• Blackbeard@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    24 hours ago

    My opinion is that the US already has access to Apple devices data. If we consider this to be true, what the UK is trying to do it’s to match a possible enemy capabilities. Is this a valid point though? This woudn’t make this action less wrong, I must to be clear, but it would be more undestandable.

  • JoeKrogan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    372
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    This is the correct response. Either everyone has protection or no one has. Not that I’d trust apple anyway but by pulling the service your average person is likely to make some noise because they can feel the effect.

    • hardypart@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      103
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      I’m not even an Apple user but somehow I still feel like Apple is one of the very last companies where privacy and the security of your data is more worth than a dime.

      • zettajon@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        99
        arrow-down
        75
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Nope, Apple sells your data just as much as Google does: https://www.insiderintelligence.com/content/apple-ad-revenues-skyrocket-amid-its-privacy-changes https://www.vox.com/recode/2022/12/22/23513061/apple-iphone-app-store-ads-privacy-antitrust#luMMel

        While people noticed their new policies against 3rd party apps, that masked the fact that those policies carved out an exception for first party apps, meaning they collect (anonymous) data on you through Health, Journal, Music, etc. just like every other company. “Trusting them more” is simply a result of you and everyone else getting hit with their privacy ads recently.

        Edit: “just like every other company” meant Google and Microsoft, i.e. the other big equivalent tech companies, my fault for not being specific.

        • steal_your_face@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          115
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          While I’m all for calling out companies for abusing your privacy, your own links show that they don’t collect as much data as google. They could (and should) be better though.

          • khajimak@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            71
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            2 years ago

            Nope apple is literally worse than hitler, spez, and elon musk confirmed. Tim apple fucked my wife in front of me.

        • SidneyGrant@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          29
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          2 years ago

          I feel like wuth the amount of stuff done on device and not in the cloud with iPhones and other Apple products, saying that Apple sells just as much as Google is at the very least disingenuous…

          • IronCorgi@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 years ago

            Why? They gather data locally on your device rather than on a cloud service. Why do you feel the locality where they gather your data makes the comment disingenuous?

        • webghost0101@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          There is a massive leap between collecting data and selling your data.

          I am against both but in the digital age actually knowing who has your data is such a relief. My old email got sold to third party’s a bit to many times and to this day 80% of the incoming messages are blatant generic America targeted phishing.

        • Platform27@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Health is on-device, and is E2EE. To my knowledge, that’s always been the case. They do allow optional data linking services, but those need to be setup by the end-user. Apple should have no knowledge of this data, by default. Notes can be E2EE (with ADP), and with Journal (a new iOS feature) being E2EE. Music is a paid for service, with no ads, and is one of the more privacy respecting options. Data is needed for Music to help serve the user, and suggest artists/songs… it’s literally one of the platforms benefits, over self-hosting.

          • zettajon@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            None of the major players literally sell your true name and address. All mask the data, and then do stuff with it like create trends to know which ads to display to “users that search for tiktok on the app store/play store”

            • Platform27@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              Apple does not sell user data. By all means, look at their Privacy Policy (it’s easy to read), and show me where this is mentioned. They do collect it, and use it for their own marketing platform, but they don’t sell/trade it. In fact they DO anonymise the data they collect. Take a look: https://www.apple.com/privacy/docs/Differential_Privacy_Overview.pdf This is just one document, found after a quick search. They also disclose other details on their security, and other privacy (or lack thereof) aspects.

              Now show me where other ad agencies, not just one or two, that goes to the same lengths, while also giving decent documentation. I’m not saying Apple is perfect (far from it).

              • zettajon@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                2 years ago

                They do collect it, and use it for their own marketing platform

                Right

                but they don’t sell/trade it

                Then what are they collecting it for? To line their servers? It’s being used to train services, and those services that have ads have those ads targeted using the data collected in the first sentence I quoted.

                In fact they DO anonymise the data they collect

                So does google. Again, to the broader thread audience replying to my original comment, what is the difference?

                • JshKlsn@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  You’re right. Not sure why you’re downvoted.

                  Google would be stupid to sell your data. Instead they keep it private, and when people go to Google, they tell them to push ads to certain groups or take surveys from certain groups, and Google does so. They do not hand those advertisers your data, otherwise those advertisers would never come back. They have the data.

                • seukari@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  I recently learned that one method for companies to get around data selling laws is to give the data away for free in order to attract certain types of advertisers, then, they sell ad slots for people with specific demographics or interests.

