I respect people’s right to use apple products, but please stop asserting “privacy”, big corps doesn’t give a shit.
I hate the term sideloading. It’s a made-up propaganda word to make it seem scary or wrong to install software on your device. All in the name of corporate profits.
I use an iPhone simply because I refuse to use google services any longer, not because I’m delusional about apple caring about privacy.
I don’t quite get the hierarchy, Linux phones have FOSS software, and greater device capability and software support compared to dumb phones. They should be ranked above dumb phones.
Unfortunately Linux phones are not that mature yet. Often they lack basic functions like “calling”.
Often they lack basic functions like “calling”.
Who needs to do that in this day and age?? ha ha!
Apple does give a shit about privacy… in the same way that companies care about gay pride. Right now privacy is still a selling point for Apple compared to other companies. This is why they are still so loud about on device AI and pretty much silent when any of their features require cloud processing. But am under no illusions that will remain the case forever.
As far as “dumb phones” are concerned; they don’t exist anymore. It’s still a device with an OS, GPS (as required by the law that created the Amber Alert here in the US), and an Internet connection, that makes calls using VoLTE or similar. Most of the ones you can buy today run things like KaiOS which has an App Store and comes with Google Maps preinstalled.
If you want real privacy you need to disconnect from the Internet which pretty much means no phones at all now that everything is VoIP.
Apple has 2x very publicly resisted government demands for user data and campaigned against laws to institute backdoors into their software and services. They’re not perfect by any means but they are by far a lesser evil.
A fully capable Linux phone is the dream, but most people aren’t going to use one. For the majority of people, I would recommend the company that refused to listen to the US and EU about weakening the security of their products over the one with the business model of relying on advertising to you and selling your data.
They just do that for brand optics. Because researchers found the apple privacy settings off/on made no difference to the packet of info sent to apple. Their privacy is a facade.
The issue in one of the cases (San Bernardino) had nothing to do with iCloud data, and everything to do with the data on the device itself. The FBI request was a backdoor into the device. Apple (rightly) refused to add a backdoor to access the phone.
You are referencing data that goes to Apple’s iCloud servers, which Apple was happy to provide because they held the encryption keys. Since then, they have enabled an E2E encryption feature for iCloud data.
I am happy to discuss Apple’s shortcomings, but let’s be clear on which ones we’re discussing
Its the don’t track privacy type settings where you opt out, research found it was a toggle button that did nothing.
They only tout privacy to gain market, they would sell us out for a dollar
Is this separate from Advanced Data Protection, which is E2E encrypted data on iCloud?
“Don’t track privacy type settings” isn’t very descriptive, so apologies if I’m sounding any way I’m just trying to be clear about what the complaint here is.
And to be clear, is this a privacy concern exclusive to Apple?
Totally unrelated to the E2E, I will have to search for it. It was a year or two ago. Apple claimed turning off the data collection kept your use private to you, but was just a lie, they collected all your data anyway.
And yes, its an IPhone setting not an android setting. Google is another issue.
Ok please let me know when you have more information I am very interested to know.
And they have proven if the government makes a law requiring access they’ll do it. They have done it for China and Russia.
That’s literally any company though. If you want to legally operate in a certain country, you need to abide by the country’s laws. Sure, pirate FOSS projects could exist. But that’s not the kind of shit that will be sold in retail, because it would literally be illegal to sell.
This is like complaining that Japanese phones can’t disable the camera shutter sound. It’s because Japan regulated the shutter sound, because upskirting was a major issue. So phones legally sold in Japan are required to have the shutter sound permanently set at a high volume, even when the ringer is silenced. That isn’t the phone maker’s fault.
Apple campaigned against regulation like what you’re complaining about. It isn’t Apple’s fault that the regulation was passed anyways.
Hardware really needs to be opened. So many issues are caused by people being unable to get away from large company control due to them beinf the only ones able to get decent hardware.
The Librem 5 is a Linux phone and already has open board design files, available here.
@jcs Librem 5 has a fully closed source SoC, which means System on a Chip as opposed to a traditional desktop where the components would be part of a motherboard. The board schematics are for a basic PCB. It’s a nearly entirely closed source device in terms of where the actual complexity is. The SoC is the core component providing nearly all the base functionality. The SSD, memory, touchscreen, battery, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, cellular, etc. are all closed source, as are various other chips, etc.
@jcs Librem 5 has atrocious privacy and security due to using a bunch of low security and outdated components, which are not open and do not have open firmware. Many components including the radios lack proper security updates. Purism does not provide the firmware updates through their OS and has set up a bunch of it in a way where it can’t be updated. They even went out of the way to move things to a locked down secondary processor to block updates. They claim if you can’t update it, it’s open.
@jcs The definition of openness used by Librem 5 is that a fully closed source device with closed source firmware and software would be open and freedom respecting as long as none of the firmware/software can be updated.
Purism prevents updating firmware for the SoC and calls it open even though the SoC is fully closed source hardware and does have closed source firmware, which just can’t be updated. They don’t count secondary components like radios. 99.999% closed source hardware isn’t open.
