People lose right for privacy when they steal.
PC for privacy?Hey Tim buy an Android and a PC
if you want privacy, and leave us poor Apple users with a technology meant to find lost and stolen devices to have our privacy violated.
One of the biggest problems is that it does not notify the person being located. Why is that? Wouldn't you like to know if someone is querying your location? Apple probably decided not to implement that because it would reveal how creepy the feature is. A lot of people probably don't even realize they are being tracked. If people started getting notifications that 'SoandSo snooped your location.' a lot of people would turn off location sharing.It's often not unbeknownst to them. I can track my wife and kid, they should be able to track me and each other (I know the kid can). It's useful.
What a db.
Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney today commented on Apple's Find My service, referring to it as "super creepy surveillance tech" that "shouldn't exist."
![]()
Sweeney went on to explain that several years ago, "a kid" stole a Mac laptop out of his car. Years later, Sweeney was checking Find My, and as the Mac was still connected to his Apple ID account, it showed him the location where the thief lived.
Sweeney's take is curious, because providing the location of a lost or stolen device is exactly what the Find My service is meant to do. Apple devices remain tied to a user's account if not removed, a feature that is meant to thwart theft.
After confusion from his Twitter followers over his comments, Sweeney said that the location of a device in someone's possession can't be tracked without tracking the person, and "people have a right to privacy." He claims that detection and recovery of a lost or stolen device should be "mediated by due process of law" and not exposed to the device owner "in vigilante fashion."
When Sweeney saw how Find My worked, he said he turned off the feature on all of his devices.
While Apple's AirTag item trackers have been criticized for their use by stalkers, the Find My service has not been the target of similar complaints. Find My and Activation Lock have been important theft deterrents, cutting down on iPhone theft. Apple recently expanded Activation Lock to include iPhone components to prevent them from being disassembled for parts.
Article Link: Apple's Find My Is 'Super Creepy Surveillance Tech' That Shouldn't Exist, Says Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney
Very weird how one exercising freedom of choice triggers the Apple hivemindI also have Find My turned off on all my devices hehe (don’t rob me)
Who's snooping on their spouse and children, unbeknownst to them? Don't like it? Turn it off. Very easy to do. "Legitimately" bought used laptops will be reformatted sitting at the Welcome screen; no Find My would be turned on. You shouldn't make excuses for crappy behavior, of which this is more of from Sweeney.Lots of knee jerk groupthink dismissiveness in this thread, but I think he has a point. I've often been creeped out by Find My's ablility to function as a surveilance tool. Sorry, but snooping the location of spouses and children, unbeknownst to them, is creepy. Tim's example could just as easily be a case where you legitimately buy a used laptop and now someone is able to track your location.
Not really, no. It's a feature that can be turned off just as easily as it's turned on; it's not at all hidden "surveillance-ware".It’s a fair point and opinion. These location-tracking features have caused people much grief, including ending relationships. Sometimes it’s better not to know something.
No. The 2 people who can locate me are my wife and kid; I don't have to know if they check to see where I am, and between texts and e-mails my iPhone vibrates enough as it is. I'm not slipping around doing anything I need to hide.One of the biggest problems is that it does not notify the person being located. Why is that? Wouldn't you like to know if someone is querying your location?
Agree.Who's snooping on their spouse and children, unbeknownst to them? Don't like it? Turn it off. Very easy to do. "Legitimately" bought used laptops will be reformatted sitting at the Welcome screen; no Find My would be turned on. You shouldn't make excuses for crappy behavior, of which this is more of from Sweeney.
Sweet strawman.Very weird how one exercising freedom of choice triggers the Apple hivemind
And how is that a strawman when no one actually responded to my comment in any form except by disliking it? Almost like they were the ones with no argument because they were taking offense to a simple choice (which also had nothing to do with them)Sweet strawman.
Respond how, to what? You turned off the ability to find your items if they are lost for no stated reason, and announced that decision on this thread. What response did you anticipate?And how is that a strawman when no one actually responded to my comment in any form except by disliking it? Almost like they were the ones with no argument because they were taking offense to a simple choice (which also had nothing to do with them)
You purposely disable a useful feature in the instance your stuff is stolen, without saying what the reasoning is, and then make a BS comment about a “hive mind”.And how is that a strawman when no one actually responded to my comment in any form except by disliking it? Almost like they were the ones with no argument because they were taking offense to a simple choice (which also had nothing to do with them)
The real point is
The real point is that this service is against GDPR. To manage somebody else data (the location of the "tag"), I need somebody else approval... In addition, if my mobile is used to track somebody else, I need to be informed and approve this transaction.
