please stop believing the myth of apple privacy. apple is fooling people and they are a fascist part of the surveillance state just as much all the other tech companies.
Speaking only for myself -> say for argument sake, Apple really was the Mercedes of privacy. At best, that makes them benevolent dictators. iOS is completely locked down. Prob is, benevolent dictators can become hostile dictators overnight. Maybe company management changes. Maybe they have financial probs and look to selling user data to shore up the balance sheet. Corporate policies can change. Subservience to a big tech co about what s/w you are even allowed to run on your own dev, feels risky to me.
I do get why ppl like Apple stuff tho. It's very polished. It's just not for me.
"In recent months, hints emerged concerning Apple’s plans to introduce camera-equipped AirPods Pro; the cameras would be designed to pick up details of your ambient surroundings and feed information to Siri to help you with your life.
At one point, we heard the product had been pulled citing privacy concerns. But that doesn’t seem to be the case, as the latest seemingly orchestrated Apple “leak” offers up a short video to explain how these things are going to work."
I'd feel bad for any casual airpod owners but....that would be so, so funny if they went from the product you were uncool for not using to the product that gets you glares
The release will be a critical time for a reaction. If too slow "everyone" will have these just like you see airpods in almost everyones ears. A gym might then not want to ban them anymore since almost all of their customers are wearing them. Apple and their airpods might have the right amount of mainstream pull to make this a new normal, unfortunately. It is something that Meta was not able to do with their glasses.
The article is about how Apple is adding cameras to an upcoming iPodAirPods model for ??? reasons.
In recent months, hints emerged concerning Apple’s plans to introduce camera-equipped AirPods Pro; the cameras would be designed to pick up details of your ambient surroundings and feed information to Siri to help you with your life.
"Consent" from just the wearer, that is likely to have their iPhone's photos/videos synched to their iCloud account: which by default don't appear to be end-to-end encrypted (and is therefore accessible by Apple). So although the user is technically expected to read Apple's entire privacy policy to everyone they interact with, and they technically can enable E2EE on iCloud for this category of data, they know full and well the ordinary iSheep isn't going to.
Given Apple's obsession with brand-perception, risking being associated with perverts (like rightfully happened with Meta's "pervert glasses"), I think it's completely inexcusable to release a product of the same category; at least for the time being. But perhaps Apple's marketed propaganda has really given the ignorant populace a false sense of privacy, in which they blindly trust a Trillion dollar corporation with their most privacy-sensitive information.
Single party consent for recording in public (or in places a person could be reasonably expected to be recorded) is the norm everywhere I’m aware of.
A private conversation would be one where you could claim that a person is expected to read a privacy policy to people but of course that would be preempted by the recording party following actual laws governing recording and would never be expected.
Apple has never embraces privacy. They've been selling user data as long as it's been profitable to do so just like all the big tech companies that people give their private information to.
17 Comments
artyom@piefed.social · 44 pts · 1d
If you're gonna post clickbait you could at least add a short summary
umbrella@lemmy.ml · 25 pts · 1d
please stop believing the myth of apple privacy. apple is fooling people and they are a fascist part of the surveillance state just as much all the other tech companies.
RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 1d
Some of my favourite TheHatedOne's videos are the Apple privacy videos.
FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 8h
Any in particular you'd recommend?
Speaking only for myself -> say for argument sake, Apple really was the Mercedes of privacy. At best, that makes them benevolent dictators. iOS is completely locked down. Prob is, benevolent dictators can become hostile dictators overnight. Maybe company management changes. Maybe they have financial probs and look to selling user data to shore up the balance sheet. Corporate policies can change. Subservience to a big tech co about what s/w you are even allowed to run on your own dev, feels risky to me.
I do get why ppl like Apple stuff tho. It's very polished. It's just not for me.
RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 8h
None of THO's Apple videos stand out ... they are all good.
RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works · 25 pts · 1d
From the article
"In recent months, hints emerged concerning Apple’s plans to introduce camera-equipped AirPods Pro; the cameras would be designed to pick up details of your ambient surroundings and feed information to Siri to help you with your life.
At one point, we heard the product had been pulled citing privacy concerns. But that doesn’t seem to be the case, as the latest seemingly orchestrated Apple “leak” offers up a short video to explain how these things are going to work."
FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works · 14 pts · 1d
My prob, Apple Meta and the others, is that I am a detail of the wearers ambient surroundings. There is no way for me to opt out.
RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 1d
I couldn't agree more.
chris@links.openriver.net · 17 pts · 1d
Great comment on Mac rumors said something about this getting air pods banned at gyms.
I wonder if it will also make it hard to wear AirPods anywhere because of social stigma. I don’t want people afraid I’m recording them.
glimse@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 1d
I'd feel bad for any casual airpod owners but....that would be so, so funny if they went from the product you were uncool for not using to the product that gets you glares
the__joosh@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 1d
Yeah I wear mine quite a lot, the seemless movement between devices is very nice, but I would 100% switch to different headphones if this is true
gedfromgont@piefed.ca · 2 pts · 20h
The release will be a critical time for a reaction. If too slow "everyone" will have these just like you see airpods in almost everyones ears. A gym might then not want to ban them anymore since almost all of their customers are wearing them. Apple and their airpods might have the right amount of mainstream pull to make this a new normal, unfortunately. It is something that Meta was not able to do with their glasses.
orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts · 10 pts · 1d
The article is about how Apple is adding cameras to an upcoming
iPodAirPods model for ??? reasons.Edit: I’m an idiot and typed “iPod” lol.
PierceTheBubble@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 1d
"Consent" from just the wearer, that is likely to have their iPhone's photos/videos synched to their iCloud account: which by default don't appear to be end-to-end encrypted (and is therefore accessible by Apple). So although the user is technically expected to read Apple's entire privacy policy to everyone they interact with, and they technically can enable E2EE on iCloud for this category of data, they know full and well the ordinary iSheep isn't going to.
Given Apple's obsession with brand-perception, risking being associated with perverts (like rightfully happened with Meta's "pervert glasses"), I think it's completely inexcusable to release a product of the same category; at least for the time being. But perhaps Apple's marketed propaganda has really given the ignorant populace a false sense of privacy, in which they blindly trust a Trillion dollar corporation with their most privacy-sensitive information.
TrollAccount69@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 8h
Single party consent for recording in public (or in places a person could be reasonably expected to be recorded) is the norm everywhere I’m aware of.
A private conversation would be one where you could claim that a person is expected to read a privacy policy to people but of course that would be preempted by the recording party following actual laws governing recording and would never be expected.
chillpanzee@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 1d
Betteridge's law of headlines... no, of course they aren't.
irotsoma@piefed.blahaj.zone · 3 pts · 22h
Apple has never embraces privacy. They've been selling user data as long as it's been profitable to do so just like all the big tech companies that people give their private information to.