Apple won't monetize customers' data even if it would make "a ton of money," CEO Cook says

cnet.com/news/apple-tim-cook-says-facebook-failed-to-regulate-itself/

>Apple won't monetize customers' data even if it would make "a ton of money," CEO Cook says

>"The truth is, we could make a ton of money if we monetized our customer -- if our customer was our product. We've elected not to do that," he said

Disclaimer: I never owned an Apple product in my life. And was always anti-Apple and considiered Apple users suckers that buy overpriced tech items as fashion statements.

That being said, and I know Apple is a corporation like others... but the bottom line is - if you compare all the major tech companies, Apple has the best track record of not selling their users, instead selling TO them (which imo is morally better) - and at least RESISTING the government... Google & others seem to happily collaborate with Govt'.

I want to hate Apple but it's becoming harder and harder desu. They are consistently standing for what is right, even if it's just PR... it still matters. - that some BIG corp does it

With other companies you pay less because you ARE the product... And they managed to make UNIX mainstream. Their PR must be excellent because they're making even someone who hated them for 10+ years like me, suddenly thinking of reconsidering that...

Attached: apples.png (709x482, 552K)

Other urls found in this thread:

foxnews.com/tech/2018/04/03/mark-zuckerberg-slams-apple-ceos-extremely-glib-critique.html
apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/
google.com.au/maps/timeline
github.com/apple/darwin-xnu
michaellynn.github.io/2016/10/04/mDMacOS/
moof-it.co.uk/technical/is-macos-imaging-finally-dead/
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAd
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

They don't need to when they make such a mark up on hardware. You can bet your ass if Apple sold hardware more competitively, they'd sell your fucking data.

LAGDROID TARDS BTFO

I'm in the same boat as you and actually purchased an apple product BECAUSE of their stance on user privacy.

spoiler: it's actually really good.

disclaimer: I use android for my personal phone, windows for work, fedora for personal and OS X for personal laptop

some things are a bit too simplistic but i only need my laptop for some basic tasks so it's not the end of the world

>sold hardware more competitively, they'd sell your fucking data.
a.k.a. if they sold their hardware at unsustainable prices they would have to look for other revenue streams, exactly like the other manufacturers wo whored themselves go Microsoft and had to sell their ethics when McAfee and all the other crapware companies offered a few pennies more for their bottom line?
The reason Apple can say "no" to unethical business practices is that they actually have a significant profit margin, something that you should expect any serious company to have, but which few can afford to have in a hypercapitalized globalized economy.

Its kinda cool, but
>trusting the jew
Friendly reminder that Apple happily joined PRISM in 2012

I'm poor, and I can't buy a $1000 phone

based cook
he may encourage stupid designs but he doesn't cuck the user's data

Why selling it when they already give it to the NSA for free?

Sage, report and hide.

I see nothing wrong with hating Apple while admitting that they are spot on on this exact issue.

Remember their iCloud password brutforce fuckup though.

foxnews.com/tech/2018/04/03/mark-zuckerberg-slams-apple-ceos-extremely-glib-critique.html
>Zuckerberg argued advertising revenue allows the company to offer customers the service for free, while stressing Facebook’s mission to connect people from across the globe.

>He also took a jab at Apple’s pricey products, warning customers to be weary of “Stockholm Syndrome.”

>"I think it's important that we don't all get Stockholm syndrome and let the companies that work hard to charge you more convince you that they actually care more about you. Because that sounds ridiculous to me," Zuckerberg said.

Is Cook, dare we say, our/g/uy?

could shills like you be any more desperate to /lickass/?

It's all just PR. That case about the iPhone that apple didn't want the FBI getting into was just staged so people would think companies could stand up against FBI. They can't, they haven't, and they won't.

>Tim: we will slow down iPhone making clients buy more

>apple fights them in court
>google just hands over data behind the scenes

>apple did nothing!

Unfortunately macOS is going to shit. Has been for a while. I also expect Apple to take away our root access sometime in the next 5 years, though maybe that's a bit too paranoid.

>They "trust me" Dumb fucks.

Attached: ellen.jpg (2016x3000, 650K)

apple is good

most of the shit that google does via their cloud like their photos app doing facial tagging and their search in the photos app is done all locally on your phone on iphones with apples' photos app

google just uploads all your photos to help it's network

Friendly reminder that US law doesn't allow companies to not join surveillance programs if compelled.
Friendly reminder that US law doesn't allow companies to talk about what surveillance programs they're part of or why they entered.
Friendly reminder that the US NSA should never be trusted, especially when talking about itself.

There is a huge markup but nearly every other manufacturer copies their pricing structure for example Galaxy S9/Pixel and iPhone and Surfacebook/XPS and Macbook.

The others arent paying for retail space and apart from google and ms arent developing an OS. Technically these days you get more for your dollar with apple.

It’s not the ads themselves that bother people, but rather the mass accumulation of personal data to target those ads to individuals. Of course, that’s where the money is, so Facebook isn’t ever going to change that.

Zuckerberg being disingenuous as usual, the two-faced creep.

They can't sell your data because you can't save your personal files into their locked down shit phones.

Bullshit lip service over a privacy policy and other documents that say otherwise.

Apple grants itself the right to do and sell more of your private data than even Google:

apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/

>blind faith in proprietary software
How about fuck you.

The fact is that you pay in the end. Either up front with cash for iPhone or with your privacy for lagdroid.

There's a reason that iPhone users are both perceived as and actually more intelligent, successful and attractive.

Apple is the only company that hasnt gone full data mining mode just yet.

There isnt any other manufacturer on the planet that is even trying to combat privacy (even if they do it half assed) They are just all getting worse and worse.

Sure they have hand over data to the NSA or FBI or whoever asks for it. You should be blaming the government for that rather than apple. There is no profit in it for them to do it and its going against their privacy marketing.

>we don't sell your data
ofc they don't. They give it for free to the gov. Who fucking cares of what they say ? Listen to our gnu/lord and saviour and gtfo of this board

Look it up. Also look up Snowden.

$0.01 has been deposited into your bank account

haha all these google fanboys trying to take the high road

google.com.au/maps/timeline

This, you can't just assume everything the guy says is true without being about to access the source code.

That’s fine. That’s what people have been suggesting for a long time anyways: charge for service X instead of selling my data generated from using service X. They have to make money somehow. They don’t charge for the OS updates, either. It’s all part of the markup.

>Apple grants itself the right to do and sell more of your private data than even Google:

have you even read the link you posted. Its nothing out of the ordinary. They are not even in the same league as google.

That is obviously too paranoid. I agreee that they’ve been making it harder to develop on.

Totally blank because I can read.

Google fanboys been giving up personal data for almost a decade but still cry about apple

>google tracks location
>google was connecting to wifi networks in the background as you roamed
>fingerprint api came well after oems put it in
>had to trust oems doing right thing with it
>most just stored on local storage


>Here’s the kind of data your Android device transmits to Google on a regular basis:

A list of types of movements that your phone thinks you could be doing, by likelihood. (e.g. walking: 51%, onBicycle: 4%, inRailVehicle: 3%)
The barometric pressure
Whether or not you’re connected to wifi
The MAC address—which is a unique identifier—of the Wi-Fi access point you’re connected to
The MAC address, signal strength, and frequency of every nearby wifi access point
The MAC address, identifier, type, and two measures of signal strength of every nearby Bluetooth beacon
The charge level of your phone battery and whether or not your phone is charging
The voltage of your battery
The GPS coordinates of your phone and the accuracy of those coordinates
The GPS elevation and the accuracy of that

github.com/apple/darwin-xnu

Fuck off, Jow Forumstard.
We never should trust in closed source.(With exception of Jow Forums). Apple had lied in past and probably still lying about a lot of things.

Attached: reddit spacing.png (866x475, 69K)

>We never should trust in closed source.(With exception of Jow Forums).
I hope you're joking. Why would you trust Jow Forums any more than any other closed source project?

>google logs your location
>google logs all wifi networks near you
>google logs all voice commands given to your phone
>google logs all apps opened
>google logs all searches
>google logs all images viewed

You can't be serious. I'm aware of the NSA leaks. I've just long suspected, as have others, that the leaked documents were either lying or overstating the truth about voluntary participation. Of course, since US law doesn't allow companies to not lie when asked to, there's probably no way to tell.

2016: michaellynn.github.io/2016/10/04/mDMacOS/
2018: moof-it.co.uk/technical/is-macos-imaging-finally-dead/
2020: forced verified boot for macOS
2022: can't disable SIP anymore
2024: bootloader gets locked down
I do think this is too paranoid, but "obvious" is an overstatement. Apple has certainly said they want to unify their systems.

>thinking apple doesnt just hand over data behind the scenes too

The fact is that the FBI doesn't need to go to Google or anyone else to get access to Android devices. But when it comes to user data that any of those companies have on their servers the FBI can just hand them a warrant and they will comply.

A weeb(moot/hiro) can't be a bad person.

>all these android pajeets trying to lecture everyone on privacy

top KEK

Hiro literally cannot be a weeb, by the very definition of the word.

Make sense. weebs or nips otakus can't be a bad person.

I honestly don't care that much about any of that data so long as they abide by my settings not to store that data linked to my account.

I have my location history turned off, which is why when I download my data from Google I'm not surprised to find there is no location history. I know they're getting that data (sometimes you get those messages from Maps to review a place you're at) but as long as they're not storing that data linked to my account as per my settings, I don't care. They can use that data to help improve their services.

