Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Why not both? If privacy is another thing that sells, then it’s a win-win for them. Especially since no-one else seems to care about it.



The point is that they don’t actually care because they’re not offering true privacy. Real privacy means my data is mine, and I decide individually which people or groups get access, including Apple.

Apples’ “privacy” is that they retain monopoly control over my data. Basically they stiff arm the competition (Facebook, Google, Amazon, etc) and get to profit exclusively by spying on me.


> Apples’ “privacy” is that they retain monopoly control over my data.

That's a strange way to describe the situation where Apple is not allowing third parties to share your private data without your permission. Apple is doing exactly what you wanted in your first paragraph, which is to let you decide who gets access to your private data. If you only give it to Apple, that's YOU deciding to voluntarily grant Apple that monopoly. It's only a "monopoly" if YOU choose it to be.

If you want to download the Facebook app from the App Store and voluntarily give your private data to Facebook, Apple isn't standing in your way. Monopoly? Seriously, I have no idea what that complaint could possibly be based on.

> and get to profit exclusively by spying on me.

I'll set aside the weird claim that Apple is "spying" on you, as though you didn't know Apple is involved in the functioning of your device. Really I'm confused why exclusivity would be a grievance. You think it'd be better if Apple were giving your data to other companies so more companies could spy on you?


The point is that there's no option where nobody gets to spy on me. I should have the option to host the server-side software myself, and/or delegate that to a third party of my choosing which provides a standardized API.

Calling what Apple does "privacy" is a sleight of hand. True privacy means my data is mine, I am not forced to share it with whatever random employees of a multinational corporation happen to be able to access it, it is not necessarily within the crosshairs of bulk warrants imposed on Apple by governments, and I have the option to refuse to allow it to be used to demographically and psychologically profile me for the purposes of advertising or anything else by any other entity including Apple.

What they are engaged in is the monopolization of user data, duplicitously dressed in the robes of "privacy".


You can choose to run your own weather data aggregation service. Just because that's something Apple is selling doesn't mean you need to buy it.


Don’t use iCloud and all your wishes are granted. You can use non-iCloud services for email, calendars, contacts etc. It’s true that you won’t get the full iCloud experience of course, but any such complaint is invalid—you can’t have your cake and eat it too, as the saying goes.


> You think it'd be better if Apple were giving your data to other companies so more companies could spy on you?

No, I think it would be better if Apple stopped spying on me at all, full stop.


The complaint was that Apple was supposedly spying with exclusivity, i.e. not allowing others to spy on you.

And regardless, if you don’t like it, the solution is entirely within your grasp. After all, there’s no law forcing you to reveal your private self to Apple.


Yeah, and I should be able to run Arch on my iPhone! /s




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: