citpeks
About
- Username
- citpeks
- Joined
- Visits
- 334
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,007
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 271
Reactions
-
Apple Watch Pro renders illustrate Digital Crown protrusion & more
FYI, there is actually a horological term for the "protrusion."They're called crown guards, and common on tool (functional) watches, like divers.
-
A secret tool lets police conduct mass surveillance using app data
lam92103 said:
The article says the exact opposite. They are harvesting Location Data from apps on iOSstantheman said:This is precisely the type of abuse of personal data that Apple has been protecting us from for many years. Meanwhile Google, Facebook and others have pretended it was not a significant threat at all.Actually, you're both correct.One of the key pieces of data is the unique advertising ID, which Apple has put limits on in iOS (App Tracking Transparency) and raised a stink from the ad industry when it was introduced.Third party SDKs that developers use to build apps are leaking and exploiting that data, which is traded in a shadowy industry where different interests buy that information for their own purposes. In this case, it's law enforcement, to determine location history for a device. Other buyers may have an interest in the whereabouts of user devices for other purposes, like marketing.What's of interest here is that law enforcement is purportedly bound by some old document, the U.S. Constitution, which contains a section forbidding unreasonable search or seizure without a warrant. That pesky 4th Amendment. And any rational citizen should also recognize that mass surveillance is also counter to the principles of a free society. Sadly, it's looking like the only difference between us, China, and other despotic countries is that there, it's government sponsored, here it's sponsored by private industry for capital gain.One of the companies named in this story, Starbucks, may have some plausible deniability, in that it does have an legitimate interest in using the location information a user grants, for its own purposes to help facilitate the sales and marketing of its products, at one of its many outlets. However, it is troubling that its developers and lawyers, either haven't read, or don't care about the terms under which the leaky SDK in its app, and the company behind it, may also be granted the right to collect that data for itself, and sell it to others, who can then compile and it package it for sale again, like Fog Data is doing for law enforcement.Starbucks' business is selling coffee. But there are other companies who have less reliable sources of revenue, arguably less ethics, and may count upon data collection and sale as part of its business, if not the primary business.Putting one's life on a smartphone has undeniable benefit, and advantages, but it also come with many risks, in that the information stored on them, and how/where they're used can also unintentionally leak a lot of data about the user, which is used in unintended, unknown, and potentially harmful ways.A cell phone can't practically function without the service provider knowing where the device is located at all times. And the cell phone companies have been caught selling that information.A weather, or other app that uses location data to better provide a service also has legitimate and practical use for such data. But, one app, IBM's Weather Channel app, has been sued for selling that data.The real issue is that there is a wild west gong on behind the scenes with the data that's captured by our smartphones, whether intentionally and unintentionally, unbeknownst to most users.And unfortunately, it would be naive to think that Congress has any interest in setting up some rules, or giving the regulators the powers to provide some boundaries, or clamp down on potential abuse of such practices. Even if one, or more of them, who are as easily tracked as one of us, were to have their information outed, revealing their deeds, naughty or nice.Anyone who thinks this kind of stuff matters should be proactive, check and re-check your settings, don't instantly click "Agree" on any EULA popups, and don't install an app just because the owner says it will provide a "better experience."If a company or site can't or won't give you a good experience accessible through a browser on their website, think about the reasons behind that, what they have to gain, and what you have to lose. Sites such as Yelp and Reddit, which actively cripple their mobile browser experience, should raise eyebrows.
-
Apple has never been against advertising -- it's against invasive data collection
paxman said:I always have to laugh when people rage against advertising. If nobody advertised their goods how would you know what your options were, and as a producer of goods how would you let people know? Remember that branding is pretty much just advertising. In your face invasive advertising is terrible, I agree, and I understand that that is what people hate, but I just hate blanket statements devoid of nuance. As for Apple, I am paying top dollar for their products and service so they owe me the pleasure of no unsightly inappropriate ads.Ironically, your statements do just what you criticize, making blanket assertions lacking in nuance.1) Obnoxious ads are just that, obnoxious, not necessarily invasive, at least to those who choose not to run any sort of ad blocker.2) What many object to, and the topic of the piece, is invasive data collection, and other techniques used to target ads. Don't conflate the nature of an ad, or how it's presented, with how it's aimed. They are two different things.The Facebooks of the world, and the online ad industry would have you believe that it's perfectly fine to follow you around, peeking over your shoulder and taking note of where you go and what you browse, in order to target you with specific ads, or to help infer what you're more likely to be interested in or buy. One famous example of that, and the potential unintended consequences of such practices is the example of the parents who were served baby goods ad by Target because it concluded that their daughter was pregnant, unbeknownst to them.In real life, would you consent to someone following you around, store to store, place to place, and observing your every move to help them decide what ads to show you?Probably not, and most would consider it to be creepy. Why, then, do most people not object to the practice when it's done online?And online, it's much easier to compile, and cross reference that data to build a more comprehensive dossier and profile, tied specifically to you.Apple also serves ads, and collects data, but it is at least trying to recognize that there are certain lines that it won't cross, and the data that is collected won't be tied to specific persons, at least to the degree that others do it.
-
Apple's iPhone repair tool kit that it rents is wheeled and weighs 79 pounds
radarthekat said:
When is the last time you performed ignition timing on your vehicle. Or swapped out a bad wrist pin on a piston? Some folks have the tools to do these jobs at home, but they aren’t free or cheap. Nor are the instructions simple.crowley said:Trust Apple to make it way more complicated than it needs to be.
You're arguing with someone who had admitted to never having repaired, or attempted to repair anything. Has never walked the walk, but tries to talk the talk. Waste of time.
-
Mac Studio teardown demonstrates relatively easy disassembly
crowley said:So no, there is no car where you have to forcibly remove a seal to access anything. There are some places where you might need to replace something to do a very particular task. Pretty different.
And in any case, car manufacturers also being shitty doesn't make Apple any less shitty.You asked for examples, and yet chose to ignore the ones that were provided.The fact of the matter is that the disassembly and repair of products that were not designed to be user-serviceable often involve sacrificial elements in the due course of such procedures.If those, including yourself, have ever picked up a tool, and made such repairs, you would be able to comprehend and acknowledge that fact.It's clearly evident that you, and others who like to argue these points, have not, and only like to argue for argument's sake and ignore the facts.That's your prerogative, but don't expect any respect from those who actually have done it, not just talk about it, in an ignorant fashion.
