Tim Cook: 'We Don't Buy' the Need to Give Up Privacy for AI

[inscrewtable]

Apple gets $1B/year from Google to let them be the default search engine on the iPhone so the reality is that Apple did partly become the most valued tech company by allowing their users' privacy to be invaded.

No, they got to be worth 700 billion, by revolutionising phones and introducing the iPad. They clearly got where they are with hardware and software. Google also cannot link your iphone to you. Google is the best search service, so there's no point in Apple being churlish, but they cut out every privacy invasion avenue which is why Google came up with Android.

 

[BootsWalking]

No, they got to be worth 700 billion, by revolutionising phones and introducing the iPad. They clearly got where they are with hardware and software. Google also cannot link your iphone to you. Google is the best search service, so there's no point in Apple being churlish, but they cut out every privacy invasion avenue which is why Google came up with Android.

And they made billions more by selling out their users to Google. If you think differently then ask yourself why Apple wanted to keep their arrangement with Google under court seal. Might have something to do with Tim's public insistence on how Apple protects their user privacy yet behind closed doors they're making billion-dollar deals with Google to share in the profits of invading users' privacy.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-apple-1-billion-to-keep-search-bar-on-iphone

 

[spinedoc77]

Nice, this is one of the main reasons I switched back to an iPhone. While I find Android superior in both hardware and OS, I just got a bit alarmed at just how much information I was giving up and what Google's motives were towards that information.

 

[AxoNeuron]

The more I think about it, the more I can't see how AI and anything like this can get better without you losing personal privacy.
Think of your wife.
She's helpful, she can tell you when someones birthday is, where you are going on holiday, suggest what she thinks you might like to see on TV etc etc.
the only reason she, or anyone you know, can be that useful is because they know about you. they know a lot about you, they need to know a lot in order to help,

Imagine being totally secret, walking up to a stranger who you have never given any personal info to and asking in depth questions, they won't know as they won't have prior or current info about you to work with.

Let's take it a LOT further, way way further.
Would you have a Commander Data or would you run away as he could see your location, know about you and be linked into details about you, and also linked into higher up computing/clouds to pull data and help.

I mean Jesus, people get paranoid about a mic in their home that turns on with a keyword "Alexa"
People were even more paranoid about Kinnect as it may be spying on me!

God knows if we every get AI androids with eyes and ears!

Apple only says it never 'stores' personal information. That doesn't mean it never 'uses' personal information. Very carefully worded statements from the folks in Cupertino!

Not that there's anything to be concerned about, Apple really is very good when it comes to privacy protection, unlike some of the more spineless companies out there (looking at you Microsoft, Yahoo, AT&T, etc.)

Essentially what Apple does is this: it receives personal information from you through some interaction, it then feeds the personal information through a training neural network, and then discards it. My only wish is that Apple was a bit less uptight about this stuff. They could use this same technique to improve iTunes recommendations and such, but they are too afraid to do it.

 

[Rigby]

And when you search the Internet who do you use? Because all search engines will be collecting that data

Actually, it's perfectly possible to make an ad-funded search page that does not require collecting your data and tracking you everywhere you go. Try these two for example:

https://www.startpage.com/
https://duckduckgo.com/

Apple is great at marketing, there why I don't really listen to these pointless sound bites from them as that's all they are, marketing phrases to make you give them money. This site will be making money of advertising, that's a ridiculous argument to make.

Of course they use privacy as a marketing feature. Nothing wrong with that as long as it's real. And it is. Read, for example, their iOS Security Guide for some examples how privacy is designed into their products. The reason why they can do that is simply that they don't depend on collecting your information for their business like Google, Facebook and others do.

Google, on the other hand, is slowly cooking you like the proverbial frog in the glas. Example: When they acquired Doubleclick some years ago, they promised they'd never combine its tracking data with the personally identifiable information they have about you. Then, a few months ago, they silently changed their terms to do just that, probably because they saw that Facebook (which has been doing it all along) achieved a slighty higher hitrate with their ad targeting and wanted a part of that action. That will always overide your privacy for companies that depend on ad revenue for their survival.
[doublepost=1477534549][/doublepost]

Talking to your phone, or natural language recognition, is only a small part about what AI is about.

The other day I travelled a couple of days for work. In my Android phone I had real time information about the flights I was going to take (what terminal, airport maps, notifications about delays, times, gates, etc), about my hotel reservation (location, phone numbers, check in/out times, etc), about the places I was visiting, all this dynamically with zero effort from my part.

