legal is ask.
  Again, that might be have been the intent, but unfortunately the reality was very different. I was there. So were many, many other people in my professional network. You could try to ask, but it was no guarantee of even getting a response, never mind a useful, definitive one. Of course, that was also inevitable, because if the law can't enumerate every possible legitimate use of data, it's hardly practical for understaffed regulators to review every organisation's operating procedures and business models for free and on demand and to give an official opinion on whether they are compliant or what needs fixing if not.
  There were (and are) consultants charging £X,000 per day to fill this gap for larger organisations who could afford them, but as far as I can tell, those roles required no particular qualifications (e.g., they weren't necessarily legal experts) and had no particular authority (e.g., their opinions or interpretations were in no way binding on the regulators). They were just people who had tried to keep up with the often verbose and disorganised official guidance and listened for any informal remarks from regulators across the EU to search for any hint of how things would go. As with many external consultants, as much as anything they were probably there so senior management that did fall foul of the regulators later could point at spending significant money on professional advice and say "Well, we tried in good faith to be compliant".
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
99. Re:Free pass over privacy by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-07 22:23 · Score: 1
  
  You could try to ask, but it was no guarantee of even getting a response, never mind a useful, definitive one.
  What I meant was you could ask the data subject for permission. One of the great things about it, from my perspective, was that all I had to do was ignore people I didn't want to be associated with and they would be forced to delete data about me. No more making individual requests for removal.
  I suppose I'm looking at it more from an individual's point of view. I've got multiple complaints on the go because a lot of big companies (e.g. PayPal and Apple) can't seem to comply even when the requirement is clear.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
100. Re:Free pass over privacy by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2019-01-08 00:00 · Score: 1
  
  Ah, sorry, I misunderstood. One of the common arguments around the time of the GDPR's introduction was that because the European approach to these laws is to describe general principles and leave it to regulators and courts to resolve the finer details, businesses in doubt about whether they were going to be compliant could just ask whether their practices would be acceptable. But of course that was never going to scale, and so it proved in practice.
  Naturally you can do almost anything you might reasonably want to with explicit consent, but relying on consent alone comes with additional obligations. Where you're doing processing that is legitimate and reasonably expected, the general advice was to try to avoid that particular minefield as much as possible.
  That was partly because some of the record-keeping requirements were stricter under GDPR and would potentially disqualify even genuine consent freely given in the past. For example, maybe you didn't still have a copy of the exact wording from your web site a decade ago when someone signed up for your double opt-in mailing list.
  To be fair, it was also partly a defence against troublemakers. For those of us in the UK, and possibly some other EU states, the GDPR removed the small but non-zero financial incentive not to make subject access requests as a legally-backed form of harassment of any organisation someone didn't like. There was even an infamous "nightmare letter" that someone wrote to demonstrate just how far someone wanting to disrupt a business could go by exploiting all of their new rights under the law for vexatious purposes. If you aren't relying on consent, some of the more onerous obligations disappear, and you don't end up wasting so much time doing things like telling fraudsters where to go when they're trying to get you to delete records that would show them up as such.
  This is very different to recognising that the needle had moved too far and steps to protect individuals' privacy and provide reasonable rights accordingly were long overdue. As an individual, I totally respect that, and indeed I am a fierce advocate of better online privacy protections myself. But for much the same reason, my own businesses were never doing shady stuff with people's data anyway, and we still had to waste significant time and money on research and compliance even though we changed pretty much nothing about our actual data processing. Meanwhile, as you note yourself, the businesses these measures were really aimed at have not magically become perfect corporate citizens overnight.
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
101. Re:Free pass over privacy by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-08 00:28 · Score: 1
  
  I take your point, but for example I don't think the "nightmare letter" is actually all that bad. Most of the questions should be things that the company can answer easily anyway, and the answer will be the same for every request or at worst require a quick ctrl+F on a list of records involved in a data breech.
  So again I see it as a benefit. If companies were not able to answer those things already they should be now.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
102. Re:Free pass over privacy by shilly · 2019-01-08 00:44 · Score: 1
  
  But there are tons of simple ways of transferring files from an iOS device to a Linux device. FileExplorer Pro, for example.
  https://www.skyjos.com/fileexp...
  No idea if it works with a USB cable, but mainly because I can't be bothered to do all the checking.
103. Re:Free pass over privacy by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · 2019-01-08 01:06 · Score: 1
  