                  They don’t sell the data because that is harder to do with laws restricting it, so they just use it as advertiser bait in ways that bypass the law.

                  Further reading: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/google-says-it-doesnt-sell-your-data-heres-how-company-shares-monetizes-and

        • AngrilyEatingMuffins@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 years ago

          Anonymous data is actually pretty different to the data everyone else collects, which literally has your name and picture

          Apple’s data is useful for trends but it can’t be used to study who I am.

          • generalpotato@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            This comment needs to be further up rather than the idiotic takes that don’t understand the difference between anonymized data collection (Apple) vs identifiable data collection (Meta/Google/most other tech).

            • QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              Well, then there’s also the people that don’t realize that there are all sorts of programs out there that will try to take that “anonymized” data and then tie it right back to a persons profile.

              For example, you can anonymize GPS location data, but just because you strip away identifying information doesn’t mean that you’re truly anonymous. It can still be obvious where you live and where you work. And once you figure out where they live (again based on anonymous data) you can tie that information right back into their profile and continue to track them as if nothing has changed. https://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/security/a15927450/identify-individual-users-with-stravas-heatmap/

              • Yendor@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 years ago

                That won’t work on Apples data - they group all the data into cohorts, so the anonymising isn’t reversible.

              • generalpotato@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 years ago

                Not all anonymization techniques are created equal? I’m pretty sure this is fairly obvious at this point to anybody remotely familiar with how data collection works when it comes to privacy and device metrics.

                So, how is this relevant to this conversation besides adding more FUD and misinformation?

        • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          As much as Google? Likely not. Does their carefully curated pro-privacy image actually match their practices? Also likely not.

        • Yendor@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 years ago

          Did you read the article you posted? Apple serve you ads, they don’t sell your data. And they allow you to opt out of tracking. It’s all right there in your article.

          • JshKlsn@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 years ago

            I know this is off topic, but Apple isn’t innocent.

            It’s almost worse to think your privacy is protected when it’s not, than to know it’s not. At least I know Google is sending my Google Assistant sound clips to be analyzed. Sucks when you learn the person you thought you could trust is fucking behind your back.

      • DragonAce@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Any company that obfuscates all their security practices, refuses to give statistics on security risks and counter measures, and boils their product security down to “Trust us, bro.”, doesn’t actually give a fuck about your security. They’re just the last company who is still able to keeps everything secret so they can make shit up as they go along. Apple’s security is a joke and they’re just as bad as any other manufacturer on the market, the only difference is they have successfully kept their shit secret for all these years and spent decades convincing people they actually give a fuck about security.

        I still remember a few years ago having a conversation with a coworker about her iphone and she bragged about Apple never being hacked and this was right after I had just got done reading an article about a large scale hack on their network. Of course Apple never said a damned thing about it, so I forwarded her the article. IIRC she mumbled something about how the article was probably not accurate. Apple fanatics do some crazy mental gymnastics to justify them spending thousands on a phone thats probably worth about $300 at best(their hardware is on average 1-2 generations behind other devices on the market).

        Did you know that most celebrity phone hacks are thru apple accounts?

        • kautau@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          obfuscates all their security practices

          https://help.apple.com/pdf/security/en_US/apple-platform-security-guide.pdf

          https://support.apple.com/guide/security/advanced-data-protection-for-icloud-sec973254c5f/web

          https://developer.apple.com/documentation/cloudkit/encrypting_user_data

          I had just got done reading an article about a large scale hack on their network

          Source? Or should I just “trust you bro”

          Did you know that most celebrity phone hacks are thru apple accounts?

          Did you know that most celebrities own iPhones by a far margin? These aren’t the encryption was broken hacks when someone is getting into an iCloud account, these are social engineering hacks. That’s what happens when your publicist, your agent, and others have access to your digital accounts so they can get you a new phone quick while you are on the road, grab the photos you took on your phone from your iCloud account to share, etc. More holes in security.

          about $300 at best(their hardware is on average 1-2 generations behind other devices on the market)

          Flagship android phones, barring a few exceptions, are not sold without pre-installed apps that subsidize the cost of the phone.

          Do you have an example of a device priced at $300 with competitive hardware to the base iPhone 14, without bloatware subsidizing the cost of the device? I’d accept that generally iPhones are ~$100-200 above the price of devices with competitive hardware, but a current gen iPhone having $300 hardware? The specs are very similar to other devices in similar price ranges

          I’ve owned both Pixels and iPhones before. While each has its pros and cons, I’ve found that the app sandboxing, default settings, and ability to opt out of telemetry was always better on iPhone. And until google has free, easy-to-use E2E encryption for Android devices and the related cloud services, customer data on Google’s servers is more at risk to be stolen/sold for profit/used without explicit user consent.

