Tim Cook Calls for US Privacy Law to Protect Citizens From Growing 'Data Industrial Complex'

[MacRumors]

Apple CEO Tim Cook has called for a tough new U.S. data protection law to protect user privacy rights in the face of a growing "data industrial complex," in a passionately delivered speech in Europe.

Cook argued for the law during a keynote speech given today at the 40th International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners (ICDPPC), which is being held in Brussels. The following quotes were published by TechCrunch.

"Our own information — from the everyday to the deeply personal — is being weaponized against us with military efficiency," warned Cook. "These scraps of data, each one harmless enough on its own, are carefully assembled, synthesized, traded and sold.

"Taken to the extreme this process creates an enduring digital profile and lets companies know you better than you may know yourself. Your profile is a bunch of algorithms that serve up increasingly extreme content, pounding our harmless preferences into harm."

"We shouldn't sugarcoat the consequences. This is surveillance," he added.

Cook went on to commend the recently enacted European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which places stricter rules on how personal data is handled by businesses and organizations, and argued for a similar law in the U.S. – a call received with applause from the conference audience.

"This year you've shown the world that good policy and political will can come together to protect the rights of everyone," he said. "It is time for the rest of the world, including my home country, to follow your lead. We in Apple are in full support of a comprehensive federal privacy law in the United States."

Cook said a U.S. privacy law should prioritize data minimization, or "the right to have personal data minimized", as well as transparency with regard to what is being collected, the right to access that data, and the right to security, which is "foundational to trust."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1055035534769340418

In his speech, Cook also drew on Apple's privacy-first approach to artificial intelligence in contrast to other tech giants, and said he felt the technology held great promise to benefit humanity, but warned that "advancing AI by collecting huge personal profiles is laziness, not efficiency."

"For artificial intelligence to be truly smart it must respect human values — including privacy. If we get this wrong, the dangers are profound. We can achieve both great artificial intelligence and great privacy standards. It is not only a possibility — it is a responsibility.”

In closing, the Apple CEO criticized tech companies who "endorse reform in public and then resist and undermine it behind closed doors." He added: "It's time to face facts. We will never achieve technology's true potential without the full faith and confidence of the people who use it."

Apple's commitment to privacy protection has become one of the company's guiding principles in recent years, as over against the increasingly publicized data mining practices of tech firms like Facebook and Google, whose CEOs are scheduled to appear at the conference later this week.

Earlier this year, for example, Cook argued for stronger data privacy regulations following what he called the "dire" Facebook and Cambridge Analytica scandal, in which data on 50 million Facebook users was amassed without their consent.

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Article Link: Tim Cook Calls for US Privacy Law to Protect Citizens From Growing 'Data Industrial Complex'

 

[DNichter]

Good, I agree. Our privacy needs to be protected. Obviously a great business move by Apple that protects the interests of consumers as well. I’m not sure how this will all play out for companies like Google and Facebook, but they have to be scrambling to rethink their business models for a sustainable future.

 

[Stella]

Cook puts on a good publicity stunt when it comes to privacy. Looks the other way and coughs when it comes to China.

No threat to profits and good image - a winner.

 

[KPOM]

Ordinarily I’m against big government interference, but given that states such as California are already passing laws, a federal law is probably warranted to avoid a confusing regulatory framework here.

 

[gixxerfool]

Companies like Google and FB had to know this gravy train would eventually come to an end in one way or another. At best, they get on board and figure out a new plan and forge ahead with they consumers in mind. At worst, they feel the hurt when it does stop and it forces action on their part.

 

[-BigMac-]

Meanwhile accepts $3 Billion every year to have Google, the biggest data miner in the world, as default search engine on all iOS Devices.

 

[barmann]

I hardly ever agree with Tim Cook on anything, but that was well said .

However, Apple is using user data for profit as well , just not as shamelessly as FB, Google etc ., and not as their sole business model .

The writing is on the wall though, with data mining being under scrutiny in Europe and lawmakers finally catching up with the worst offenders , so Apple might try to be on the right side of the issue when the man comes knocking .

 

[Rogifan]

Meanwhile accepts #3 Billion every year to have Google, the biggest data miner in the world, as default search engine on all iOS Devices.

And the most downloaded apps on iOS devices come from Google and Facebook.

 

[DNichter]

And the most downloaded apps on iOS devices come from Google and Facebook.

I think user choice should still be considered.

 

[magicschoolbus]

I agree with Cook; however it would be nice for him to put his money where his mouth is when it comes to privacy and treatment in China.

 

[chfilm]

I think Apple should begin building a new HQ in Europe. What cook is dreaming about won’t manifest in the US under trump.

 

[DNichter]

I agree with Cook; however it would be nice for him to put his money where his mouth is when it comes to privacy and treatment in China.

I saw your original post also. Where in regards to China do you feel Apple is violating its users’ privacy?

 

[69Mustang]

I saw your original post also. Where in regards to China do you feel Apple is violating its users’ privacy?

That's a pretty disingenuous characterization of what @magicschoolbus stated. I'm pretty sure you know exactly what he meant as well, because you asked your question in a very leading way. No one said Apple was violating it's users privacy. For you to imply it is pretty bad form imo. Cook loves to tout privacy as a fundamental right (I agree with him), yet actively facilitates China's policies of governmental control over privacy rights of Chinese citizens.

I'm on record for being a fan of Cook as a CEO. I'm also on record for not being a fan of his moralizing that happens to have a hard ceiling of "does this affect revenue?" I genuinely think he means what he says. He believes in personal privacy. I also believe he's willing to compromise those beliefs when it comes to acquiescing to China.

 

[Jyby]

Science Rules!

 

[DNichter]

That's a pretty disingenuous characterization of what @magicschoolbus stated. I'm pretty sure you know exactly what he meant as well, because you asked your question in a very leading way. No one said Apple was violating it's users privacy. For you to imply it is pretty bad form imo. Cook loves to tout privacy as a fundamental right (I agree with him), yet actively facilitates China's policies of governmental control over privacy rights of Chinese citizens.

I'm on record for being a fan of Cook as a CEO. I'm also on record for not being a fan of his moralizing that happens to have a hard ceiling of "does this affect revenue?" I genuinely think he means what he says. He believes in personal privacy. I also believe he's willing to compromise those beliefs when it comes to acquiescing to China.

Well I was trying to understand what his point was. The article is about protecting users' privacy. I don't consider adhering to Chinese law a violation of users' privacy. I am assuming you would expect Apple to simply shut down operations in China? In the end, I don't equate the two and was trying to understand the meaning of their post.

 

[DoctorTech]

I agree 100% with everything Mr. Cook said. Like a previous commenter stated, politically I don’t agree with Mr. Cook very often but this shouldn’t be a political issue at all. Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Green Party, Independent... we should all recognize the threat that mass data collection / surveillance poses to us all both individually and collectively.

Brad Thor’s book “Blacklist” is a work of fiction but it gives a glimpse of the type of threat too much data in the wrong hands can pose not just to a person, group or country but potentially to the entire world.

 

[centauratlas]

Apple needs to encrypt iCloud data with an on device private key then. And not keep a backup on their servers. Whether at rest or not, Apple shouldn't have the ability to unlock it.

Apple: put your money where your mouth is. Please.

 

[B4U]

Data Industrial Complex, a.k.a. Google?

 

[joueboy]

He sound like he's trapped into something but he cannot really publicly claim the main culprit for all these sensitive data collection and where it's ended up. Like a hostage crisis just say it Tim, China is hungry for all these information sending students to the US and Europe and mostly all the constant hacking attempts and activities originates from them.

 

[radiology]

Oh my god! I have agreed with Tim’s comments three times in less than a week. I’m definitely scheduling an appointment with my doctor...

 

[Substance90]

Not that I don't agree with him but I must say it's easy for him to say these things when Apple sells hardware and not ads.

 

[4jasontv]

CEO wants regulations that devalue the primary revenue source of company's biggest competitors. /s

 

[Scottsdale]

I have to say, I think more of Tim Cook’s defense of our privacy and his promotion of human rights than of his leadership abilities of the World’s largest publicly traded company. He is the type of leader that should be leading our government - not our AAPL. And that’s saying a lot for any human. Tim Cook for President of the USA.

 

[Sasparilla]

Mr. Cook is totally on target here. However the surveillance capitalism sect (Google, Facebook etc.) make up a bigger lobbying group than Apple (the one big tech company espousing privacy). Absolute surveillance will eventually result in tyranny...you just have to wait for the right government to come into power to start pulling those levers to ensure they never leave office.

The U.S. government needs to write a strong privacy law for its citizens, probably preventing sales of data to 3rd parties etc.. Unfortunately the U.S. federal government (outside of social issues) has been almost totally corrupted by its 50 year experiment with paid lobbying (paid lobbying didn't start in the U.S. until the early 70's for the Republicans and Dems came on board in the later 70's - started by Paul Mannafort & friends, yeah really that guy). Europe is about the only place where privacy still is defended some against corporate interests...the U.S. is pretty much a lost cause, what's right for the citizens is of no concern for the laws created (except for social issues the parties use to lock voters in with). JMHO..

 

[69Mustang]

Well I was trying to understand what his point was. The article is about protecting users' privacy. I don't consider adhering to Chinese law a violation of users' privacy.

Please stop with the "violation of user privacy". You're the only one to make the claim. You're the only one arguing that point. When Apple removed VPN's from the App Store, they definitely facilitated China's suppression of user privacy.

I am assuming you would expect Apple to simply shut down operations in China?

Why would you assume that I would expect something so dumb and unrealistic? Wouldn't a smarter assumption be that I would expect Cook to be more cognizant of the juxtaposition of his words regarding privacy and his actions in China that don't jibe with those words?