  I can only offer a similar principle to my earlier comments again here. In principle, it's fine to say organisations should be able to answer those questions. In practice, if you're dealing with a guy who does plumbing for a living but has a web site that was built for him three years ago by some freelancer or agency, it doesn't serve anyone's interests to provide a mechanism where someone who wasn't happy about something can legally tie that guy up in knots (or, realistically, cost him significant time and money getting professionals in again to deal with the issue). Even a small tech firm might need to take someone off real work for a few days and spend some money on a lawyer to figure out how to reply to a letter like that. If your startup only had two or three people doing everything in the first place, or maybe even just you working on your grand idea for the next Google out of your garage in your spare time, that's a disproportionate burden if you weren't actually doing anything shady in the first place and the request is vexatious.
  I think it's worth remembering that almost all businesses are small businesses. Things that are merely a "cost of doing business" to a large firm with dedicated admin and IT and legal staff can be very expensive for the little guy. Indeed, the GDPR itself has a 4% cap on the fines in terms of global annual turnover for giants like Facebook and Google, yet if your business has annual turnover under €20M, the cap is effectively 100% of your revenue and the GDPR and regulators therefore pose an existential threat. Combined with the inherent ambiguities in the regulations themselves and the lack of binding requirements for due process, you can see why smaller businesses are wary here.
  
  --
  If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
PRISM by deadaluspark · 2019-01-06 05:30 · Score: 5, Insightful

They're still a PRISM partner with the US Government which means they are completely compromised and your data isn't safe at all. Why does anyone even buy these fucking advertisements? Did everyone already forget about the Ed Snowden leaks? Are my fellow countrymen really that insipid, thick, and forgetful?
1. Re:PRISM by Registered+Coward+v2 · 2019-01-06 05:33 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  They're still a PRISM partner with the US Government which means they are completely compromised and your data isn't safe at all. Why does anyone even buy these fucking advertisements?
  Because they want to believe.
  
  Did everyone already forget about the Ed Snowden leaks?
  Who?
  
  Are my fellow countrymen really that insipid, thick, and forgetful?
  Yes
  
  --
  I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
2. Re:PRISM by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-06 06:29 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  To be fair there is no evidence that PRISM was voluntary, and in fact the leaked documents show that it worked by attacking those company's networks. Google took very public actions to cut off access after the leak. I'm sure Apple did something too, but didn't say what exactly.
  For example, there was that infamous slide showing otherwise protected Gmail data flowing between data centres. A few months later Google had it fully encrypted.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
3. Re:PRISM by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-06 11:22 · Score: 1
  
  They're still a PRISM partner with the US Government which means they are completely compromised and your data isn't safe at all.
  
  Hmm let's see. On the one hand, we have tech companies whose entire business model relies on harvesting and selling your data on any and every facet of your life to advertisers. One the other, we have Apple who maybe, perhaps in the past shared data (likely under coercion) with US intelligence agencies, which couldn't give less of a shit what tinfoil-hat nonsense you're up to unless it involves mass-scale harm to bystanders.
  Which one to go with... hmmm tough call...
  Pro tip: you're not important. At all. The only people who care about your "subversive" reddit posts are advertisers trying to sell you Reynolds Wrap.
4. Re:PRISM by Anubis+IV · 2019-01-06 18:33 · Score: 1
  
  The infamous “goto fail” bug was fixed shortly after the PRISM leaks. It had apparently been added to the codebase at the time that the NSA claimed Apple joined PRISM and was rumored to have been discovered after a code audit of everything checked in around that time. It also would have allowed everything the NSA claimed it could get from Apple.
Re:What happens to your iPhone, stay with your iPh by b0s0z0ku · 2019-01-06 05:44 · Score: 1

Fortunately, there's a market that "fell from the truck", at least for not. Stolen or counterfeit parts are the best parts, and hopefully they'll be harder to stop from entering the country with the government shutdown...
I hate Apple but.... by tomxor · 2019-01-06 05:53 · Score: 5, Interesting

How is this trolling? They are advertising a supposed feature of their phone, and supposing their competitors lack that feature then it's automatically trolling? I really hate Apple and think they are evil, but my view is not so warped as to think advertising advantages is trolling.
1. Re: I hate Apple but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-06 06:00 · Score: 1
  
  It's false. Apple claims it doesn't do bad but the reality is that every app on their store does what every app on Android does. Just because Apple itself is not an ad company doesn't mean that they really care. It's just so far not worth their time to collect this data.
  Let alone the fact that they intentionally steer people to use Google as a search engine now in exchange for billions of dollars. If that isn't selling users data idk what is going on in this world.
2. Re:I hate Apple but.... by Kohath · 2019-01-06 06:10 · Score: 2
  
  Anything someone doesn’t like for any reason is called trolling now. It's easier to name-call than to spend 10 seconds thinking about what's the actual objection.
3. Re:I hate Apple but.... by Sebby · 2019-01-06 06:13 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  The wording of the title is meant to trigger the Apple fanboys.
  