            • kautau@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              2 years ago

              I won’t disagree with that, it certainly seems to be the most secure OS available for modern smartphones.

              My points were purely refuting the commenter I responded to’s weird obsession with “Apple = Bad and Insecure.” We should encourage competition and support efforts to increase security anywhere they occur. Brand tribalism doesn’t help anyone.

    • EighthLayer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      2 years ago

      iMessage isn’t a big loss in the UK. FaceTime would be.

      WhatsApp pulling out of the UK would have the biggest impact. Almost everyone uses it here.

      • iMike@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 years ago

        Can confirm, it had swipe to reply for a while now, it’s coming to iMessage in next iOS… The only thing that annoys me about WhatsApp is the high picture compression resulting in low quality images.

        • shebpamm@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 years ago

          If you need to send uncompressed images send it as a “document” rather than an image. You won’t get the preview but it’ll be the same file as on your phone.

  • irkli@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    157
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I wonder how many complaining here actually read even this bland and uninformative article.

    At issue I believe (because it is not stated, but discussed elsewhere in better venues) is that UK wants to be able to see inside encrypted comms and files, under the guise of CSAM detection. Apple is right to oppose it.

    Arguments based on hypocrisy real or perceived in other venues (china) has nothing to do with this decision its just piss-taking. Give it a rest.

    • Misconduct@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      Other than their asinine charging cable/accessory situations I consistently find myself agreeing with Apple pretty much any time any government body or group is mad they won’t do something.

      • linearchaos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        They’re generally on the wrong side of the battle for right to repair and removable batteries too.

        But yeah, privacy they almost always have the right of it.

      • TwanHE@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        2 years ago

        Requiring usb c was something I agreed with. But indeed many times apple has rightly fought for their userbase.

      • kameecoding@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 years ago

        how do you reckon?

        only time they have been on the consumer’s side was with regards to privacy, refusing to comply with the FBI and now this.

        everything else they are pretty anti-consumer, off the top of my head

        • first to remove jack 3.5 (even though I don’t really care about this, others do.)
        • sticking to shitty lightning cable so they can sell overpriced cables
        • the charger thing with the EU
        • worst of all entirely against right to repair
        • Perhyte@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          To be fair, those first three points fall squarely under that “charging cable/accessory situations” exception. With Apple, it turns out that’s a pretty broad exception.

          • lemme_at_it@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Bluetooth provides another vector of attack for the convenience. There is already quite a list of known vulnerabilities. Yes, many of these get patched but as the open standard evolves, so do the hackers. You could turn it off entirely, plug in a cable & forget all that if all you wanted to do was use audio/video.

          • kameecoding@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            like I said, I personally don’t care, but it’s a nice port, pretty ubiquitous and it’s nice to have choice for customers.

  • Dionysus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    116
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    There’s legitimate criticism to be made for Apple, but this is something I really appreciate about them.

    • TerraNova@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Walled garden aside, I think they do care about privacy and security.

      • GunnarRunnar@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        It’s their brand. And I’m glad it is. It’s something Samsung can’t copy (I presume because of the Google backbone) or attack.

        (Written on a Samsung phone btw.)

        Edit. I should probably add why it’s good even when I’m not in their ecosystem. It raises the bar for competition and shows that privacy adds value.

      • Juviz@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        I don’t know if they actually care, but I think they figured privacy was a great niche to jump in when they started losing more and more market share to android

      • catastrophicblues@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Yup. They have had issues (think CSAM scandal), but they’re slowly earning back my trust. I’m still a bit wary, but for big tech they have a pretty good track record.

  • falkerie71@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    There are a lot of things to hate about Apple, but this I can get behind. Get people using 3rd party messaging apps too! Preferably ones with e2e encryption.

    • hiire@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      2 years ago

      I hate how people turn a blind eye to these things nowadays. They’re willing to give away their personal lives at the expense of the shittiest excuses out there. Privacy should be a necessity, ffs.

    • dunestorm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 years ago

      Why don’t they just actually give their actual reason: to spy on UK citizens.

      To use children and criminals as a scapegoat for this attrocity is disgusting.

    • perviouslyiner@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 years ago

      protect the public from criminals, child sex abusers and terrorists

      Aren’t two of those just subsets of the first one?

      What a curious pair of emotionally manipulative examples to choose, when it adds absolutely no extra meaning to the Home Office’s statement.

