In the OP photo, did Tim just squeeze out a silent but deadly one?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple CEO Tim Cook: Privacy is 'One of the Top Issues of the Century'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Except when they don't.
A business may not discriminate based on, say, skin color or sexual orientation in terms of delivery of standard services. (Note that this does not compel a business to be forced into a contract as per work-for-hire.)
Darth Tulhu
macrumors 68020
I really appreciate what Tim is trying to do here.
However, I'm annoyed at how some here are hiding their frakked-up "different opinion" behind the "freedom of speech" thing, and then throwing it back at Tim as if it somehow discounts what he is talking about.
Freedom of speech does not imply freedom from consequence. As is true for all things, there are lines that cannot be crossed.
The events on January 6th show EXACTLY how running your mouth with a frakked up "opinion" gets other people hurt.
If you feel free to speak "your opinion", and said opinion aims to harm, oppress, disenfranchise, and abuse people other than yourself then we the people will exercise our freedom to remove your ability, to the extent necessary, from your opinion impacting a society that wants to move forward together.
Such ideology is a cancer to be excised.
However, I'm annoyed at how some here are hiding their frakked-up "different opinion" behind the "freedom of speech" thing, and then throwing it back at Tim as if it somehow discounts what he is talking about.
Freedom of speech does not imply freedom from consequence. As is true for all things, there are lines that cannot be crossed.
The events on January 6th show EXACTLY how running your mouth with a frakked up "opinion" gets other people hurt.
If you feel free to speak "your opinion", and said opinion aims to harm, oppress, disenfranchise, and abuse people other than yourself then we the people will exercise our freedom to remove your ability, to the extent necessary, from your opinion impacting a society that wants to move forward together.
Such ideology is a cancer to be excised.
I'm guessing many take the words seriously.
Maybe companies are, but in a thread about Apple, can you cite some examples (dishonesty and two faced) given privacy and security are not binary? One cannot flip a switch and declare privacy and security "all done", nothing else in the world to do.
Yep, this is what I was referring to above. So are YOU advocating Apple ban google ip addresses from it's infrastructure. (I actually don't expect an answer because the above comment is ludicrous)
Such as (given the above comments, that one can fix/update/change/tweak a massive corporation by flipping a light switch)
I don't believe it for a second.
Tim Cook says this for now, because he can pretend to be a champion for privacy while Apple is still relying primarily on hardware sales.
As Apple moves more heavily into services and ad revenue, they will quietly backtrack on their ostensibly ideological battle for privacy. Mark my word.
Tim Cook says this for now, because he can pretend to be a champion for privacy while Apple is still relying primarily on hardware sales.
As Apple moves more heavily into services and ad revenue, they will quietly backtrack on their ostensibly ideological battle for privacy. Mark my word.
I'd add the freedom of speech is right up there too Mr Apple, and monopoly's need to be broken up.
Apple CEO Tim Cook this morning spoke at the virtual Computers, Privacy, and Data Protection conference where he discussed Facebook's business model and Apple's upcoming enforcement of App Tracking Transparency, and afterwards, he elaborated on some of his speech in an interview with Fast Company.
Cook said that privacy is "one of the top issues of the century" and that it's important to put "deep thinking" into that to figure out how to "leave something for the next-generation that is a lot better than the current situation." Cook said privacy "should be weighted" like climate change, another huge issue the world is facing.
On the topic of why people should care about their privacy, even when there's nothing to hide, Cook said that he tries to get people to think about living in a world of constant surveillance, something that Apple did this morning with the release of a document called "A Day in the Life of Your Data" that details how third-party companies track user data across websites and apps.Cook also pointed out that not all "Big Tech" companies are the the same, and he said that he worries about the "broad-brush categorization" of giving major companies like Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Apple all one label. "I try to encourage people to think a level deeper than that and think about the companies themselves and their business models and how they conduct themselves, and so on and so forth--what their values are," he said.
Cook was asked about whether he thinks artificial intelligence is a threat and how it ranks compared to privacy, and he said that "both of those" can be used negatively and can be "amplified by technology." Cook said that ethical AI, and ethical data privacy and data collection are both important issues that "have to be worked on."
Fast Company's full interview with Cook also touches on technology and extremism, privacy legislature and regulation, and the future of privacy in tech, and it's well worth a read.
Article Link: Apple CEO Tim Cook: Privacy is 'One of the Top Issues of the Century'
I don't get Facebook's argument here, or Google or any other app developer. If your business tanks because people don't want to opt in, then you shouldn't be in business, simple.
Sure, but let's discuss privacy, because that is what the thread is discussing. Because privacy, security and user experience have to meld together. Apple already has stated the privacy aspect, that is stewardship of your PII, is important to them.
Now if one is discussing the balance between security and user experience, a lousy user experience at the expense of placebo security features does not advance the cause.
What's listed above is not related to privacy.