  --
  
  AC comments get piped to /dev/null
4. Re:I hate Apple but.... by Megol · 2019-01-06 06:21 · Score: 1
  
  One can troll while stating the truth, it is the act of intentionally provoking/manipulating people that matters.
5. Re:I hate Apple but.... by AmiMoJo · 2019-01-06 06:31 · Score: 1
  
  I guess the trolling would be trying to imply that all their competitors are inferior, when they are not.
  Look at how many people on Slashdot drank the coolaid and think that Google tracks your every move via Android and, bizarrely, Chrome. It's not true of course, unless you explicitly opt in to location history, same as you can with Apple devices if you want to make use if their features that rely on it. But that's the myth, and they are perpetuating it.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
6. Re:I hate Apple but.... by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-06 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  It's completely false, though. Apple has been caught - repeatedly - violating their own privacy policy and allowing third parties to do it too. From this Twitter thread, we've got: AccuWeather (and now we know the Weather Channel too) tracking your location even with location off in iOS, Uber getting root level access (basically) to iOS, allowing it to record all other apps and act as a keylogger, the revelation that all calls, FaceTime, and text messages are sent to Apple's servers, and then another time third party apps were discovered being allowed to access the contacts list without being granted permission to do so.
  So, uh, yeah. Apple may claim they like privacy, but they certainly can't be bothered to follow through.
7. Re:I hate Apple but.... by serviscope_minor · 2019-01-06 09:49 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  How is this trolling?
  It might be true but it's clearly done in a way to wind up the companies at CES. In other words, it's a troll, and an excellent classy one. Even people here seem to have forgotten that trolling is winding up, not just shit posting.
  
  --
  SJW n. One who posts facts.
8. Re: I hate Apple but.... by shilly · 2019-01-06 20:19 · Score: 1
  
  Erm, no
  https://privacyinternational.o...
True in a number of ways. by Cmdln+Daco · 2019-01-06 06:11 · Score: 1

When you belong to a mafia-like cult, it's true that your secrets stay within the organization. So long as you acknowledge that Apple owns you, they will protect you.
Meanwhile in the real world by Iamthecheese · 2019-01-06 06:24 · Score: 1

https://imgoat.com/uploads/ede...

--
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
What happens on your iPhone stays on your iPhone by Darinbob · 2019-01-06 06:28 · Score: 5, Informative

That's the slogan used, for those who don't want to have to actually click on the story and supply advertising revenue to a clickbait site.
I just switched back to iPhone for this reason by Btrot69 · 2019-01-06 06:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

I bought an iPhone on the first day in '07, cause it was obviously a great thing.
In about 2012, I switched to Android, mostly cause I run linux everywhere else and like it.
I thought I'd have more privacy, then slowly realized how stupid that was.
Looked into Cyanogenmod and LineageOS over and over, but ran out of time to ever actually do it.
Finally gave up, bit down, and went back to iPhone (it was a hand-me-down 6S)
I really liked Android. Still lots that can't do on the iPhone.
I really wish there was a better choice, but for now, I'm depending on Apple to keep the worst data harvesters at bay.
With Google, you don't get that option, got burned too many times.
1. Re:I just switched back to iPhone for this reason by Solandri · 2019-01-06 07:48 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  In about 2012, I switched to Android, mostly cause I run linux everywhere else and like it.
  I thought I'd have more privacy, then slowly realized how stupid that was.
  Looked into Cyanogenmod and LineageOS over and over, but ran out of time to ever actually do it.
  If you were considering Cyanogenmod (phone has unlocked bootloader and is rooted), you didn't look hard enough.
  
  AFWall+ lets you block apps from sending data over the network. Let's you selectively allow/deny access to the LAN, WiFi, and/or cellular networks for each app and service on your phone. (NetGuard claims to do the same without root, but I haven't tried it.)
  
  XPrivacyLua takes a different approach. It allows the apps to send data back, it just turns the data they see into fake data. So your location will be spoofed as being in the South Pacific, they will see a fake contact list instead of your real one, This works better if an app you need needs network access to function or crashes if you simply block its network access.
2. Re:I just switched back to iPhone for this reason by Chryana · 2019-01-06 10:29 · Score: 1
  
  Recent iPhone user here. This is something I found out as soon as I moved to iOS. One of the reasons I switched was Apple's claims of caring about privacy. While it may be true that Apple won't sell customer data to third parties, I don't think they do a good job of empowering their users to control what data is being shared by installed applications. Safari is the worst offender here. With iOS 12, they removed support for legacy extensions, which apparently killed almost all of the privacy oriented extensions available. I've found only one application, non-free, and nothing else whatsoever.
Gmail hasn't based ads on messages for 1 1/2 years by tepples · 2019-01-06 06:55 · Score: 1

Gmail used to scan your incoming mail for keywords in order to deliver contextually relevant advertising. It stopped that practice a year and a half ago. Since July 2017, Gmail ads are instead interest-based, drawing context from your browsing history on other Google properties and on third parties' websites that use Google analytics or advertising.
"Used to be"? by 110010001000 · 2019-01-06 07:05 · Score: 1

Apple USED TO BE? You must be naive to think that Apple isn't collecting tons of user data.
Trolling is a sign of desperation by bkmoore · 2019-01-06 07:11 · Score: 1

Come on Apple, you can do better. Where's a better product? Where did the SE 2 go? I'm sorry people aren't lining up to buy your latest models. Maybe your prices are just too damn high given our current economy and you don't have any compelling new features to sell.
Trolling is really just a cop out and a sign of desperation. It means you're all out of ideas and you have nothing new to offer. So you resort to trolling your rivals. We see this all the time in our politics, and now companies are trolling too and thinking it's normal? That's not cool.
1. Re:Trolling is a sign of desperation by sound+vision · 2019-01-06 07:43 · Score: 1
  
  Your Apple Tax dollars at work!
2. Re:Trolling is a sign of desperation by bkmoore · 2019-01-06 10:46 · Score: 1
  
  Your Apple Tax dollars at work!
  Thanks for proving my point.
Try a LineageOS phone will tier 1 support. by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-06 07:12 · Score: 1

Most of them are a generation or two old high end phone, not unlike your 6S, but the well supported ones work great, and when combined with f-droid provide an end to end open source experience, including firewalling.
I personally use one all the time, although my particular model (which is officially unsupported) had a variety of quirks my first generation device didn't (Huwei brand phone from the Android 2 days.)
Both have served me well for many years, and the benefits of Lineage outweigh the detriments, unless you need netflix or other widevine/ARM TEE L1 DRM support.
Ironically they sell you to Google by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-06 07:16 · Score: 1

Did you not know you are sold to Google for 9billion dollers.
Quick look at the top twenty on Apple store
YouTube
Instagram
Snapchat
Messenger
Facebook
Bitmoji
Netflix
Google Maps
Gmail
Spotify Music
Amazon
Uber
WhatsApp Messenger
Pandora
Wish
TikTok
Cash App
Google Photos
Google Chrome
Twitter
Looks like lots of Google and Facebook apps. Why hasn't Apple protected you
Ironically I moved from Apple to Android after watching the south park HUMANCENTiPAD about Apple's EULA and was disgusted by Apple.
Re:iCloud by Red_Forman · 2019-01-06 07:21 · Score: 1

I got news for you: under their clothes, everyone is naked.
Re:iAD I guess failed by LynnwoodRooster · 2019-01-06 07:23 · Score: 1

Rounded corners.
And courage.

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Re:Definition of trolling by Red_Forman · 2019-01-06 07:25 · Score: 1

Apple's phones comes with children's sweat and blood.
You really are deluding yourself if you think Android phones are any different. Basically everything is built or assembled in Chinese factories these days.
Re:iAD I guess failed by Red_Forman · 2019-01-06 07:27 · Score: 1

According to most Android trolls, they would be left with courageous rounded corners.
Re:AAC patents by DontBeAMoran · 2019-01-06 07:48 · Score: 1

If you don't like AAC, you can always use the decades-old MP3 format.

--
#DeleteFacebook
SMS by Excelcia · 2019-01-06 08:13 · Score: 1

Apple still redirects 100% of all SMS traffic aimed at other iPhone users through its own servers. Installing facebook or twitter on my phone doesn't do that. If I buy an iPhone I can choose if I want to use Twitter or Facebook at all. I can't choose whether I want Apple to have all my SMS traffic.
1. Re:SMS by shilly · 2019-01-06 20:14 · Score: 1
  
  That's not how iMessage works. If the message is sent from or to an iPhone where iMessage is disabled, it is treated as an SMS.
  All this is of course ignoring the fact that iMessage is end-to-end encrypted, and you can turn off iCloud Backup for iMessages.
  And SMS's are inherently much less secure than iMessages.
Re: iAD I guess failed by LynnwoodRooster · 2019-01-06 08:17 · Score: 1

Nah, that's the domain of those stupid Essential and Pixel phones. The iPhones don't have a notch - they added tabs on the left and right sides!

