I'm confused, but isn't data retention required by many countires? If even ONE country that Twitter operates in/doesn't Geoblock, then legally they would be liable for criminal misconduct if subpoenaed for communication and were unable to provide it. Which means they either have to choose not to operate legally in that country, or keep literally everything for the longest statute.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Twitter Has Been Keeping Deleted DMs for Years
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well one simple point is Apple gets it's money by charging you a LOT of money to use something they create, so they are in a position to say, we don't use your data as their business is taking your money direct.
Other companies give you a free product to use, then very gradually cent by cent get money from aspects of data about your usage of their free product.
It's why I HATE Tim Cooks attitude as he never mentions this.
You could do the same with a car.
I charge you $20,000 to buy a car, and that's that.
Or I could give you a care for free, but the deal is, I can then use data supplied by your car. Where you drive to, what shops you go to, perhaps what shopping you buy, to gradually get back my money.
But you got a free car remember!
So how about we scrap Facebook, Twitter, all all of these FREE products, and start charging for them, perhaps $100 or $200 a year, and don't collect any data to make money, and then we would be like Apple.
Which world do you and most people wish to be in?
One where you need to pay constantly to keep using a platform/product, like Apple.
Or one where you have totally free platforms/products to use, and some of your data is used to support their costs?
It's a great idea, with 3 issues.
1: How would you ever know?
If your ex girlfriend tells you to throw away all the photo's you own of her, how will it be 100% certain you do?
2: What do you mean by company?
Government records? Medical records, Insurance records?
3: Do you still wish to be able to use a companies products/services for free, or would you take the option of perhaps paying $10 for use of Facebook, and $10 to use Twitter, and $10 to use Google Maps, etc etc etc ?
They have it already—in the EU. It’s called GDPR. It’s very long and quite comprehensive, and it addresses all the issues you cited, although there is some gray area (and this case falls into it).
Here in the US, California passed its own (weaker) data protection legislation last year, and it’s slated to take effect in 2020. You can expect other states and the federal government to follow.
The GDPR model makes the most sense, despite the gray area, because you simply can’t mandate deletion of ALL data. That’s impractical, and GDPR smartly does not require that. It does however mandate upon user’s request vaporization of any and every bit of sensitive data (defined as a class) and personally identifying data—including data held not just by the organization or company the user is talking to (the “data controller”) but also their third party partners (“data processors”).
GDPR on web sites is a joke.
Some are simple and you can just opt out.
Others just point you towards "data partners" where you can read pages and pages tenfold about all sorts of junk.
It's made so complicated you either don't bother, or just click accept.
Some are simple and you can just opt out.
Others just point you towards "data partners" where you can read pages and pages tenfold about all sorts of junk.
It's made so complicated you either don't bother, or just click accept.
That’s actually the opposite of proper GDPR compliance. The terms are supposed to be in plain English.
That said, they have to disclose the data usage (and thus often the partners) to you, so overall things are simpler but yet longer and more comprehensive.
Nightmarish as compliance is if you work in or with a company that controls or processes PII or sensitive data, I’m a fan. It’s long overdue. And I say this as someone who personally doesn’t care what other companies do with my data.
Wow, you bought that one didn't you... hook, line and sinker. Don't ever trust any corporation, especially Apple.
Nonsense. Storage is a fraction of the overall cost, more like a rounding error in the context of a company's financials. Even if it was more than a trivial amount, no one would immediately think "gee maybe we're storing stuff we're not supposed to and that's why the bill is so high."
This theory belongs in the trash pile along with "Apple intentionally throttles devices to stimulate more upgrades'
[doublepost=1550346846][/doublepost]
Exactly. Deleting data can sometimes have negative effects on the integrity of other data. Deleting is often more like the delete button in gmail, where things are archived, rather than permanently deleted. Even Apple does not permanently delete data after some time passes (for example, deleting photos from iCloud).
There is nothing nefarious or unusual about this, although it would be nice if companies were more transparent about how this works.
Exactly. In project veritas videos it is also uncovered they have your passwords in clear text.
Wondered a lot about that cause the most basic audit would catch this if it was default implementation.
Some time later they made a big announcement that a bug in backend kept cleartex passwords in log files and urged everyone to change their password.
If you don't agree with a company's privacy policy, you simply don't do business with that company. Easy as that.
This is what I find confusing.
People want a service, and want to use it for free, and expect the company to have no means to survive.
They offer you a free to use product and use data to support the service for you.
Apple does not do this, they charge you a LOT of money, and then say we don't use your data.
Well, sure, if that's what you want.
The point is, people want to use free? apps/
You can't have it both ways.
Even Apple uses your data. They just conveniently are able to monetize their products in such a way that that data usage seems less nefarious. People (wrongly) assume that’s some sort of nobility on Apple’s part. It isn’t. It’s just a side effect of their different business model, and they’ve chosen to hype it up in their marketing accordingly.
The view is always good from the cheap seats.
Actually , I believe it was social engineering where they figured out the answers to their security questions. But it is amazing that people are so uniformed to believe that Apple was at fault in this case.
[doublepost=1550374162][/doublepost]
Such a cynic. Founders Jobs and Wozniak believed strongly in privacy. It's part of Apple's DNA now, and yes a major competitive advantage, but it doesn't mean it is insincere.
You say cynic; I say realist. Also, you're going to have a really hard time supporting the assertion that it's a "major competitive advantage." Good luck with that one.
No one should be... It's a service that can think and act by itself... by like any service, users demand on personal info they "wish to place" to not be kept.
I think these services are getting into hot water. They want to give convenience to users to download previous stuff, but their walking into danger as well as "proof" of not deleting. Google, and Apple who both allow to you download everything too, can do the same thing..
We hope not, but who's stopping them ?
