Tim Cook Urges U.S. Congress to Pass Comprehensive Federal Privacy Legislation in Op-Ed

[Defthand]

Worth noting that every single abuse of silicon technology was made possible by its most active advocates and peddlers. The next time a nerd tells you that X product will improve the human experience, ask at what cost. Chances are, they are shortsighted, or intentionally dismissive, of the potential downsides. Once an idea starts to generate income, it's too late to recall it.

 

[9081094]

Blah, blah, blah ... posturing

Easy to promote, Cook, when you monetize hardware. [And, only when Apple services are nascent proportionally to hardware revenues.]

The solution to privacy is libertarian, and remains with the individual:

1. do not participate on any social network -- facebook, tweeter, et al
2. do not login with a single identifier
3. do not register with mobile apps
4. ...

Just say no.

Exactly. The platform can be safe but when you install or participate in social media on an iPhone... it won’t stay on your iPhone.

 

[velocityg4]

To my pleasant surprise, this is the first time that I like anything that Tim Cook has ever done. Unfortunately, the aptitude level of people in Congress is so remarkably low; it's unlikely they will understand it, much less do anything about it.

They'll just ask companies like Facebook, Google and similar what the legislation should contain. Like they did on the last similar initiative last October. Nothing like asking the fox how to guard the hen house.

 

[joueboy]

Can't he just quit Apple and run for politics. He lives in California likes to politicized everything, like to talk to media and he's already popular. I mean he deserves an office in California and I'm sure more Californians will be happy for him and support him really well.

 

[Defthand]

So you're saying that, without my consent, Apple is providing auto insurance companies with my driving behaviors via GPS information? At the same time, all my health data is being shared to health care providers without my consent? Can you please link me to some sort of proof to show this? Also, I never called them a "privacy messiah", not sure where that came from, but I am saying that Apple is better than most.

Apple’s not covertly sharing your data with insurers. They’re leaving that decision up to you. But what Apple is doing is giving insurers tools to potentially exploit, and creating a new vulnerability for trusting participants. Naive users will provide actuaries and risk managers the ability to change coverage if the slightest change in risk metrics occurs. And this well intentioned tech could become mandatory for insurance coverage if its creators aren’t careful.

 

[DNichter]

Apple’s not covertly sharing your data with insurers. They’re leaving that decision up to you. But what Apple is doing is giving insurers tools to potentially exploit, and creating a new vulnerability for trusting participants. Naive users will provide actuaries and risk managers the ability to change coverage if the slightest change in risk metrics occurs. And this well intentioned tech could become mandatory for insurance coverage if its creators aren’t careful.

Sure, and it should be left to the individual. I think there is always going to be the opportunity for stuff like this to get out of hand, but I think Apple can help manage that a bit. Be super clear with the information you are sharing, only work with partners that share the same values as you do, ensure that your data is not being shared outside of what is permitted, stuff like that.

 

[smoking monkey]

Blah, blah, blah ... posturing

Easy to promote, Cook, when you monetize hardware. [And, only when Apple services are nascent proportionally to hardware revenues.]

The solution to privacy is libertarian, and remains with the individual:

1. do not participate on any social network -- facebook, tweeter, et al
2. do not login with a single identifier
3. do not register with mobile apps
4. ...

Just say no.

I agree with Number 1 1000%!
In fact, all the newest data is showing just how damaging social media is on those born after 1995. In particular it is having a devastating mental affect on women. You only have to look at the fact that the owners of all the big social media platforms don't allow their own children to use it as enough evidence to show how damaging it really is.

 

[Tech198]

It IS time to stand up for your right.... I do agree with that statement, but why should Apple be the preacher of all of this when if the whole idea is standing up, that means "the user".. not"give it to us because we know how to protect you"

But that's we're we are going... Privacy companies want you to trust them, then they can collect stuff behind the scenes without a trace of evidence.... If the government can do that and we have no proof they do,,, then why not privacy companies as well ? The buck stops with the user..

Tim is good at his speeches. If you must share info, don't do it online... but if you do, then you already know you've lost. encryption or not.. Although better than plan text. i wouldn't exactly call encryption unbreakable either.. The fact its shared tells you everything... I don't believe you can share and be totally 100% safe, with as many encryption as possible,because there will always be ways. present, or future we have not found yet..

(If you like this info, plz send $2 care of Paypal to ..) j/k lol

 

[GermanSuplex]

Go to eBay. Go to the “opt out” section and look at the massive list of companies who have your eBay info.

There should be opt-in rules, not a blanket privacy policy. It’s too easy to deceive online. I know wise men who can read you back an encyclopedia’s worth of actual real-life laws and statutes, but don’t know what “catfishing” is, unless it involves a boat and a lake.

 

[Williesleg]

What does this have to do with building insanely great products?

Lead by example, Timmy. Stop collecting my photos and examining them, especially in the background on OSX on my computer. What's with all the facetile files? Constantly updated, and uploaded to who knows where.

 

[KPandian1]

I don’t disagree with Cook but how much is it going to cost consumers?

2-3 cups of retail coffee cost?!

 

[MacBH928]

People who say that privacy is a personal choice... this is not true. If we worked with your logic then we can do the following:
1-Why ban gambling anywhere, its a free choice
2-Why ban prostitution any where, its a free choice
3-Why ban drugs, its a free choice
4-Why ban suicide, its a free choice
5-Why regulate any health or hygiene laws on food serving businesses, its a free choice
6-Why regulate banks, its your choice to put your money with them

Data collection is everywhere now in the modern life and it is sometimes required to have an email, online access, a cellphone, or others. It must be regulated like everything else is. In fact, law enforcement get suspicious if they don't see you carrying a phone, have online accounts, or a disconnected life.

 

[dogslobber]

The example given by Tim in his letter is dead wrong. If a retailer transfers your purchase information to a third party and such information does not contain personal information that can be linked to you, it is not personal information at all. The data collected by a retailer about his sales and numbers for example, is also personal information of the retailer. I really dont care if a retailer sells the information that I purchased a specific product as long as this information does not contain my name, credit card number and address. It is raw statistic information which is no way personal in nature.

I see it the other way. If you want to use the details of a sale, any sale, involving me then you should need my express permission to do that. Anything I do with your business should be my protected right to privacy and not disclosed in any way, shape or form at all. That data, cleansed or not, is still my data and not your data. It's why I never participate in any request for input to give opinion on anything due to not getting monetary reimbursement. My opinion isn't free and neither is my privacy.