I'll never understand why I would need Google, Apple or any other 3rd party for this kind of thing. The usual airline apps already push this formation to me, including based on the location (even boarding passes in Apple Wallet can do that). Heck, you can even put it on an Apple Watch complication if you want to. No need to let anyone sift through my private email.
[doublepost=1477535637][/doublepost]

Indeed. Siri ought to work offline for simple tasks like reminder, calendar, timer and even making phone calls since data connection may be really slow but you could still be able to make a call.
For more complicated commands going online is acceptable, and most of the time the answer needs fetching data from the internet so it wouldn't work offline even if Siri was able to recognise the meaning of a request.

They actually try to do as much as possible on the device. Here's a paragraph from the iOS Security Guide:

"Many Siri functions are accomplished by the device under the direction of the server.
For example, if the user asks Siri to read an incoming message, the server simply tells
the device to speak the contents of its unread messages. The contents and sender of
the message are not sent to the server."
[doublepost=1477536079][/doublepost]

With 'your explicit consent' which is when you click on Agree twice on Apples updates or when you install an app or agree to an apps user agreement..

Actually that's referring to the "Diagnostics & Usage" option in the privacy settings (AKA telemetry). It you turn it off it stays off.

And APPLE will share this information with others INCLUDING Google.

Source?
[doublepost=1477536954][/doublepost]

And they made billions more by selling out their users to Google.

How is setting the default search enigne "selling out users"?

If you think differently then ask yourself why Apple wanted to keep their arrangement with Google under court seal. Might have something to do with Tim's public insistence on how Apple protects their user privacy yet behind closed doors they're making billion-dollar deals with Google to share in the profits of invading users' privacy.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-apple-1-billion-to-keep-search-bar-on-iphone

Your argument makes no sense. It was always known that Google paid Apple to be default search engine (just as they pay e.g. Mozilla to make it the default in Firefox). The only thing that wasn't known were specific dollar figures, which are a commercial secret that can weaken their negotiation position with other companies if publicized.

 

[n2arkitektur]

I disagree. I fail to see how knowing my browsing habits will help Siri remember context, or learn more facts - two areas where it's behind Google.

Sure, I should be able to ask siri to 'play me a new song you'll think I like' but Apple's stance on privacy doesn't prevent this.

Why does SIRI suck so bad, then? They've been gathering our anonymous SIRI user data for five years. Why doesn't she understand the most basic questions? Why when asking a general question while driving does she just serve up web results without reading me the answer? Apple is clearly doing something wrong. What is it?

 

[sir1963nz]

And they made billions more by selling out their users to Google. If you think differently then ask yourself why Apple wanted to keep their arrangement with Google under court seal. Might have something to do with Tim's public insistence on how Apple protects their user privacy yet behind closed doors they're making billion-dollar deals with Google to share in the profits of invading users' privacy.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-apple-1-billion-to-keep-search-bar-on-iphone

They wanted to keep a commercial transaction secret, however that has nothing to do with end user data being shared.
The reason we have Maps is because Google would not offer point by point directions to the iPhone because Apple would not allow data to be hoovered up. Apples solution was to produce their own product, this forced google to modernise maps WITHOUT the data demands they were seeking.

Googles entire business relies on data, your data, and being able to sell that to 3rd parties.
Apples business relies on selling hardware/software.

 

[BootsWalking]

Actually, it's perfectly possible to make an ad-funded search page that does not require collecting your data and tracking you everywhere you go. Try these two for example:

https://www.startpage.com/
https://duckduckgo.com/

Of course they use privacy as a marketing feature. Nothing wrong with that as long as it's real. And it is. Read, for example, their iOS Security Guide for some examples how privacy is designed into their products. The reason why they can do that is simply that they don't depend on collecting your information for their business like Google, Facebook and others do.

Google, on the other hand, is slowly cooking you like the proverbial frog in the glas. Example: When they acquired Doubleclick some years ago, they promised they'd never combine its tracking data with the personally identifiable information they have about you. Then, a few months ago, they silently changed their terms to do just that, probably because they saw that Facebook (which has been doing it all along) achieved a slighty higher hitrate with their ad targeting and wanted a part of that action. That will always overide your privacy for companies that depend on ad revenue for their survival.
[doublepost=1477534549][/doublepost]I'll never understand why I would need Google, Apple or any other 3rd party for this kind of thing. The usual airline apps already push this formation to me, including based on the location (even boarding passes in Apple Wallet can do that). Heck, you can even put it on an Apple Watch complication if you want to. No need to let anyone sift through my private email.
[doublepost=1477535637][/doublepost]They actually try to do as much as possible on the device. Here's a paragraph from the iOS Security Guide:

"Many Siri functions are accomplished by the device under the direction of the server.
For example, if the user asks Siri to read an incoming message, the server simply tells
the device to speak the contents of its unread messages. The contents and sender of
the message are not sent to the server."
[doublepost=1477536079][/doublepost]Actually that's referring to the "Diagnostics & Usage" option in the privacy settings (AKA telemetry). It you turn it off it stays off.
Source?
[doublepost=1477536954][/doublepost]How is setting the default search enigne "selling out users"?
Your argument makes no sense. It was always known that Google paid Apple to be default search engine (just as they pay e.g. Mozilla to make it the default in Firefox). The only thing that wasn't known were specific dollar figures, which are a commercial secret that can weaken their negotiation position with other companies if publicized.

