Google's version ... Sign here please ... Health Insurance Personal Advertising Account.
Were you aware Apple's iCloud is NOT approved for storing sensitive health information? Apple will not guarantee its privacy and proper storage. “If you are a covered entity, business associate or representative of a covered entity or business associate (as those terms are defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103), You agree that you will not use any component, function or other facility of iCloud to create, receive, maintain or transmit any “protected health information” (as such term is defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103) or use iCloud in any manner that would make Apple (or any Apple Subsidiary) Your or any third party’s business associate.”
FWIW Google does offer HIPAA-compliant cloud services and will guarantee the privacy and safe storage of that data.
Really gatorguy? More whataboutism?
The OP seems interested in HIPAA as it applies to the big techs.
The OP only mentioned Google. What does Apple have to do with that or this article?
Beside the fact the AI article's author mentions Apple and Google in the same sentence really nothing.
Geesh, no recognition of sarcasm when you see it? I've so missed you and your pleasant demeanor here. Welcome back!
Google's version ... Sign here please ... Health Insurance Personal Advertising Account.
Were you aware Apple's iCloud is NOT approved for storing sensitive health information? Apple will not guarantee its privacy and proper storage. “If you are a covered entity, business associate or representative of a covered entity or business associate (as those terms are defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103), You agree that you will not use any component, function or other facility of iCloud to create, receive, maintain or transmit any “protected health information” (as such term is defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103) or use iCloud in any manner that would make Apple (or any Apple Subsidiary) Your or any third party’s business associate.”
FWIW Google does offer HIPAA-compliant cloud services and will guarantee the privacy and safe storage of that data.
Really gatorguy? More whataboutism?
The OP seems interested in HIPAA as it applies to the big techs.
The OP only mentioned Google. What does Apple have to do with that or this article?
Beside the fact the AI article's author mentions Apple and Google in the same sentence really nothing.
Geesh, no recognition of sarcasm when you see it? I've so missed you and your pleasant demeanor here. Welcome back!
Sarcasm is just another smokescreen
It certainly is... I recognised that in the OP's post.
Google's version ... Sign here please ... Health Insurance Personal Advertising Account.
Were you aware Apple's iCloud is NOT approved for storing sensitive health information? Apple will not guarantee its privacy and proper storage. “If you are a covered entity, business associate or representative of a covered entity or business associate (as those terms are defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103), You agree that you will not use any component, function or other facility of iCloud to create, receive, maintain or transmit any “protected health information” (as such term is defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103) or use iCloud in any manner that would make Apple (or any Apple Subsidiary) Your or any third party’s business associate.”
FWIW Google does offer HIPAA-compliant cloud services and will guarantee the privacy and safe storage of that data.
Really gatorguy? More whataboutism?
The OP seems interested in HIPAA as it applies to the big techs.
The OP only mentioned Google. What does Apple have to do with that or this article?
Absolutely nothing. He has a compulsion to paint his narrative, it's very bizarre.
Google's version ... Sign here please ... Health Insurance Personal Advertising Account.
Were you aware Apple's iCloud is NOT approved for storing sensitive health information? Apple will not guarantee its privacy and proper storage. “If you are a covered entity, business associate or representative of a covered entity or business associate (as those terms are defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103), You agree that you will not use any component, function or other facility of iCloud to create, receive, maintain or transmit any “protected health information” (as such term is defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103) or use iCloud in any manner that would make Apple (or any Apple Subsidiary) Your or any third party’s business associate.”
FWIW Google does offer HIPAA-compliant cloud services and will guarantee the privacy and safe storage of that data.
Really gatorguy? More whataboutism?
The OP seems interested in HIPAA as it applies to the big techs.
The OP only mentioned Google. What does Apple have to do with that or this article?
Beside the fact the AI article's author mentions Apple and Google in the same sentence really nothing.
Geesh, no recognition of sarcasm when you see it? I've so missed you and your pleasant demeanor here. Welcome back!
You posted Apple's iCloud policy on protected health info, and touted Google's, despite the fact that no one asked about Apple's policy on medical records. That isn't sarcasm. You post wasn't a sarcastic or humorous response to the OP, it was just your typical whataboutism.
Perhaps its now time for Apple to release AppleWatch for Android. It will expand the market for AppleWatch, in the same way that iPod did and iPhone does for Windows users.