That's part of the reason why Google is the first choice many things. If you're searching for nearby services chances are you will use Google and they can offer this because they have built up such a large amount of, hopefully anonymized, data.

There's a second side affect in that because this data is so precious to Google's business their security on it is top notch. Yes, they sell data but they're not giving away their whole database and they take their account security really seriously.

>as long as they don't have a link for me to see it i'm fine with it, even though it's linked to my ad ID
>i'm fine with them scanning all wifi around me and tracking me, with no setting for it

Must be nice being so ignorant

>even though it's linked to my ad ID
Is it? Because I don't see ads related to my location.

PR TALK

>>i'm fine with them scanning all wifi around me and tracking me, with no setting for it
Also, I covered this and WIFI points that are broadcasting their presence aren't private and as long as they are abiding by my settings not to store this data linked to me I don't see the harm.

>"The truth is, we could make a ton of money if we monetized our customer -- if our customer was our product. We've elected not to do that," he said
Literally the exact same bullshit that the zucc was spewing
Proprietary shit, not even once

there is no setting for it

Didn't Apple give up data to both the US and China?

US companies have to give all their data to the government

So why would anyone trust an American company?

Yes, but you obviously havent.

>We may collect, use, transfer, and disclose non-personal information for any purpose:
The following is among this information
> occupation, language, zip code, area code, unique device identifier, referrer URL, location, and the time zone
> information regarding customer activities on our website, iCloud services, our iTunes Store, App Store, Mac App Store, App Store for Apple TV and iBooks Stores and from our other products and services [...] This information is aggregated
> details of how you use our services, including search queries

Lel. And even the remaining personal information can be sold to anyone else:
> in the event of a reorganization, merger, or sale

Or it can be freely disclosed to the public when it seems "appropriate" to Apple:
> We may also disclose information about you if we determine that for purposes of national security, law enforcement, or other issues of public importance, disclosure is necessary or appropriate.

No, Google has nothing this bad. Most companies have nothing this bad.

>in the near future
>walking down street
>police stops you and scans your iris
>'what's this mate, you're not in the system?'
>pull out iphone 19S
>cop gets flustered and mumbles something about tim cook

Google Settings, Location, Scanning, Wi-fi scanning
Turn it off if you want.

Your point? MacOS is not Darwin.

>he thinks that's the wifi scanning

Just like how street view cars didn't scan for wifi either LOL

no but craig is

Attached: 1494762285490.jpg (575x323, 24K)

Well, I would trust Apple more than Microsoft in that regard.

See Microsoft is also bad, but still a hair away from that. And this is just parts of what Apple allows itself in the general privacy policy. There are more details in various EULA and shit.

>hiro isn't selling my data

Attached: 1516103551602.gif (330x166, 2.24M)

Jim, please leave.

Apple compiles their users data into a formula they can legally sell to third parties without it disclosing it. Third parties don't get any raw data but they do get metrics on demographics.

>i dont' know how the ad business works

It works for google because they're the largest ad service in the world so even if they only have partial data they can then sell that and say we will target all 18-24yos who searched for x in the last 60 days

apple doesn't service ads nor can really sell it to anyone, without a way to actually service an ad

iAd is dead

PS: I don't blame you, the Apple Marketing Crook CEOS have repeatedly stated that they're the surely the bestest company at privacy and other bullshit.

If you're a less sociopathic being and believe in people not lying to your face, you could get this impression, that Apple has fair privacy protections and can't / won't do shit with your privacy.

But the licenses they peddle your products under say something else entirely, they permit Apple to do essentially anything and they basically guarantee just about nothing.

>theres no option
>there is an option
>its not the option
Of course the street view cars scan for wifi. What's your point? That's got nothing to do with this. Wifi networks are always broadcasting their presence. It's not private information that they are there.
Do you consider wardriving as some kind of invasion of privacy?

>apple fights orders in court
>refuses to push firmware to even a mass shooters phone in the name of privacy
>iphones encrypted by default
>need passcode after x hours of standby
>passcode protected under constitution as a password, biometrics not proven yet
>almost all things done locally on the device not the cloud (photos AI tagging)

Yeah apple are the bad guys but

>they can legally sell to third parties
They probably actually can sell your
> occupation, language, zip code, area code, unique device identifier, referrer URL, location, and the time zone
And a lot more, as individual data set. After all, they didn't attach your name directly, so it does "not, on its own, permit direct association" with you. And no, no guarantees about anything related to "more data" and "indirect association" or whatever that will be immediately obvious to marketing businesses.

And as I already pointed out in this thread, they can also sell private data as long as it's a "sale" or "reorganization" or "merger". Fucking brilliant.