--
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Re:Definition of trolling by gnasher719 · 2019-01-06 08:39 · Score: 1

You really are deluding yourself if you think Android phones are any different. Basically everything is built or assembled in Chinese factories these days.
The first really badly negative news about Apple in China was an article claiming that the highest number of complaints by people building iPhones was about overtime. Then someone looked further and the complaints were about the fact that workers couldn't always get as much overtime (and extra money) as they wanted.

Then there was the scandal when 300 workers in the iPhone factory threatened to jump from a roof. Well, it was in fact at the factory where iPhones were built. At the same factory, Microsoft Xbox was built. And Microsoft was scaling down production, and these 300 workers were in danger of losing their jobs building Xboxes.
Re:What happens on your iPhone stays on your iPhon by goose-incarnated · 2019-01-06 09:05 · Score: 1, Troll

That's the slogan used, for those who don't want to have to actually click on the story and supply advertising revenue to a clickbait site.
It's almost like the apple-exclusive fappening never happened... You never really understand the term "Reality Distortion" until you see Apple's marketing literature (which sooner or later get regurgitated by iPhone users).

--
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
God shut up already you fucking idiot, jesus by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-06 09:20 · Score: 1

You are too dumb and boring to matter, stifle your urge to blather in public. You're a moron. Nobody cares. Hold it in, go bother your mom.
Who do I root for here? by Snotnose · 2019-01-06 09:59 · Score: 2

Apple, who has usually had (IMHO) second rate hardware for over inflated prices, but they care about user's privacy. Or everyone else.
Some brands sell your data by AHuxley · 2019-01-06 10:39 · Score: 1

Some brands give your data away to the US gov under PRISM.

--
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Windows Phone by DogDude · 2019-01-06 11:08 · Score: 1

I use a Windows Phone to keep my data private. Works fine.

--
I don't respond to AC's.
Re:Gmail hasn't based ads on messages for 1 1/2 ye by Graymalkin · 2019-01-06 11:39 · Score: 1

So your response is Google used to read your e-mail until recently but now they just cyber-stalk you. That's technically an improvement.

--
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
Software non-freedom remains the root issue. by jbn-o · 2019-01-06 12:19 · Score: 1
Only Apple's bosses determine what "Apple's purpose" is. We come to know what Google's main line of business is (spying) because what now know that they have been doing (spying). Now that we know more about what Apple, Microsoft, and other proprietors do we can retroactively say what they've been doing. Snowden and others have provided irrefutable proof that software proprietors don't care about one's privacy and the structure of proprietary software was a long-time clue to those who understand the power of software non-freedom over the user regarding what is possible. Certainly keeping secrets from the user and putting in general-purpose holes into systems for future exploitation are the most practical means by which to do many things against the user's interests including but not limited to not looking out for their privacy. If Apple gets a pass amongst technocrats it's because some technically skilled users are easily distracted by details and not repeatedly taught to look at the bigger picture (software non-freedom is the root of virtually all of these abuses). Here are some more specific examples of these points:
- Apple iTunes flaw went unfixed for years and allowed remote access which enables spying and a lot more. There was also news of a hidden backdoor API in OS X for years which granted root privileges. This too could have enabled spying and a lot more.
- Apple has blocked Telegram from upgrading its app for a month. This evidently has to do with Russia's command to Apple to block Telegram in Russia. The Telegram client is free software on other platforms, but no apps are free on an iThing.
- As of 2015, Apple systematically bans apps that endorse abortion rights or would help women find abortions. This particular political slant affects other Apple services.
- There are many more vulnerabilites listed here and here which could be turned into privacy violations depending on how these vulnerabilities or backdoors are used.
--
Digital Citizen
And how about that Apple privacy in China? pfft by Nocturrne · 2019-01-06 12:28 · Score: 1

Tim Cock doesn't like to talk about that...
Re:iAD I guess failed by MrKaos · 2019-01-06 23:32 · Score: 1

You forgot to mention that through Intelligence sharing agreements with Australia all Apple products can be easily taken off the iPhone despite Apples massive bilboard, which is essentially bullshit.
But let's not factor Law into Apples brainwashing fantasy.

--
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Needs an asterisk by Anonymous Coward · 2019-01-07 01:11 · Score: 1

What happens on your iPhone stays on your iPhone. **
** Only while Airplane mode is active