The premise is 'they offer features that use data & say they keep it secure. but what if they actually don't'
Seriously?
The premise is 'they offer features that use data & say they keep it secure. but what if they actually don't'
Seriously?
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes" is a very legitimate and serious question.
Not to mention, it doesn't matter if they actually "do" keep it secure, themselves, as a company, would still have access to all this information.
E.g., the Vision frameworks subjects any images to a local (built-in) neural network and returns the scanned text, which is then most probably put into the system clipboard. How is this surveillance, but copy-and-paste in MS Word was not?
It's also part of the backup to iCloud, which is not encrypted, no?
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303
Edit: Mind that this would still apply much the same to copy-and-paste in MS Word and any (encrypted) remote backups of the resulting documents. Where is the significant difference? Also mind that iCloud backups are not mandatory, but yet another (optional) service.
Not all. Notably not iCloud backups. They're encrypted but Apple has the key.
Not sure if this is common knowledge (I highly doubt it). While legitimate, the English saying would have done just as well IMO.
...note that they can pick them up on their own at any age...
I applaud you for speaking/knowing a few sayings in latin, though.
I love Apple’s privacy stance and have bought in. However this article made me realize that if apple ever wanted to flip the switch and monetize the data they’d have a treasure trove to work from.
It’s not hard to imagine a future Apple facing stagnant revenue growth, a new CEO brought in to turn things around and enabling a new revenue stream monetizing their privacy features as ad features.
I think the real takeaway is we need better government regulations to ensure situations like that cannot occur. Eg. You can’t change the terms of service of existing customers in ways that reduce their data privacy.