Notsofast

jmulchino said:

Yes, a surprising article with some muddled logic (“locker room talk”? Huh?). And the tone is a bit dismissive of Apple’s recent troubles with the i9 processor. (“Non-engineer YouTubers”) Example: In another story published by AI, Apple actually worked with the “non-engineer” to apparently resolve the issue. 

Most AI readers don’t really care about Samsung, Microsoft, etc. offerings, so why the paranoia? Is it to stifle legitimate criticism by AI readers on Apple? Methinks so. 

And lastly, where is the updated Mac Mini? Cook promised and update. “It’s in our future” Remember. Which future?

You lost people when you suggested that Apple relied on the Youtuber's skills to identify and fix the bug when all they did was to work with him to try and reproduce the problem, which he had trouble doing, so they could resolve it. No insult intended towards him, but he obviously had no idea what the problem was or how to fix it, just that he had experienced a problem, which sometimes occurred.  

Soli said:

tallest skil said:

gatorguy said:

Google ain't selling 'ya, not even making "you" and your data available to anyone else unless request it or under legal orders to do so (like Apple is). Google is far from the top dog. Unlike everyone I listed above they don't "sell you". They sell ads. Worry about Google selling it is not one of them.

How much are you paid per post? Just curious.

Are you reading what he's posting? Do you really think AppleInsider knows my name, email address, physical address, age, sex, gender, etc. simply because they use Google AdWords?

Google doesn't sell your personal data! How that can be more clear? It would be foolish for them to do that and they wouldn't exist today if that was their business mode. The long money is keeping the data for themselves. Google is profitable because they have collected data about you that no one else has.

Apple also collects data in much the same way that Google does, just through different avenues. The key difference is that Apple isn't selling ads as their primary source of income. They had 6 years of doing the same thing as Google with iAds because closing up shop 2 years ago.

Do you also think Apple sold your personal data to their iAd partners? Of course you don't because it doesn't fit your Google is evil and Apple is good narrative, and yet it's the same model. Even now you deny that Apple uses all this data about their consumer base to both create targeted ads and create products that lead to increased spending.

Please stop the fake news.  People can't take you seriously when you make comments like Apple and Google are the same when it comes to your privacy.  Not even the most ardent Android Boy would make such a silly statement.   Apple does not collect data like Google.  Apple has no need for your personal data and doesn't want it.  Google couldn't exist without your personal data and vacuums up every intimate detail of  your life. 

rogifan_new said:

What privacy issues are there with the iOS version of Google maps? 

Many.  One of the central mistakes people make in analysis the threat Google poses is that they look at each piece of data in isolation.  For example, people will say "whats the harm if Google records that I went from my house to a particular office building?"  Even is you use iOS,  if you use Google Maps it's no different than using Google search or any other service.  They will take the Google Maps information and your ISP address, etc., and link it elsewhere. 

The mistake is that Google doesn't store that data in isolation. Google takes that data and will try and link it to the "universal identifier" they have assigned to you, so unless you take certain measures to thwart Google,  using Google Maps provides them more data. That trip to that building will link to other trips to that building to the web sessions they recorded where you clicked on a web site regarding a particular medical condition and to gmail's you wrote to your family, etc., etc., to give Google keen insights into your formerly private medical information.  You can play this out a million different ways the potential threats once Google has amassed into a digital dossier the most intimate details of your life.  And, then extend that to the others who can access that data, such as law enforcement with a valid subpoena/warrant, someone who files a suit against you and has a civil subpoena, hackers who get access to it,  governments, intel agencies, etc., or just the advertisers, insurance companies, etc., who pay Google to give them indirect access to your information. 

"Facebook and Google are dependent on advertising, which demands collecting enough customer data to attract marketers."  Please don't whitewash the grossly invasive vacuuming of the most intimate details of people's lives, essentially without people's knowledge or meaningful consent, by Facebook and Google.  

Indeed, I am having to block two of Google's trackers they are trying to install on me as I use this website.  Google never asked for my permission, nor told me that it was going to install a tracker to collect information on what I click on, etc., and then follow me to other places on the web.  Google doesn't truly inform people that they scan every gmail sent or received, that they scan every document uploaded, every photo opened or saved, everywhere you drive, every search made, every everything, and then tie it all together under what they euphemistically call a "universal identifier," which is nothing more than a dossier that they are trying to create on every person in the world eventually.  They don't meaningfully tell people that the TOS gives Google the right to sell all of this information should they choose to do so.  Or important little details such as for every photo you upload to Google photos is stored for "free" because you give them a WORLDWIDE, PERPETUAL (means forever:) ) license to use that photo.

Google gets over 90% of its revenue from advertisement.  It is the Borg indeed.  It wants to know everything about everyone on the planet to monetize human beings as things to be sold.  It's why they do everything they do.  They want to know everything that happens in your home, so they are almost giving away Google smart speakers (which are recording everything said that they can hear and sending it to their servers, again linked to your "universal identifier" and kept forever.  They are developing self-driving systems because they want to hear everything you say and know everywhere you go, every thing you see, everyone you visit, which will require that they lure you into their Google equipped vehicle.  You can see an early version of this with Android Auto, where unlike CarPlay, they are trying to suck personal data about your use of the car, from you.  That's why Toyota still is holding out and not adopting Android Auto in their cars.  

nunzy said:

If Apple is coming out with audiophile-quality headphones, it makes perfect sense that they would not use the Beat brand for them. Beat is not associated with audiophile-quality.

The recent Studio 3 wireless have been well received from the audio quality point of view though