Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Are you being disingenuous or do you not really understand that when you select to advertise to a demographic with dozens of variables to hone in on a specific user, that you’re buying the product of users’ data that Google collects?

I'm buying access to a targeted audience, but I'm not gaining access to the specific data that Google collected. It's two very different things.

A good comparison is I can also advertise to a niche magazine but the magazine is not providing me with specific name and address of each of their subscribers, their billing history, login history to their websites or time spent viewing each of their pages, or list of all the customer interactions they've collected.
 
Last edited:
I'm buying access to a targeted audience, but I'm not gaining access to the specific data that Google collected. It's two very different things.

A good comparison is …

A sausage. You buy the specific ingredients and some junk meat of your choice, all wrapped up in a shiny, smooth and cute skin!

You never want to see what and how the ingredients go into a sausage, even if Grandma is making it at home, you love the product and the illusion is great.

Your "targeted" audience does not exist without the data trove mined by Google; or FaceBook.
 
A sausage. You buy the specific ingredients and some junk meat of your choice, all wrapped up in a shiny, smooth and cute skin!

You never want to see what and how the ingredients go into a sausage, even if Grandma is making it at home, you love the product and the illusion is great.

Your "targeted" audience does not exist without the data trove mined by Google; or FaceBook.


Yep that's how all advertising works. Be it TV, sports, magazines, news, whatever. They build a product that people consume and the publishers of that product then sell advertising based on the audience of that product.

That's very different than selling the actual data being collected that Google basis their audiences on which is something Google does not do.
 
Google does not, and I repeat, does not get user identifying information about anything I search for. It’s not hypocritical at all to allow users to get search results from Google that aren’t tied to a specific user.

When you make a request to Google - e.g. a search - cookies are transmitted with the request and response. One or more of these cookies will be a unique identifier - we'll call it "visitor ID" - that persists for a long period. You've probably had yours set for months or even years.

This visitor ID is used by Google to tie up your sessions and activity across Google sites and other third-party websites or apps you visit that use Google's analytics or advertising services. It's critical to their operation and forms the basis for many of their products.

You said this tracking is not personally identifiable. That is (or should be) true in Europe. But you said it's not tied to a specific user. This is incorrect - it absolutely is. Without that, Google's model fails. That specific user might just be identified as a random ID, but they are the same random ID. And their profile will build, and build, and build.

Check it out yourself:

1. Visit Google in your browser, go to Dev Tools > Application > Cookies and look for 'NID'.
2. Now do the same on this page (look under 'analytics.google.com' in Cookies). Same NID.

This NID cookie is just one link to an "anonymous" profile of you. This profile will have every search you made, every page you visited, every product you bought* on any website or app** that uses Google's services. For example, it knows you read this very article.

I've oversimplified this, as there is far more than one measly cookie used to achieve this. But the concept is true.

In short, your search results are tied to you, user #192473593.

* May not understand the purchase or product itself - may just understand "bought something"
** Depends on integration, but possible
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
If Apple is so concerned about privacy, WHY can't you reply to a FaceTime call in AUDIO ONLY mode?
That would be a nice enhancement, but presenting it in such an if/then format is a non-sequitur - their model is likely that you're doing FaceTime calls with friends/family and you may be expecting the call (arranged time or used Messages first to coordinate), so it's not a unexpected intrusion and it's not a random stranger. This article, and the video Apple released, are all about keeping outsiders out of your stuff, not about telling grandma to call back later. You're shoehorning a reasonable enhancement request into a place it doesn't fit.
 
If Apple is so concerned about privacy, WHY can't you reply to a FaceTime call in AUDIO ONLY mode?

I've requested this for YEARS on Apple's website. Maybe you're not dressed or in the bathroom or having a bad hair day. SO SIMPLE to implement this. Sometimes I get a FaceTime call and I WANT to talk to the person, but I don't want them to see me.

Why can't you just put your finger over the camera? Or face the phone a different direction?
 



Apple today shared a new privacy-focused iPhone ad on its YouTube channel. The ad will premiere tonight and air through March Madness in the United States before expanding to select other markets globally.


The 45-second video starts with the tagline "privacy matters" and then shows a variety of humorous if not slightly awkward situations where people would want their privacy protected in everyday life. In one scene, for example, two men briefly pause their conversation while a waitress is at their table.

"If privacy matters in your life, it should matter to the phone your life is on," the ad concludes. "Privacy. That's iPhone."

The ad arrives around six weeks after a major FaceTime bug was uncovered that allowed one person to call another person over FaceTime and listen to that other person's audio without the call being answered. Apple fixed the bug in iOS 12.1.4 and apologized, but it certainly wasn't good for its reputation.

Apple similarly promoted its privacy stance with a billboard near CES 2019 in Las Vegas that read "what happens on your iPhone, stays on your iPhone."

applelasvegasbillboard-800x600.jpg

Bugs aside, Apple really does place an emphasis on privacy, especially compared to some other tech giants like Facebook. Apple has long said it believes privacy is a "fundamental human right," and as part of that, it aims to minimize its collection of customer data and disassociate it from an individual user when it does.