Please note the data encryption is formally a risk mitigation, to reduce the impact in case somebody is able to stole the data. But using encryption doesn't allow you to manage somebody else data.
It seems to me the owner is finding the location 'data' of his own property (so it's not someone else's data). That a criminal has wrongly caused that stolen property to be near himself shouldn't change that. For that matter, it's possible the stolen property could turn up in a pawn shop. The idea that I should be rendered unable to find my own stolen property because the thief might be nearby is...insane. And deeply morally wrong.To people downgrading my post, please start reading and studying GDPR (https://commission.europa.eu/law/law-topic/data-protection/data-protection-eu_en, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32016R0679).
Thank you.
Sweeney is a "parallel", a hired-gun who corrupts legitimate arguments other people are making (so, after flaming out, he takes them down too). For example, in his OP tweet, he could have brought up the very real prospect of an enraged owner tracking down and harming someone who may be several owners downstream of the original purported thief. Or he could have brought up Apple's by-now-common-knowledge lickspittle relationship with the NSA, and that such feature almost certainly exists for the covert ulterior motive of intelligence entities tracking every customer (and potentially sending furtive telemetry even while 'off'), with said "feature" being surface-marketed as a theft-prevention widget. --But he didn't do any of that. Instead, he makes a bonehead troll comment that gets immediately shot down (while Apple and its spy agency patrons silently chortle in the background).Sweeney seems to have a real red bottom over EVERYTHING Apple. Go back to whining, bozo!
While I agree with you that his story smells off, I would suggest that nobody, but nobody, would seriously take Sweeney for a parallel controlled by Apple, as defined by your linked article. He has been pushing anti-Apple sentiment for many years now and is the driving force behind various lawsuits filed by Epic against Apple -- not all of which have failed. What's more, while his successes have been more limited in the United States, he has nonetheless successfully lobbied for changes to laws in various other countries around the world, which have significantly adversely impacted Apple's business model, even practically upending it entirely in the EU.Sweeney is a "parallel", a hired-gun who corrupts legitimate arguments other people are making (so, after flaming out, he takes them down too). ...
Remember "Blackout Tuesday" four years ago? Go high enough over the CEO's head, you'll find these guys all have the same nameless bosses six shadowy holding company layers up. Punch may hit Judy, who hits him back, but they do what they do for reasons the toddlers in the audience don't understand. Sweeney is a manufactured foil who doesn't do any serious damage while making everyone on the "side" he crashed look like a fool by proximity. It's intentional, and done on Twitter, because the first tactic of propaganda is to spin your tale where the rubes are. (An ostensible big cheese such as CEO getting in loud, stupid fights on Twitter is a veritable de rigueur guarantee that he's a front-man playing a role.)While I agree with you that his story smells off, I would suggest that nobody, but nobody, would seriously take Sweeney for a parallel controlled by Apple, as defined by your linked article. He has been pushing anti-Apple sentiment for many years now
Corporate lawsuits and settlements are invariably orchestrated swindles of class-C common stockholders, as well as plunder runs against the futures markets for those with inside knowledge of the outcome. (That's something to think about next time the news is clamoring for your attention about the latest outrageous thing some company is allegedly doing; there may be more money to be made rigging leveraged exchanges than in shipping actual product.)...and is the driving force behind various lawsuits filed by Epic against Apple -- not all of which have failed.
That's Hanlon's Razor whispering in your ear, urging you to give him the benefit of the doubt. Don't. He just a smaller puppet in a smaller role than that awarded bigger puppets (like Musk, or Cook, or Gates, ...or Trump and Biden for that matter).No... I would opine that he is neither a parallel nor an anti... rather, he's just a jerk with a chip on his shoulder, too much money and too much control over other people's money.
Hanlon's Razor is indeed a compelling argument in a lot of cases, and may yet apply -- but I would argue that Occam's Razor is far more useful, herein. Your manufactured explanations for seemingly everything that is wrong in society require far too many convoluted assumptions about far too many things.That's Hanlon's Razor whispering in your ear...
Hanlon's Razor sounds like some ancient aphorism, but actually dates only from the '90s. (The ancients took things at face value: if you behaved in a questionable manner, they assumed you were up to something, not just stupid.)Hanlon's Razor is indeed a compelling argument in a lot of cases....