[politelemon]

It is hypocrisy to advertise yourself as something that you are not. Yours is a deliberate mis-telling or misinterpretation to make them appear saying something they're not.

> I don’t know anyone who interprets Apple’s stance on Privacy as “They will break the law for you”, only in contrast to… everyone else (?) selling your advertising data?

I know that most people will assume that everything is private and hidden away based on their marketing campaigns; assuming that privacy = breaking the law is something you are foisting on, and is in poor form.

Either you are deep inside the HN/Apple reality distortion field or avoiding acknowledgment that a problem has existed for a long time, which needs addressing. This isn't uncommon on HN sadly, I will usually see similar mental gymnastic performed whenever there's any slightly negative news about Apple.

[misnome]

> assuming that privacy = breaking the law is something you are foisting on, and is in poor form.

What privacy do you have that isn't subject to the law? Outside of your own brain, can't literally everything be subject to a legal order to gain access?

It seems to me that your definition of absolute privacy is extreme, extremely specific to you, and renders the word essentially meaningless; This does of course make it very easy to argue in bad faith and rant about companies that you don't like.

[kelnos]

I think the GP's point is that Apple's marketing may make it seem (to many people) like Apple's security is set up in such a way that the law isn't relevant, and that users' data is encrypted and handled in such a way that even if Apple is ordered by a court to divulge something, they are simply unable to do so.

And that's true, to some limited extent, but (some) people believe it's true to an absolute extent.

Apple doesn't need to tell people they will break the law in order to maintain their privacy; they just need to insinuate that user data is handled in a way such that it's out of the law's reach.

[misnome]

> Either you are deep inside the HN/Apple reality distortion field or avoiding acknowledgment that a problem has existed for a long time, which needs addressing. This isn't uncommon on HN sadly, I will usually see similar mental gymnastic performed whenever there's any slightly negative news about Apple.

Or, it could be that other people have legitimate views and interpretations that don't match your own?

By your own logic, you are also doing similar mental gymnastics to interpret news about what a government is doing in a deliberately negative way about Apple, driven by an explicit marketing piece for a company that is trying to present themselves as the solution.