That would be an idiotic move, and the dynamics are completely different from your analogy. iPhone spurs Apple Watch sales, and vice versa. The Apple Watch is now SO good, that people are now buying iPhones just so they can use one. Makes no sense not to have them co-dependent.
Isn’t it funny who each and every single company acquired by google seems to feel the urge to immediately point out how important safety and privacy always was and will continue to be ... as though one might doubt this. I wonder why....
With all the Android phones in the wild it makes sense for someone to try to come up with a smart watch which is compatible. Apple has proven that the market is fertile. If Google could manage to somehow in spite of their record get this right it could be a good move for them.
They tried and failed already. Love how android/Google is allowed to sweep their failures under the rug.
Google's version ... Sign here please ... Health Insurance Personal Advertising Account.
Were you aware Apple's iCloud is NOT approved for storing sensitive health information? Apple will not guarantee its privacy and proper storage. “If you are a covered entity, business associate or representative of a covered entity or business associate (as those terms are defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103), You agree that you will not use any component, function or other facility of iCloud to create, receive, maintain or transmit any “protected health information” (as such term is defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103) or use iCloud in any manner that would make Apple (or any Apple Subsidiary) Your or any third party’s business associate.”
FWIW Google does offer HIPAA-compliant cloud services and will guarantee the privacy and safe storage of that data.
Really gatorguy? More whataboutism?
The OP seems interested in HIPAA as it applies to the big techs.
The OP only mentioned Google. What does Apple have to do with that or this article?
Absolutely nothing. He has a compulsion to paint his narrative, it's very bizarre.
Yes, he always, in responses to accusations about bad, or potentially bad, behavior on Google's part, posts some nonsense about Apple, as though it has any bearing. Notice that he always couches it in terms of, "Apple could ..." coupled with some nefarious scenario where Apple does the thing Google is accused of, or worse. He's very careful to phrase his arguments in ways he can maintain deniability, even if it's implausible deniability, when, as frequently happens, he gets called out on relevant facts. But the goal is always to deflect the discussion from criticism of Google and turn it to defending Apple, defending them not for things they've done, but things, "Apple could," do.
I mean Google could be roasting puppies and serving them at company picnics, but I don't recall anyone ever raising that particular hypothetical as an argument here.
Google's version ... Sign here please ... Health Insurance Personal Advertising Account.
Were you aware Apple's iCloud is NOT approved for storing sensitive health information? Apple will not guarantee its privacy and proper storage. “If you are a covered entity, business associate or representative of a covered entity or business associate (as those terms are defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103), You agree that you will not use any component, function or other facility of iCloud to create, receive, maintain or transmit any “protected health information” (as such term is defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103) or use iCloud in any manner that would make Apple (or any Apple Subsidiary) Your or any third party’s business associate.”
FWIW Google does offer HIPAA-compliant cloud services and will guarantee the privacy and safe storage of that data.
Working hard today I see. I think it is true to say Apple don't use personal data to sell to advertisers, that was the joke there. Besides, I am pretty sure Apple will have thought through how to deal with data used in the healthcare push they have been talking about for some time now so don't fret.
Google's version ... Sign here please ... Health Insurance Personal Advertising Account.
Were you aware Apple's iCloud is NOT approved for storing sensitive health information? Apple will not guarantee its privacy and proper storage. “If you are a covered entity, business associate or representative of a covered entity or business associate (as those terms are defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103), You agree that you will not use any component, function or other facility of iCloud to create, receive, maintain or transmit any “protected health information” (as such term is defined at 45 C.F.R § 160.103) or use iCloud in any manner that would make Apple (or any Apple Subsidiary) Your or any third party’s business associate.”
FWIW Google does offer HIPAA-compliant cloud services and will guarantee the privacy and safe storage of that data.
Really gatorguy? More whataboutism?
The OP seems interested in HIPAA as it applies to the big techs.
The OP only mentioned Google. What does Apple have to do with that or this article?
Absolutely nothing. He has a compulsion to paint his narrative, it's very bizarre.
Yes, he always, in responses to accusations about bad, or potentially bad, behavior on Google's part, posts some nonsense about Apple, as though it has any bearing. Notice that he always couches it in terms of, "Apple could ..." coupled with some nefarious scenario where Apple does the thing Google is accused of
AAAND you still can't be bothered to understand the method by which ads appear on a Google ad platform. It's not because I haven't tried to educate you.
