> Making the privacy-preserving setting the default is the right call. Whether or not China had anything to do with it is honestly irrelevant.
One of us is wrong, here, my understanding is not that Apple changed a default , but Apple removed/wiped the default option . You claim that you can change the default back to what it was before ?
> ather than get a new app for everything, it's all controlled by once interface.
Makes sense.
But why does that interface have to be the clumsy, always listening crap that we see today?
And why can no one except Apple[0][1] give any guarantees with regards to what they use my data for?
[0]: No, I'm not a Apple fanboy. I just can't stand their UX, seriously, which is sad since I value their current stanace on privacy.
[1]: And for what it's worth, Apple seems happy with selling out if the alternative is leaving the Chinese market behind as documented elsewhere in this thread. Although I'll admit that from what I read they where up front with their Chinese users about the change.
> I don’t ever want to hear again how Apple is some champion of privacy and ethics.
Counterpoint:
They could have just rolled out the feature change globally. Instead Apple makes it clear with singling out China, that this change was demanded by the CCP.
> Is that true though? When Apple made tracking opt-in, pretty much everyone refused. I think that's a clear indicator that the overwhelming majority do want privacy, and if they're actually given a choice, most will probably take it.
Is it? Or is it a clear indication that most people will stick with whatever the default option handed to them is?
If you are in mainland china, a state owned telco owns the keys and the data stored in iCloud, so you really don't have any privacy with Apple if you are in China. It more or less ruins my opinion of Apple's stance of privacy.
>Is that true though? When Apple made tracking opt-in, pretty much everyone refused. I think that's a clear indicator that the overwhelming majority do want privacy, and if they're actually given a choice, most will probably take it.
That option already existed in the settings. People couldn't be bothered to go set it because they don't really care.
>Fwiw, I do think Apple and Google are different today in how they handle consumer privacy.
So we're conveniently going to ignore how Apple violates user privacy by handing over their cloud data to the Chinese government? It goes both ways. If you're going to be a proponent of user privacy then don't be a hypocrite and bend over to the Chinese government. Apple clearly values their Chinese profits over the privacy of their Chinese users.
> I do like their pro privacy stance against the big dogs
I do like their pro-privacy stance as well, but I take issue with that sentence in that it makes it sound like Apple is not a "big dog" and taking a stance for you, the little guy. Yes, their policies with regards to your data are easier to stomach than, say, Google's, but they are not on your side against the world, they are on their own side, and have plenty of questionable policies and decisions to show for that.
Foremost of all being that they refuse you the ability to install a different OS on the hardware you own, or even install any application you would like on it. This is not merely an abstract philosophical matter either (though I'd argue it would matter even then): in China, you used to be able to install VPN apps to evade state surveillance, until China made Apple boot them from the App Store. I cannot see any argument that makes this into a win for customers.
> I don't think Apple would want to make itself the default. That would just invite all kinds of regulatory scrutiny, and would conflict with their pro privacy image.
They did it for other markets where they do compete - maps most notably.
> Now, with the option to opt-out of tracking at the point-of-use, consumers won’t have to sift through their phone’s settings to protect their privacy.
On most devices these settings are buried so deep that almost no one knows that they exist. Android used to go as far as only allow you to _reset_ your token, instead of removing it completely, IIRC.
> This makes me feel that the new focus on privacy from Apple is more for PR purpose than something they really care for.
It may well be something that some parts of the organisation care about, but clearly it is not something that the UX people designing the settings applets care about (assuming such people exist; for a company generally very good at UI and UX, Apple tends to have very confusing settings stuff).
> Apple has completely forgotten their privacy bargains in China when their profits were threatened.
Couple of things here. First, I live in America so I don't really care and apparently the Chinese people for whatever reason want to live in that privacy hellscape. Second, Apple unfortunately (like many corporations) is not in a position to dictate privacy regulations to the Chinese government. The interactions here, frankly, are complicated so I'm not really buying this as a valid criticism w.r.t the App Store. If you really want to try and take a moral high ground here, well, let me know when the EU stops supporting genocide in Xinjiang. I'll wait.
(but it's complicated, so let's not sling mud here alright?)
> They've also special-cased their own Ad data collection (a business that's growing in revenue) to be opt-out.
Yes, and I don't like this. It's something I agree with criticizing Apple for.
Similarly: "They're an unaccountable and unelected corporation, not a government"
Yes. And? They're ahead of government regulation here (in many instances and in many countries). You're framing this as if my choices are an unelected corporation and a government, but we're just switching between one unelected corporation (Apple) and others (Facebook, et al).
> I honestly don't understand your penchant to cross your fingers and hope a for-profit corporation will protect you over actually ensuring they do via privacy legislation.
We are not talking about GDPR or "socialism" or whatever. We're talking about regulating Apple so that other mega corporations can create their own app stores on iOS and then do whatever they want. You're just wrestling control away from one mega corporation that ostensibly has some sort of values that align with the interest of the public and giving it to other mega corporations that, as far as I can tell, don't.
> Kara Swisher thinks its part of piling onto apple anti-trust by the US Government, which kinda? makes sense.
The issue is it's irrelevant to antitrust when they're not actually monopolizing anything in this context. Making a privacy setting default to private but still allowing the user to change it leaves the user in control. Apple isn't forcing the customer to do anything.
Facebook objects to this because nobody wants to be tracked, so nobody is going to turn it back on. But doing something by default that nearly every user wants while giving the 0.0% of users who don't want that the option to do it the other way is not monopolizing anything.
Compare this to the app store where they're actually restricting what the user can do by prohibiting competing stores.
> Don't you think it's at least a little hypocritical that they don't extend the same privacy configuration options to their apps that they mandate for 3rd party apps?
Yes. I think Apple is playing an unfair game AND I am concerned about user privacy and how people are being tracked around the web. I'm not sure why other users are acting like both can't be true.
> However if Apple is really privacy, they should put this option in wizard
I agree with you in theory, but read my point again. If everyone disabled it, then app developers would find a worse way (privacy wise) to accomplish the same goal.
> one thing is for certain; Apple doesn't treat privacy as a human right. If you can live with that, then more power to you.
You're inferring that the commenter deduced this solely from the new (incorrect) info. It seems a lot more plausible that they already hold the view (as I do) that Apple's privacy-friendly image is overblown, and used a separate issue to belabor that pt.
Though I do agree that this incident seemed unlikely w/o further evidence, even given Apple's traditional disdain for the user's control over their own system. And Apple has firmly joined the ranks of bigtech cos that HN threads are absolutely deranged about.
> this is the exact same technology Apple lets China use to hunt down their religious and political minorities.
QR codes? HTTP requests? I’m not sure what technology you’re referring to.
> one thing is for certain; Apple doesn't treat privacy as a human right.
They have put a huge amount of effort into privacy technology; more than any comparable company I can think of. I don’t think your certainty is even remotely justified.
One of us is wrong, here, my understanding is not that Apple changed a default , but Apple removed/wiped the default option . You claim that you can change the default back to what it was before ?
reply