[somenameforme]

You're conflating public vs private. PRISM is private data collection and probably unconstitutional/illegal owing to the 4th amendment. So any information provided by PRISM is not directly used. Instead there is parallel construction [1] - the NSA (or whatever other agency they provide intel to) creates a pretext for how they obtained the information/evidence that sidesteps the real source. For instance if they pick up information on a car carrying drugs, that car might be pulled over for 'driving recklessly' and it's then searched because of 'suspicious behavior.' The real source of the reason makes no appearance in court.

The reason for this charade is because everytime somebody tries to sue the NSA over illegal data collection, the case gets tossed for lack of standing. You need to prove both that you were illegally spied on and negatively affected by such. If you can't prove that, then you have no standing to sue. And anytime people try to gather evidence of said collection in e.g. discovery, the government simply claims national security - and the case ends up tossed.

The public cases are efforts to try to streamline the process where the government could legally directly utilize such things. So you have this sort of charade where Apple is giving the government everything it wants in private, but then genuinely fighting them publicly. Both sides get more or less what they want out of the deal. Apple gets to pretend to be a protector of privacy, and the government gets unfettered access to whatever they want.

The Intercept has run a bunch of articles on this topic, alongside direct evidence of such. Here's one. [2]

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

[2] - https://theintercept.com/2017/11/30/nsa-surveillance-fisa-se...

[leakycap]

There is no evidence of Parallel construction in iOS. NSA/other baddies wants to surveil, Apple is fighting this more than any other large company I know of.

Today's announcement from Apple further flies in the face of your arguments: https://security.apple.com/blog/apple-security-bounty-evolve...

[bigyabai]

> There is no evidence of Parallel construction in iOS.

Parallel construction isn't a technical "feature" on any phone. It is a way the NSA can use their de-facto coercion powers, ones that Apple has already admitted to fielding. If Apple is fighting this "more than any other large company" you know of, you better trust them a whole lot more than any of us do. There is no evidence that Cook has resisted this admin, at the going rate it seems like a Tweet is all it takes for him to redesign the ecosystem.

> Today's announcement from Apple further flies in the face of your arguments

Apple has always had a pitiful security bounty. It's why NSO Group burns their zero-days instead of disclosing them responsibly. Nobody cares what Apple will pay you if the exploit is worth more.

Mind you, Apple tried to sue NSO Group but then dropped the case after their federal handlers warned them of fighting with Israeli intel: https://www.securityweek.com/apple-suddenly-drops-nso-group-...

[leakycap]

> you better trust them a whole lot more than any of us do

Who are you speaking for when you say "any of us do"? I don't know many technically competent people who would choose an Android device at retail over an iOS device at retail, and if you do, you should question their specific reason to see if they're competent.

[bigyabai]

You know that's a false dichotomy. I can distrust Google's Play Services and firmware while also distrusting Apple's entire OS for exactly the same reasons. "Any of us" is referring to the hacker who esteems caution over brand loyalty. Your trust is excessive, and your evidence is perfunctory.

If we're in agreement that the frogs are boiling, you need to stop making veiled threats towards a monopoly and take action if you want to save yourself. There is no point in moralizing Apple's decisions when the abuse of their top-down control has already led to real-life censorship. The point of my whole combative comment chain is to snap you out of the ludicrous fantasy that your personal politics will triumph over the economy or sitting administration. You have already lost, your ownership of an iPhone is the loudest approval of Apple's behavior you can possibly voice. Victimize yourself all you want, you're the one asking your telecom to ship you the Apple phone.

Get this into your head: Tim Cook is not aligned with you - you are aligned with him. He isn't going to read your hand-wringing "as a long time Apple user..." comment and reconsider his life goals. Why would he? You aren't a priority to him, he is the CEO of a monopoly. All he has to worry about, to ensure his continued success, is currying government favor and selling new products. No need to listen to you in a market that doesn't compete. His RSUs are worth exponentially more when he skips your "valuable feedback" to fabricate more consolation prizes for the president. It's simple economics.

[leakycap]

> I can distrust Google's Play Services and firmware while also distrusting Apple's entire OS for exactly the same reasons.

"exactly the same reasons" undercuts your entire argument

Android and iOS are more dissimilar than Windows and macOS. You need to be more aware of the moving parts if you wish to compare them or have a distrust based in fact.

> The point of my whole combative comment chain is to snap you out of the ludicrous fantasy that your personal politics will triumph over the economy or sitting administration.

You have failed at your stated goal, as your comment has not changed my opinion. Perhaps if you tried a non-combative, more-informed approach on your next reply you can sway someone's opinion to be closer to your own.

> It's simple economics.

Three wordy paragraphs with a trite ending claiming you've made a simple argument anywhere here.