[triska]

Quoting from https://www.apple.com/privacy/ :

"Privacy is a fundamental human right. At Apple, it’s also one of our core values. Your devices are important to so many parts of your life. What you share from those experiences, and who you share it with, should be up to you. We design Apple products to protect your privacy and give you control over your information. It’s not always easy. But that’s the kind of innovation we believe in."

So, according to Apple, it is designed "to protect your privacy and give you control over your information".

[pixelgeek]

Until the Chinese government asks them not to

[caeril]

s/Chinese/any government representing a material amount of their revenue/

Don't be deceived; the San Bernardino case was a very intentionally public op to convince us that they will "fight" for our right to privacy, but the not-so-public track record since has demonstrated their absolute willingness to lick the boots of virtually every government whose citizens impact their top line materially.

This isn't a slag on Apple, specifically. Facebook, Google, et al will declaim "Russian Propaganda" all day long and then immediately roll over for Russian demands to censor political opposition, for instance. They all do it.

It's all a show. You have no privacy with any of Big Tech, regardless of where you live.

[stjohnswarts]

I have basically zero worries of all my criticisms of all my rantings against the bloated and corrupt American government getting me sent to prison for life and potentially having my organs harvested for a party elite. So I think that's one reason it's a tad bit different.

[markenqualitaet]

That's a fallacy. The argument is not about "legitimacy", but Apple's compliant with government interference.

[dwaite]

> but the not-so-public track record since has demonstrated their absolute willingness to lick the boots of virtually every government whose citizens impact their top line materially.

What sort of percentage of the entries on that unprinted list can be summarized as "they follow the law in the places where they do business?"

[kamray23]

Nearly all of them, most likely. What motivation would there to do otherwise? It's just that the vast majority of these governments, the US included, have laws mandating access to nearly everything accessible. If that data is subpoenaed and Apple can theoretically access it, it's illegal for them not to hand it over.

[JumpCrisscross]

> the San Bernardino case was a very intentionally public op to convince us that they will "fight" for our right to privacy

You’ve reversed cause and effect. Apple’s surprise at the backlash to their position on San Bernardino is well documented. It directly led to the softening of their stance on privacy.

[redprince]

> but the not-so-public track record since has demonstrated their absolute willingness to lick the boots of virtually every government whose citizens impact their top line materially.

Is there any public information that supports this claim?

[smoldesu]

https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/

See for yourself.

[redprince]

They comply with the law to the extend that they can. Apple by design locked themselves out of the capability to provide people's data in many circumstances. So the fact that requests exist says very little about what was actually provided.

[heavyset_go]

Or the US government asks them not to. Apple gives up US customers' data for about 150,000 users/accounts a year[1].

[1] https://www.apple.com/legal/transparency/us.html

[ekianjo]

In China this is probably a day's worth.

[judge2020]

For as long as a company doesn't think selling in a country risks losing more money than they make by selling there, they will be beholden to the requests of that country. You have to see Apple as its own nation state, as this is how it works everywhere - leaders will weigh the economic damage of losing trade with evil countries with the damage caused to their reputation/re-election chances by not doing anything about it.

[sneak]

This is a lie.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusiv...

https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/21/21075033/apple-icloud-end...

The iPhone uploads very nearly the entire contents of the device every night by default to Apple, in a format Apple can easily read.

[LeoPanthera]

> by default

No, not by default. That would be impossible, since iCloud Backup first requires an iCloud Account, and then requires enough iCloud storage space to backup your phone. You get 5GB for free, which is not enough for a lot of people.

[ViViDboarder]

Mine doesn’t. It’s ostensibly expected that a backup is going to send your data somewhere. I don’t use iCloud backups for that reason. Also, some iCloud backup data is e2ee. The document it here: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303

[heavyset_go]

> Also, some iCloud backup data is e2ee. The document it here: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202303

Some of it is "E2EE", but Apple holds the keys that can decrypt that data.

[katbyte]

Read the link, not all of it can be:

Data types that are protected by end-to-end encryption—such as your Keychain, Messages, Screen Time, and Health data—are not accessible via iCloud Data Recovery Service. Your device passcodes, which only you know, are required to decrypt and access them. Only you can access this information, and only on devices where you're signed in to iCloud.

[Handytinge]

Amusingly, your comment is the actual lie. iCloud backups are an opt in cloud backup solution. They are not enabled by default and myself (and many others) have never used them.

[sneak]

I've set up four iOS devices from scratch (new numbers, new Apple IDs, new everything) in the last two weeks and iCloud Backup is indeed on by default.

It's possible your understanding is out of date.

[shkkmo]

Isn't it worse to lie to you about your level of privacy than to be upfront about the data you collect?