Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The underlying assumption seems to be that people are incapable, unable and too dumb to choose for themselves, if they want to give their habit data in exchange for direct payment. Apple needs to come and save them from themselves.


This is my problem with many "privacy advocates" on the internet. It often feels like the end goal is not, to help consumers, or make it clearer what technology is doing, but to get rid of large tech companies on principle or maybe return the internet to the glory days of the the late 90's and early 00's, or just end consumerism in general. It just so happens that privacy is the most effective path to that goal.


They’re also giving away data on everyone they interact with without these people consenting to it. This is not only dumb but a violation of law in Europe. So yes, saying that people are “incapable, unable and too dumb” to act responsible on their own agency is not something I would doubt. If not to “save them from themselves”, I appreciate it when Apple comes in to save my privacy from being violated by proxy.


Very much agreed, the friend-of-a-friend aspect of privacy is very rarely considered in these discussions.


Apple isn't specifically saving anyone here, they're specifically enforcing the terms of their Enterprise app distribution program.

If, however, you want to make a wider argument about whether or not it's reasonable for Apple to take a very opinionated view of how their main computing platform should apply security/privacy protections, you're very welcome to do so. I happen to greatly value the choices Apple has made for iOS, and I encourage everyone who disagrees, to go and use Android.




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

Search: