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 Speaks on Importance of Privacy, Encryption at Champions of Freedom Event
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Unfortunately, I'm afraid sometimes this may be true today. An author may not even realize he lacks an essential part of his education. Or he may be very conscious and deliberate in his choice, but misuse it or be too narrow in his thinking. He might even think he's spreading his own beliefs - but it doesn't necessarily work that way.
I'd have to go with The Verge on this one - especially based on the context. I suspect Tim would too. That's why the quote immediately caught my attention - first that he said it that way, but then secondly that I thought he was misquoted.
Last edited:
The companies that use the ad-based revenue model are companies whose SW I refuse to use. Data mining is built into their mission statement/DNA. Sometimes I think Google is just a front for the NSA.
It's amazing how many people think that there really is such a thing as a "free lunch."
Some of you seriously believe that Apple doesn't data mine **** out of you?
For starters they have your fingerprints tied to your real name and address, they store your movements and soon they will have your health status. Oh and add gapped backdoor in iOS for NSA and their cooperation with authorities.
The thing is no one knows what Apple does with your data until they get caught like tracking and storing your location.
Whole speech is one giant bs. Apple, Google and Microsoft are all the same they would sell their own grandmas three times if they could to get some cash flow.
For starters they have your fingerprints tied to your real name and address, they store your movements and soon they will have your health status. Oh and add gapped backdoor in iOS for NSA and their cooperation with authorities.
The thing is no one knows what Apple does with your data until they get caught like tracking and storing your location.
Whole speech is one giant bs. Apple, Google and Microsoft are all the same they would sell their own grandmas three times if they could to get some cash flow.
With ‘evil’ I meant that you know that you’re essentially paying in kind with your data and are never using a service for ‘free’. And I meant it ironic, in case that wasn’t obvious. Google’s business model has always relied on this, starting with Google Search. The novelty, and brilliance, of Google Search itself was the two-sided market of consumers and advertisers. Once you encounter the Google brand, you know that you’re giving up your data for whatever purpose that Google makes money off.
With Apple, you don’t know. You might know that they also collect data through iTunes and iAd, but you don’t know to which extent and to what end. This is precisely why I find Apple so deceptive when it comes to privacy, you have to pay attention to the fine details (and the ridiculously long terms of use of iTunes and iCloud). With Google, you don’t have to worry about this, it will always be used for some commercial purpose and that makes it easy, for me, to just stay away from all of their services, even if I think the data they get from me through that particular service is harmless.
I agree that it’s still a problem for people that don’t pay any attention to this. If you’re reasonably tech-savvy however, you should easily see Google for what it is. The only reason why you would continue using Google is not because you don’t know what they do behind the scenes, it’s because you simply don’t care and prefer to enjoy the benefits their services have for you.
Last edited:
Possible, but the author's still responsible.
In the best case, I suppose that would indicate apathy, so I wouldn't want to claim that defense. It's one of the last things I'd want to be apathetic about.
As Bono's stated, it's much better to be passionate about it (i.e. religion or God), regardless of which side you stand on.
"....Apple reject the idea that our customers should have to make tradeoffs between privacy and security," Cook opened."
This is the classic Apple contradict themselves. Tim wants to collect all data, but he also understand the relationship between privacy ? That does not make sense.
If Apple wants to collect all data, then decide on THEIR behalf, how do you know from a customer point of view that the info will be what they say ?
Like any company, I put this "trade off" in action, at the customer end, not at the business end..
So, actually agree customers should make trade-off's to maintain THEIR own privacy..
Apple want you to send all info to them, THEN they will decide what is reverent or not... hence it appears it makes it easy for the user since they don't need to do anything but share..
To me, that's a no no. The word 'Privacy' doesn't mean anything anymore if anyone BUT you decides. That's where i come in
I only give up what I want.... ... and Apple can't make me.... and if its required, then i put fake info so Apple wants tob share info ? No problem, go right ahead, because it doesn't identify me anyway.
This is the classic Apple contradict themselves. Tim wants to collect all data, but he also understand the relationship between privacy ? That does not make sense.
If Apple wants to collect all data, then decide on THEIR behalf, how do you know from a customer point of view that the info will be what they say ?
Like any company, I put this "trade off" in action, at the customer end, not at the business end..
So, actually agree customers should make trade-off's to maintain THEIR own privacy..