Tim Cook has spoken out against Google's business model of making money by collecting, using, and selling customer's data. Yet Apple was found to be collecting billions by allow Google do that from Apple's own customers. Not sure how that doesn't make sense to you. Apple claimed they valued their customers' privacy yet sold that privacy to the highest bidder (Google), knowing that Google would be doing exactly what Apple said they were against (collecting and using customer data). In fact Apple wasn't paid a one-time fee for this but instead a direct cut of revenue that Google earned selling the information, so Apple is a direct party to their users' data being collected and sold for profit.

 

[smoledman]

Tim Cook is hot garbage.

 

[Feenician]

In fact Apple wasn't paid a one-time fee for this but instead a direct cut of revenue that Google earned selling the information, so Apple is a direct party to their users' data being collected and sold for profit.

Do you actually have a credible source for this? Every report I've seen says Apple charges $1 billion to make Google the default in the browser. Everyone is free to change that default to anything to Bing, Yahoo or DuckDuckGo (which I do) and then Google have literally no other presence on the iPhone unless a user configures it or installs an app. Google get nothing from my iPhone or iPad and all I did was tap one check box.

 

[smoledman]

Do you actually have a credible source for this? Every report I've seen says Apple charges $1 billion to make Google the default in the browser. Everyone is free to change that default to anything to Bing, Yahoo or DuckDuckGo (which I do) and then Google have literally no other presence on the iPhone unless a user configures it or installs an app. Google get nothing from my iPhone or iPad and all I did was tap one check box.

Siri uses Bing as the default search engine and only tech geeks know that you put the word 'Google' at the start if you want it to use something different. So basically MS is paying Apple to harvest their customer data. No matter what Tim Cook is a flaming... hypocrite.

 

[BootsWalking]

Do you actually have a credible source for this? Every report I've seen says Apple charges $1 billion to make Google the default in the browser. Everyone is free to change that default to anything to Bing, Yahoo or DuckDuckGo (which I do) and then Google have literally no other presence on the iPhone unless a user configures it or installs an app. Google get nothing from my iPhone or iPad and all I did was tap one check box.

Here's the source (Bloomberg):

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-apple-1-billion-to-keep-search-bar-on-iphone

From the article:
"Apple received $1 billion from its rival in 2014, according to a transcript of court proceedings from Oracle Corp.’s copyright lawsuit against Google. The search engine giant has an agreement with Apple that gives the iPhone maker a percentage of the revenue Google generates through the Apple device, an attorney for Oracle said at a Jan. 14 hearing in federal court."

And:
"The revenue-sharing agreement reveals the lengths Google must go to keep people using its search tool on mobile devices. It also shows how Apple benefits financially from Google’s advertising-based business model that Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook has criticized as an intrusion of privacy."

People are free to change their default search engine but millions of users wouldn't necessarily know this or know how to do it, which of course Apple and Google rely on to take in the billions of ad revenue they share.

 

[smoledman]

Yeah pay attention to what Tim Cook does, not what he says. I don't know anyone who likes him.

 

[Feenician]

Siri uses Bing as the default search engine and only tech geeks know that you put the word 'Google' at the start if you want it to use something different. So basically MS is paying Apple to harvest their customer data. No matter what Tim Cook is a flaming... hypocrite.

I meant to mention that Siri uses Bing explicitly, rather than just saying so implicitly by mentioning the browser. One less place for Google on the iPhone. I don't use keywords to search anything else on DuckDuckGo. $1 billion dollars per year for something every iOS user can opt out of in a single tap. Maybe that 80%+ market share of Android just doesn't pay as well as it should

 

[smoledman]

I meant to mention that Siri uses Bing explicitly, rather than just saying so implicitly by mentioning the browser. One less place for Google on the iPhone. I don't use keywords to search anything else on DuckDuckGo. $1 billion dollars per year for something every iOS user can opt out of in a single tap. Maybe that 80%+ market share of Android just doesn't pay as well as it should

Google is still killing it with revenue/profits lately. They even surpassed Microsoft in profits for the first time last quarter. Probably will continue to do so for the next 1-2 years.

 

[Feenician]

Here's the source (Bloomberg):

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-apple-1-billion-to-keep-search-bar-on-iphone

From the article:
"Apple received $1 billion from its rival in 2014, according to a transcript of court proceedings from Oracle Corp.’s copyright lawsuit against Google. The search engine giant has an agreement with Apple that gives the iPhone maker a percentage of the revenue Google generates through the Apple device, an attorney for Oracle said at a Jan. 14 hearing in federal court."

And:
"The revenue-sharing agreement reveals the lengths Google must go to keep people using its search tool on mobile devices. It also shows how Apple benefits financially from Google’s advertising-based business model that Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook has criticized as an intrusion of privacy."

Thanks. Thumbs up and news to me. That's the first I've heard and is indeed contrary to Apple's position. While I think the "I want the wifis and the three gees" buyers of iPhones would be perturbed by the default being something other than Google I think it should be an option and not default in light of that.

I very much stand corrected

 

[smoledman]

Thanks. Thumbs up and news to me. That's the first I've heard and is indeed contrary to Apple's position. While I think the "I want the wifis and the three gees" buyers of iPhones would be perturbed by the default being something other than Google I think it should be an option and not default in light of that.

I very much stand corrected

 

[apolloa]

That had me in stitches!!! Brilliant hahaha
Warning g to others it's a bit rude, don't ay if your easily offended or have kids around.

 

[recoil80]

[doublepost=1477535637][/doublepost]They actually try to do as much as possible on the device. Here's a paragraph from the iOS Security Guide:

"Many Siri functions are accomplished by the device under the direction of the server.
For example, if the user asks Siri to read an incoming message, the server simply tells
the device to speak the contents of its unread messages. The contents and sender of
the message are not sent to the server."

I know, but if you are offline Siri simply doesn't work.
They should fix that, enabling Siri to perform certain tasks without network interaction at all

 

[thekeyring]

Why does SIRI suck so bad, then? They've been gathering our anonymous SIRI user data for five years. Why doesn't she understand the most basic questions? Why when asking a general question while driving does she just serve up web results without reading me the answer? Apple is clearly doing something wrong. What is it?

Siri says 'here's a web search'
Google is the web search.

I would argue that, and the general notion that Google is better at going through large amounts of data (having had to do it from day 1) where as Apple isn't. Not an excuse just an observation.

 

[decafjava]

What the heck does a 6-year old youtube video have to do with privacy? I am pretty disturbed by the lack of concern some here show towards the issue. If you don't believe or agree with Apple or Tim fine, but making excuses for Google and the others I don't agree with.

 

[decafjava]

Speaking of Google and its rivals.
https://protonmail.com/blog/search-risk-google/

Search Risk – How Google Almost Killed ProtonMail

In the past two months, many of you have reached out to us to ask about the mysterious tweets we sent to Google in August. At ProtonMail, transparency is a core value, and we try to be as transparent with our community as possible. As many people have continued to point out to us, we need to be more transparent here to avoid continued confusion and speculation. Thus, we are telling the full story today to clarify what happened.

What Happened?
The short summary is that for nearly a year, Google was hiding ProtonMail from search results for queries such as ‘secure email’ and ‘encrypted email’. This was highly suspicious because ProtonMail has long been the world’s largest encrypted email provider.

Read more at the link above.

Still think there is no difference?

 

[jbrown5x]

They don't want to give up your privacy yet THEY receive 2 billion Siri requests every week!!

Nope, the only way for his statement to be true is for Apple to not receive a damn thing from you. And Siri will always be poorer too then it's competition. I would appreciate it relinquishing privacy for better services and more accuracy.

At this point Apples stupid comments about 'privacy' are nothing more then advertising soundbite gimmicks.

Good. Then I'll expect you to not be a hypocrite and not call your lawyer when your PII (Personally Identifiable Information) is compromised. Just chalk it up to your sacrifice for the necessary advancements of technology.

 

[BootsWalking]

If you want to see what blatant, self-serving hypocrisy looks like then read Tim Cook's comments from last year regarding user privacy. This was before the leak about how Apple makes billions of dollars from Google selling Apple users' privacy.

https://techcrunch.com/2015/06/02/apples-tim-cook-delivers-blistering-speech-on-encryption-privacy/

From the article:

Cook lost no time in directing comments at companies (obviously, though not explicitly) like Facebook and Google, which rely on advertising to users based on the data they collect from them for a portion, if not a majority, of their income.

“I’m speaking to you from Silicon Valley, where some of the most prominent and successful companies have built their businesses by lulling their customers into complacency about their personal information,” said Cook. “They’re gobbling up everything they can learn about you and trying to monetize it. We think that’s wrong. And it’s not the kind of company that Apple wants to be.”

 

[inscrewtable]

... selling out their users to Google.

Except that they didn't. Why not try to prove to me how they 'sold out their users to google', when apple are doing their best to execute google on the guillotine of ads.