It's always the advertisers decision to advertise their product and to choose what category of anonymized users they wish to see those ads. It has zippity to do with Apple or anyone else "doing the same thing as Google". They just provide the service by which advertisers promote their product. Google isn't the ad provider nor deciding Anonymouse should be part of the target audience. You're just a de-personailized Advertising ID Number lumped in with hundreds or thousands or millions of other Advertising ID numbers that the advertises selects as a target category.
"Google....where companies go to die" or something like that.
What a great quote. I'll steal it.
In all seriousness, this is a company without a serious Product B, despite two decades of existence, $900B market cap and multiple expensive acquisitions. Search -- i.e., peddling advertising -- is still 8 of every 10 of their revenue dollars.
"Google....where companies go to die" or something like that.
What a great quote. I'll steal it.
In all seriousness, this is a company without a serious Product B, despite two decades of existence, $900B market cap and multiple expensive acquisitions. Search -- i.e., peddling advertising -- is still 8 of every 10 of their revenue dollars.
Spread the quote. There was also a webpage titled "The Google Graveyard" that had tons of Googles failed turds. Yet here we are calling Hompod a failure....
I have a feeling today will mark the downfall of Fitbit which will be a blessing for Apple Watch.
"Google....where companies go to die" or something like that.
What a great quote. I'll steal it.
In all seriousness, this is a company without a serious Product B, despite two decades of existence, $900B market cap and multiple expensive acquisitions. Search -- i.e., peddling advertising -- is still 8 of every 10 of their revenue dollars.
and some truth to it.
Not all that atypical for any smaller acquisition that gets purchased by a big tech tho, any company for that matter. The best parts are absorbed while the rest is sold off or dumped altogether. Seems kinda rare for one to just continue with its own identity, or even their original business plan partially intact.
"Google....where companies go to die" or something like that.
What a great quote. I'll steal it.
In all seriousness, this is a company without a serious Product B, despite two decades of existence, $900B market cap and multiple expensive acquisitions. Search -- i.e., peddling advertising -- is still 8 of every 10 of their revenue dollars.
and some truth to it.
Not all that atypical for any smaller acquisition that gets purchased by a big tech tho, any company for that matter. The best parts are absorbed while the rest is sold off or dumped altogether. Seems kinda rare for one to just continue with its own identity, or even their original business plan partially intact.
“Smaller” acquisition? It happened with at least one BIG, acquisition too, where they bought a company for $13B and later sold it off for $3B (no points for guessing who)...
A cheap alternative to Apple Watch, there is most likely a market for it.
A lot of people actually like the Fitbit. It's a no fuss fitness solution. While AppleWatch is great for fitness, it has a lot of other bells and whistles that are too much for some (and that could be said for nearly all other smart watches, not just the AppleWatch.)
Comments
They tried and failed already. Love how android/Google is allowed to sweep their failures under the rug.
"Google....where companies go to die" or something like that.
I mean Google could be roasting puppies and serving them at company picnics, but I don't recall anyone ever raising that particular hypothetical as an argument here.
It's always the advertisers decision to advertise their product and to choose what category of anonymized users they wish to see those ads. It has zippity to do with Apple or anyone else "doing the same thing as Google". They just provide the service by which advertisers promote their product. Google isn't the ad provider nor deciding Anonymouse should be part of the target audience. You're just a de-personailized Advertising ID Number lumped in with hundreds or thousands or millions of other Advertising ID numbers that the advertises selects as a target category.
In all seriousness, this is a company without a serious Product B, despite two decades of existence, $900B market cap and multiple expensive acquisitions. Search -- i.e., peddling advertising -- is still 8 of every 10 of their revenue dollars.
Spread the quote. There was also a webpage titled "The Google Graveyard" that had tons of Googles failed turds. Yet here we are calling Hompod a failure....
I have a feeling today will mark the downfall of Fitbit which will be a blessing for Apple Watch.
Not all that atypical for any smaller acquisition that gets purchased by a big tech tho, any company for that matter.
The best parts are absorbed while the rest is sold off or dumped altogether. Seems kinda rare for one to just continue with its own identity, or even their original business plan partially intact.