      • darcy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        i would assume they mean ‘criminals, especially…’, but classic tHiNk oF tHe ChiLdReN argument

  • ritswd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    2 years ago

    I once had a conversation under NDA (which has expired since) with an engineer at Apple who was working on iCloud infrastructure, and he was telling me that his team was a bit shocked to read that Dropbox was releasing apps for photos at the time “because they’ve noticed that most of the files users are uploading to Dropbox are photos”. He was like: how do they know that exactly? His team had no idea and couldn’t possibly find out if the encrypted files they were storing were photos, sounds, videos, texts, whatever. That’s what encryption is for, only the client side (the devices) is supposed to know what’s up.

    Not having that information meant a direct loss of business insights and value for Apple, since Dropbox had it and leveraged it. But it turns out Apple doesn’t joke around about security/privacy.

    • whatsarefoogee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      2 years ago

      What?

      https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303

      Under Standard Data Protection photos, general drive storage and device back up are not end-to-end encrypted. Meaning that Apple has full access to reading and analyzing them.

      Under Advanced Data Protection which is an opt-in feature available since iOS 16.2, you can have those files end-to-end encrypted.

      End-to-end encryption makes the user responsible for keeping an encryption key safe, irreversibly losing their data if they lose the key. It’s not practical for the general population. I would guess its use is in low single digit percent of apple customers.

      And this feature came out in December 2022. A bit over half a year ago. Unless your friend’s NDA was super short, I presume the conversation took place before it was released. Either your friend was bullshitting you under an NDA or he’s an idiot.

      • Platform27@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Could be the engineer didn’t have permission to see file details. They could still be readable by higher-ups, but not to the general engineer. This is how it should work, if e2ee is not used. If Dropbox allowed everyone who worked on their server to read files… that’s a huge invasion of privacy.

        • LUHG@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          Makes no sense though. As if the engineer is the one deciding which apps are built. He’s just saying things he thinks he sees.

      • ritswd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Oh that’s interesting!

        Yeah, that conversation is much, much older, pretty close to the very start of iCloud file storage. I’m guessing either things changed since and they used to be end-to-end encrypted, or more likely, what the friend was complaining about is his iCloud infrastructure team didn’t have access to the keys stored by another team, and reverse. So basically, Apple could technically decrypt those files, but they don’t by policy, enforced by org-chart-driven security.

        Now excuse me while I go change a setting in my iCloud account… 😳

      • JshKlsn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        Really proves that Apple users believe Apple is perfect and they are protected, even when there’s official documentation stating otherwise. It’s baffling how many Apple users think they are fully anonymous and protected and not tracked. Apple is brainwashing you well.

        • DeadlineX@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 years ago

          I’m an apple user. I don’t think these things. I have a plethora of apple devices. I also have a few chromebooks, a high-end desktop I built for gaming and developing.

          We as people really need to stop generalizing and insulting {X group of people who are not me}. I mean, you don’t like apple. That’s totally fine! Use whatever pleases you. That doesn’t bother me at all. But stop calling me brainwashed for enjoying an ecosystem that makes my life and day-to-day easier and more enjoyable.

          People like to think of themselves as superior to the other group. But we are all individuals with our own preferences and life experiences. I had a google g1. I’ve had multiple android phones. Admittedly, they were all during android’s Wild West days where I barely got any major os updates and half of them failed within a year.

          What I’m saying (and I know this is a reply to you, but this has been frustrating me with a LOT of things, not just “Apple users”) is that we should try to put things in perspective before insulting an entire group of people that we don’t even know. That’s my two cents.

    • paysrenttobirds@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I don’t know anything about this, but the files may be encrypted blobs, but if they are mapped to the original filenames (as is the case with Dropbox) with suffix like jpg, etc, they could assume the type without decoding the file. Not saying there’s no difference between Dropbox and Apple, but I’m not sure people expected filenames to be encrypted back in the day (if even now).

      • ritswd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Yeah, to be clear, what the friend was saying that day is that they don’t even have access to file names. For them it’s 100% mangled data.

        I would definitely consider file names to be personal information, that I would expect to be encrypted. If I store a file named “Letter to IRS for 2020 violation.doc”, then suddenly you know something about me that I probably don’t want you to know.

    • t0lo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      59
      ·
      2 years ago

      Please no redditisms or else I will literally die of cringe o( ❛ᴗ❛ )o

        • t0lo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 years ago

          I know I just find it to be such a manufactured corporate tagline that exists to be used in this way and it rubs me the wrong way

          • marmo7ade@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            19.7 million iphone users will be forced to use a cross-platform messaging service.

            GOOD

            • sicjoke@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              2 years ago

              Until cross platform messaging is a good as iMessage and FaceTime from an iPhones user’s perspective it’s going to be bad.

              I have only ever used an iPhone (ignore non-smart phones) and have been weaned entirely on Apples stock apps. Conversely almost everyone I communicate regularly with is also an iPhone users. I do use other platform for communicating with non-apple friends but the experience is significantly poorer.

              I couldn’t say how many people existed within this almost exclusively Apple ecosystem but I would hazard a guess that there are a few.

              • steltek@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                2 years ago

                Apple uses iMessage as a moat against people switching to Android. They intentionally degrade your experience for their benefit.

      • Froody@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 years ago

        Gatekeeping, another redditism. Perhaps you belong there after all?

        • t0lo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 years ago

          My tenets are:

          1. no one will post on lemmy.world without getting prior approval from me
          2. At a minimum every second comment should end in some sort of praise of me
          3. No posting on Thursdays
          4. You accidentally posted something I didn’t like? Tough shit your wife and family are now hostage
  • Paws@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    2 years ago

    Signal and WhatsApp have also said they’d likely leave the UK market if this bill is passed as it currently is.

    • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      2 years ago

      Signal should still work there if people want to use it, and they don’t block it with a Great British Firewall.

      • Methylman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        It’s not so much a matter of whether the service would work or not but whether the corporate directors would be exposed to criminal liability for continuing to provide such services without OFCOM being able to “understand” the encrypted messages: see 99(4) of the Bill

        https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3137

  • ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 years ago

    The one good thing I can say about apple is that they at least push back against this kind of bullshit, even if they only do so for marketing.

    • Zpiritual@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      The other side is that they’ll also push back against good stuff for the consumer since everything they do is completely out of self interest.

      • Isthisreddit@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 years ago

        Your gonna have to back up that sort of statement. I’m not an apple fanboy, but I take security and privacy seriously, and they seem to really be on the consumers side in that regard. Please inform me how they push back against “good stuff” for the consumer

    • QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      2 years ago

      This has nothing to do with RCS from what I read on the article. It looks like the UK wants to be able to tell companies to disable security features such as End to End Encryption so that they can view the messages.

      • JshKlsn@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        Isn’t WhatsApp super popular in the EU as a whole? Like to the point where EVERYONE uses it? What does the UK have to say about that? It’s apparently E2EE, right?

        Curious why WhatsApp isn’t in trouble.

    • warmaster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      That would be better than iMessage or Whatsapp, but even better if we all moved to Simplex, or other secure and private messaging app.

  • Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Those proposals will never be made law and acted upon.

    It’s infeasible nonsense to pander to the Daily Mail reading curtain-twitchers. They’ve had 13 years to try and do this. If they wanted to (and indeed if it was in any way possible), they’d have done it already.

    It’ll be just “Vote for us and we’ll make your children safe from nonces and muzzies!” until the end of time.

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        We did, but it was pretty clear that they didn’t want to. It was a “shut the swivel eyed loons up” move and backfired in spectacular fashion.

        The Prime Minister quit the next day, and the only person that looked pleased was Nigel Farage as he knew he’d never have to deal with it or be held accountable in any way.

        The Tories will be annihilated at the next general election. Polling like 20-30% lower than Labour.

        • Aux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          The Tories will be annihilated at the next general election.

          And that’s when anti privacy bills will come through. Labour is hyper anti privacy for a long time.

      • mihor@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        2 years ago

        While I agree that Brexit was a stupidity, I also firmly believe that EU in its current form is equally as stupid.

        • flower3@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          I mean the idea behind the EU at least seems solid. The idea behind Brexit on the other hand was…

    • marmo7ade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Brexit happened. How long was that simmering? Anything is possible. The country has proven that.

  • Jackthelad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    2 years ago

    Why don’t politicians just fuck off?

    Nothing they ever do about anything leads to an improvement.

    • _TheNardDog_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 years ago

      I agreed that they should definitely fuck off, but this will be pushed y the security services. A change of government won’t change the drive for this sort of bollocks.

      “Oh but what about the criminals, terrorists and pedos?”

      What about all the people that aren’t that who loose their privacy?

      • echo64@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 years ago

        The criminals, terrorists and pedos won’t by affected. They will just switch to non weakened encryption.

        It’s always been about mass surveillance.