Hacker News Reader

Comment by georgespencer | Hacker News Reader

This isn't the same thing at all.

Yes, it is. Apple's fight with the US is based on the fact they facilitate the encryption of user data so that even Apple doesn't see content.

When the other titans don't have that feature, they have less of a stake in the argument at hand.

Is Google or Microsoft's business model dependent on selling your info to anyone other than themselves? Do you think if they did that they would stand to lose business?

Their business model is to sell ads to 3rd parties based on the information they have about you. Selling your info itself would be detrimental to their business.

Gmail skims the contents of emails and uses them for targeted advertising. Same with searches of all kinds, and any other data they get from you.

Google's targeting would be less effective if they gave everyone PGP keys and locked themselves out of the conversations they host.

Even if they don't sell it, their business model requires that they have access to it. Apple's argument here is that they don't have it.

That's not the same thing either.

Would you expand on that? The feeling seems to be that these companies rely on access to user data in a way that Apple doesn't- that's true, isn't it?

That doesn't mean that they believe the FBI should have the right to unilaterally force software and hardware vendors to build proprietary access to hardware/software which bypasses basic security features.

Making money from targeted ads doesn't mean they think the FBI should be able to bypass device security via hardware and software vendors.

Basically: making money from data != believing that a right to encryption doesn't exist.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com