>Hehe other companies BTFO because their pricing is competitive
>buy the most overpriced products not the cheaper ones

LOL

they literally connected to the networks, recorded mac addresses and IP's

>But the company has vigorously defended the legality of the sniffing, arguing that capturing unencrypted Wi-Fi is not wiretapping.

>steal someone's credit card details over wifi without a password
>completely legal in google's eyes

lmao supreme court turned their case down

Bullshit.
They sold out their Chinese customers.

>passcode protected under constitution as a password, biometrics not proven yet

A judge can't compel you to reveal your password but they can order you to present your phone/laptop with the password disabled and unencrypted.

'Overpriced' is a misnomer.
Buy Android and you're buying spyware, it's subsidised because it's selling YOU.

>doesn't knwo what google did
>claims its okay
>ignores google fined for wiretapping

>Under the act it is illegal to intentionally or purposefully: 1.Intercept, disclose, or use the contents of 2.Any wire, oral, or electronic communication

>The document says the software Milner used collected 200 gigabytes of data via Street View cars between 2008 and 2010:

yeah just casually taking 200gb of data while driving around. They weren't' just scanning for wifi they literally took shit being passed around

Reminder that the ONLY reason apple isnt in the ad business selling itoddlers' data right this second is because they were shit at it and were losing money from it.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAd
Literally spinning their failure as a marketing tactic and brain dead itoddlers lap it up.

Attached: 1404111415687.jpg (921x606, 43K)

Again, do you consider wardriving an invasion of privacy?

This is something that we have done. When WEP networks were popular going around and breaking into WEP networks was a normal thing we were doing.
Open WIFI networks are not secure. If you're sending credit card information over an insecure connection on an insecure network then any thing on the network can sniff it, including the access point itself.

It's basically identical to walking down the street saying your credit card information out loud and then taking people to court for hearing it.

Were they trying to get credit card information? Probably not.
Did they get credit card information? Probably, but that's the unfortunate fact of insecure networks.

iTODDLERS BTFO

It's a price I'm willing to pay to protect my data, honestly.

You are not protecting your data regardless of what the Apple CEO lies to your face.

See my post at for some of what Apple actually allows itself to do.

>you didn't lock your door so i can steal everything
>courts ruled it's wiretapping
>literally took 200gb of data
>no need for them to do this for street view photos

You are literally defending a company taking 200gb of personal data transmitted over wifi illegally just because it show's apple in a slightly better light

>It's basically identical to walking down the street saying your credit card information out loud and then taking people to court for hearing it.

Fun fact wiretapping applies to verbal speech too

>The law prohibits the tapping of any wire or cable or using other devices to record, intercept, or secretly overhear any private communication or spoken word when it is unauthorized by all parties in the conversation,

Don't know why you're defending google, they lost in court and paid fines

>>best track record of not selling their users
>in reality sold iToddler data as hard as they could until they started losing profits
Fuck off shill.

Regardless of what happened in court I don't see it as a terrible thing. That could be because I value security so I see people using open networks and sending unencrypted personal information over these open networks as being their lack of securing their information. Further, if it is an open network and the data is unencrypted, is it a private communication? Can you shout a conversation across a room and say it is private?

Also, to muddy the waters further, what rights do the network operators have over unencrypted data being sent over their networks?
If I own a hotel and I am providing WIFI to the customers I am able to log all unencrypted data that goes through the network. Is this also a violation of that law?

If you leave your door unlocked and get burgled because it of it people will call you an idiot, and that's basically the same thing. While what they do may be against the law I'm not really going to fault opportunists when I'm not taking steps to protect my stuff.

I'm not going to put my 60" TV out on the front porch so I can watch it outside and then expect it to be there in the morning. It's still a violation of the law to take it from my front porch but I'm not going to blame the person who steals it when I'm not securing it.

based proprietard faggots

>defending billion dollar companies committing federal crimes
>under your definition anything done on public frequencies is not a crime

>t. gullible itoddler subhuman

>Apple is an ethical, moral company
OP actually believes this.

Listening to police scanners isn't a crime.

Pretty sure Zuckerberg said the same thing, if you cucks wanna fall for it be my guest

These companies are too big to be held accountable even after blatantly lying

Why does Apple even have your data in the first place? All of your phone data can and should be stored locally. You surely can't be this much of a drone, can you?

Attached: [HorribleSubs] Himouto! Umaru-chan R - 09 [1080p].mkv_snapshot_15.26_[2017.12.03_15.19.05] - Copy.jp (1158x1080, 152K)

BASED APPLE

/thread
Reminder to report OP for commercial spam.

That motherfucker knows how long you sit in the shitter for and what time of day your most likely to take a dump.

Attached: 21714CC8-7DDC-40CE-8F04-68BBE567AACB.jpg (458x750, 106K)

fallacious thinking.

>"we won't monetize your data!! we care about your rights!"

>uses slave labor

crapple shills out in full force 2day