Apple want you to send all info to them, THEN they will decide what is reverent or not... hence it appears it makes it easy for the user since they don't need to do anything but share..
To me, that's a no no. The word 'Privacy' doesn't mean anything anymore if anyone BUT you decides. That's where i come in
I only give up what I want.... ... and Apple can't make me.... and if its required, then i put fake info
so Apple wants tob share info ? No problem, go right ahead, because it doesn't identify me anyway.
Where does Apple have my fingerprints?
Wow, that service was so terrible, I actually forgot it existed
Yes, it was! And we all know if it would have taken off, Apple would have gladly got into the Social Networking business.
Urmm, I believe apple doesn't have your physical fingerprint image stored. It's a mathematical representation of your fingerprint generated by the Secure Enclave (for 5s) or the Secure Element (for 6, 6 Plus and Air 2). So nobody will be able to decode the mathematical representation and convert it into a fingerprint image. Assuming they can even get into Secure Enclave/Element in the first place.
And this mathematical representation of your prints are stored locally and never in their servers. Possibly just tokens are generated when you need to make an app purchase with your prints. For unlocking phone I believe no internet connection is even needed.
https://support.apple.com/en-sg/HT204587
Last edited:
interesting that this article appears at the same time that MacRumors adds the dreaded "Log in with Facebook" to their forum login.
regarding Cook's comments, he articulates admirable ideals, but words are cheap. for years, corporations have been making secret back-room deals with government spys to provide direct access to customer's private data without warrants (phone calls, internet, etc.) They have done this either because they fear government reprisal for failure to cooperate, they believe that the data helps "national security", or they just don't care. Regardless, they enter into deals that prevent them from EVER revealing their cooperation, or even that the government requested it. So, ultimately, it comes down to the fact that we have to take Tim Cook's word for it.
regarding Cook's comments, he articulates admirable ideals, but words are cheap. for years, corporations have been making secret back-room deals with government spys to provide direct access to customer's private data without warrants (phone calls, internet, etc.) They have done this either because they fear government reprisal for failure to cooperate, they believe that the data helps "national security", or they just don't care. Regardless, they enter into deals that prevent them from EVER revealing their cooperation, or even that the government requested it. So, ultimately, it comes down to the fact that we have to take Tim Cook's word for it.
I think it goes deeper than what you said, although I have no issue with what you said. The problem is that even in the quid pro quo scenario you mentioned, you left out where this leads. As our information becomes "public" in Google land or Facebook land, these bots begin to create a fairly accurate profile of you. This profile, in the wrong hands, can lead to identity theft or other bad things. With the government it is much the same except it may be the government doing the bad things.
Bottom line, we should all take the responsibility to secure our on-line identity or risk potentially everything. For me, protecting my identity, means that I do not use ANY google or Facebook product or feature. They do indeed have good software, but in my opinion the price is too high. If one understands the value of their identify and other electronic stuff, they would see that buying the software is cheaper than using the "give-my-identity-for-software" freeware.
He will say the same thing he always says. We value your privacy. We do not share your personal data. All the while the data mining continues. Apple will continue to sell targeted ads using that data, just like they always have. Some here will continue to excuse it because Apple makes more of their money through hardware sales. More importantly, he won't be lying. Apple will not be sharing personal data. Just using it.
But you're okay with Apple doing the exact same thing?
Wait a minute, we have iAds, we have apps like Swiftkey that are allowed to collect your data, and Apple collects your personal data and does who knows what with it yet Tim Cook is being hailed as the king of user privacy? Too funny!!
They don't... However the relationship between the user and Apple (if assumed) is not shared, stays on device, then people may have the same "worry" about using Lastpass in Offline mode, how do we do its actually offline and not just saying its offline mode to keep users happy ?
There is some trust here about its being ok, and while i respect privacy, i am not entirely that paranoid (yet).
but if i ever get there, wake me up
Personally, I think a lot of what Tim said was BS. Consumers don't have to see these companies for what they are, we already know what they are. People are willing to trade some privacy for free services. I am one of those people.
Spoken like a champ here @ 2:34:
Spoken like a champ here @ 2:34:
Last edited:
Then you're not ALL for privacy, are you? You're mostly for privacy, unless it costs too much.
swingerofbirch
macrumors 68040
Anyone else remember picking up your photos from a bin at Costco where everybody else's were as well?