Article Link: Apple Says 'Privacy Matters' in Humorous New iPhone Ad

Privacy matters until you download all these apps that have access to your information
 
When you make a request to Google - e.g. a search - cookies are transmitted with the request and response. One or more of these cookies will be a unique identifier - we'll call it "visitor ID" - that persists for a long period. You've probably had yours set for months or even years.

This visitor ID is used by Google to tie up your sessions and activity across Google sites and other third-party websites or apps you visit that use Google's analytics or advertising services. It's critical to their operation and forms the basis for many of their products.

You said this tracking is not personally identifiable. That is (or should be) true in Europe. But you said it's not tied to a specific user. This is incorrect - it absolutely is. Without that, Google's model fails. That specific user might just be identified as a random ID, but they are the same random ID. And their profile will build, and build, and build.

Check it out yourself:

1. Visit Google in your browser, go to Dev Tools > Application > Cookies and look for 'NID'.
2. Now do the same on this page (look under 'analytics.google.com' in Cookies). Same NID.

This NID cookie is just one link to an "anonymous" profile of you. This profile will have every search you made, every page you visited, every product you bought* on any website or app** that uses Google's services. For example, it knows you read this very article.

I've oversimplified this, as there is far more than one measly cookie used to achieve this. But the concept is true.

In short, your search results are tied to you, user #192473593.

* May not understand the purchase or product itself - may just understand "bought something"
** Depends on integration, but possible
Goes much further, they will derive your identity from multiple data points, fingerprinting techniques and with AI assistance. So from usage patterns, timings, spelling and all the meta data alone they can very well identify.
 
Then they should fire every Google and FaceBook App in their "store".

Well, ya they could... but then users would complain "we can't use Facebook on iOS".. And Facebook's never gotta clamp down....we know that because its a sharing by nature.

That’s not what Apple is talking about. Apple can’t prevent me from using Safari to visit websites that might steal my credit card information or whatever else I might decide to give them. If Apple did this they’d be slammed for censorship. Same goes for any Apps or services I might use.

Apple is talking about what THEY do with your data (since Apple knows a lot about you and your device usage).

You can bypass just about any "privacy type issue" with "Well, don't look at your data, but it helps "improve" his service or app"

Doesn't that sound better? More people will happily give up their data
 
Considering the renewed attention that is being spotlighted on tech giants such as Facebook, Apple’s decisions to double down on privacy and security is starting to look more and more prescient by the moment.
 
Then they should fire every .... App in their "store".

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-08/is-apple-really-your-privacy-hero

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-on-apps-sharing-information-on-users-friends

Privacy matters when you dont tell everything but creating false hype. Were was the privacy when apple let developers to collect, build databases and sell the info to make money? And it is still possible if you dont get caught... Privacy matters, apple? How exactly? Only when advertizing but not in a real life?
 
Last edited:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-08/is-apple-really-your-privacy-hero

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-on-apps-sharing-information-on-users-friends

Privacy matters when you dont tell everything but creating false hype. Were was the privacy when apple let developers to collect, build databases and sell the info to make money? And it is still possible if you dont get caught... Privacy matters, apple? How exactly? Only when advertizing but not in a real life?
Apps can’t get to your contacts unless you give them explicit permission. And privacy like security is not an endpoint it’s a process, which Apple is obviously committed to.
 
Apps can’t get to your contacts unless you give them explicit permission. And privacy like security is not an endpoint it’s a process, which Apple is obviously committed to.

No, they dont but good luck using apps that rely on accessing photos, icloud, contacts etc... without giving them permission.

So basicly you need to give them permission unless you are only using apple apps and keep 3rd party apps away.
 
No, they dont but good luck using apps that rely on accessing photos, icloud, contacts etc... without giving them permission.
What’s your point? All or nothing? My blackberry couldn’t do anything less than all or nothing. You make that decision yourself, but it’s your decision.

However you still have to give apps permission for these:
 

Attachments

  • 9F562327-656D-40BE-9E45-49B2262472A8.png
    9F562327-656D-40BE-9E45-49B2262472A8.png
    396.4 KB · Views: 137
BS, Apple does datamine as well and allowed this to every dubious firm in the galaxy.

There's no privacy unless you dump all your hardware.
 
BS, Apple does datamine as well and allowed this to every dubious firm in the galaxy.

There's no privacy unless you dump all your hardware.
No they don’t.
[doublepost=1552743921][/doublepost]
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-08/is-apple-really-your-privacy-hero

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-on-apps-sharing-information-on-users-friends

Privacy matters when you dont tell everything but creating false hype. Were was the privacy when apple let developers to collect, build databases and sell the info to make money? And it is still possible if you dont get caught... Privacy matters, apple? How exactly? Only when advertizing but not in a real life?

You can live in a house with the shades all drawn, but if you choose to go outside and prance around naked you can’t blame the house.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.