So people who conspire to do bad things should not be able to have privacy? This means they don’t have access to encryption technology, nor be able to meet privately in person, nor use courier or mail service.
You have to take the good (privacy as a fundamental human right) with the bad (people misusing it). You can’t really distill this solution. People who are caught committing crimes should serve a prison sentence and relinquish privacy then.
Huge props to Apple. They’re the big player leading the way. They need to do more, though. Encrypt iCloud asap.
Remind where their business is based on ad revenue again?
Email Address:
Spoofing is done by changing the DisplayName (like a corporate network phone has the name or corporate name not the end users' extension). This is done at the source of the email provider and the result is the same if you using Outlook, Exchange on premises/online, GroupWise, Domino Servers (Lotus Notes 1-2-3), Google etc. Not the fault of the email program you're using.
Email fraud SMTP address (the actual email address) - is much more insidious - again not the fault of the email program you use.
Mail is set to be simple to the end user - as MOST users to NOT view the full email address even for an O365 account in Outlook app. You can simply tap on the DisplayName of the sender and BOOM you can view the full email address.
Not sure where you came up with your email thought process above, maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're really mean to convey?
How about making products in USA? You'll still be a trillion dollar company.
Apple CEO Tim Cook this morning spoke at the virtual Computers, Privacy, and Data Protection conference where he discussed Facebook's business model and Apple's upcoming enforcement of App Tracking Transparency, and afterwards, he elaborated on some of his speech in an interview with Fast Company.
Cook said that privacy is "one of the top issues of the century" and that it's important to put "deep thinking" into that to figure out how to "leave something for the next-generation that is a lot better than the current situation." Cook said privacy "should be weighted" like climate change, another huge issue the world is facing.
On the topic of why people should care about their privacy, even when there's nothing to hide, Cook said that he tries to get people to think about living in a world of constant surveillance, something that Apple did this morning with the release of a document called "A Day in the Life of Your Data" that details how third-party companies track user data across websites and apps.Cook also pointed out that not all "Big Tech" companies are the the same, and he said that he worries about the "broad-brush categorization" of giving major companies like Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Apple all one label. "I try to encourage people to think a level deeper than that and think about the companies themselves and their business models and how they conduct themselves, and so on and so forth--what their values are," he said.
Cook was asked about whether he thinks artificial intelligence is a threat and how it ranks compared to privacy, and he said that "both of those" can be used negatively and can be "amplified by technology." Cook said that ethical AI, and ethical data privacy and data collection are both important issues that "have to be worked on."
Fast Company's full interview with Cook also touches on technology and extremism, privacy legislature and regulation, and the future of privacy in tech, and it's well worth a read.
Article Link: Apple CEO Tim Cook: Privacy is 'One of the Top Issues of the Century'
Well, yes, but...
In today's world, there are so many people spewing lies and outright fomenting violence. At some point, there needs to be a way to identify people that are doing that, and target them, and somehow either get them to stop, or eliminate them from society. You can scoff at the issue all you want, but my brother has guns stocked up, and hundreds of thousands of rounds of ammo, and Facebook is supporting people on their platform communicate their agenda.
Would I want someone to be looking at my emails? Listening to my phone calls? No, but I also have no public 'sheen' of being a right wing nut job. Maybe instead of looking at people's emails, chats, social media, they need to watch these people's credit cards, and where they show up,, and who they are calling. You can tell a lot about what a person thinks by what they buy, what they watch, who they talk to. You don't need to actually see what they say to know they are up to no good.
Surveillance will just shift to what they can see. (One thing they largely can't see, is what guns people have. The NRA made sure that was 'secret')
Wow, you certainly took that opinion and ran with it. I'm impressed.
If you think that the encryption that you and I can get access to isn't possible of being broken, I really would wonder about you. ANY encryption can be broken. It comes down to how much it takes to break it, and whether there is a 'secret' back door in the algorithm, and what keys they use. As I remember, there was an encryption scheme a number of years ago that had a long key, but the first half of the key was always the same. It was said it was a 'programming mistake'. Sure, and I'm King of Mars. Bow to me...
You said they shouldn’t have the right to privacy measures and followed up by saying they aren’t effective anyway. Non sequitur.
When the Q brain dead zombies and militias marched on the capital, looking for politicians to harm/kill, they gave up their right to be in a civilized society, in my opinion. They need to be put in a place where their delusions can't incite them to cause any more violence and attacks on society. That was what mental institutions were for, and prison now.
I was making the point that encryption is only as good as it is... Politicians have been after 'hard encryption' for decades. Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, even Obama. Funny that the trump administration wasn't able to outright kill it.
Without hard encryption, almost anything can be broken. The fight is over 'us' having hard encryption, and 'them' using it... When the scandal about the compromised encryption key hit, it basically decimated any actual privacy. Fingers were pointed, and it appeared that a 'government entity' made them compromise their customers privacy.
But, whatever...
Great episode: