Guess not so private: Apple fined 8.5M for illegally harvesting iPhone user's data for ads

[Dracarris]

8 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

So Apple is by far the worst and most malicious corporation on this planet. Noted.

Well...

 

 

No.

That would be Microsoft.

[Kisai]

1 hour ago, Dracarris said:

Well...

 

 

No.

That would be Microsoft.

No that would be Oracle.

 

[HenrySalayne]

1 hour ago, Dracarris said:

No.

That would be Microsoft.

2 minutes ago, Kisai said:

No that would be Oracle.

I'm pretty sure Apple took the lead with a whopping $14,300,000,000 ($14.3 billion).

[Kisai]

19 minutes ago, HenrySalayne said:

I'm pretty sure Apple took the lead with a whopping $14,300,000,000 ($14.3 billion).

Nope, Oracle is the worst tech company:

- It bought Sun because they saw a payday out of suing IBM

- It bought MySQL to try and and squeeze licensing out of it's popular use

Look at it's list of acquisitions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Oracle and see how it keeps new database, human resources and CRM software from ever competing with itself. Most of the companies Oracle buys, are in bad faith.

 

Microsoft and Apple don't buy popular companies to eliminate competition. You could make the argument that maybe they shouldn't have been allowed to purchase certain companies. But their CEO's aren't driving luxury yachts and owning entire hawaiian islands. I'm not even saying the guy is bad, but he sure makes a show of "I have money"

 

Oracle has routinely have been fined 100's of millions of dollars. Oracle has been involved in far more privacy and corruption than Apple ever has. Apple has also far outspent Oracle in doing "good", so no. Oracle still takes the cake for worst evil tech company.

 

[Dracarris]

1 hour ago, HenrySalayne said:

I'm pretty sure Apple took the lead with a whopping $14,300,000,000 ($14.3 billion).

Is that more than MS had to pay back in the day for all that stuff-bundled-with-Windows mess?

[Commodus]

I wish we wouldn't get into straw arguments. Apple is allowed to have better privacy than Google or Microsoft while still having flaws; Google and Microsoft are not horrible monsters, either. Apple did a bad thing here, but it's not necessarily an evil mastermind, either.

 

As it is, it's amusing to realize that some of the people roasting Apple use Samsung products... and, well, if you know that company's history, it makes Apple look squeaky clean.

 

 

[Kisai]

20 minutes ago, Commodus said:

I wish we wouldn't get into straw arguments. Apple is allowed to have better privacy than Google or Microsoft while still having flaws; Google and Microsoft are not horrible monsters, either. Apple did a bad thing here, but it's not necessarily an evil mastermind, either.

 

As it is, it's amusing to realize that some of the people roasting Apple use Samsung products... and, well, if you know that company's history, it makes Apple look squeaky clean.

 

 

I don't think Apple's ever been on "doing things to maximize profitability" train, even back in the Steve Jobs era, the worst Apple could be guilty of is not making products at price points everyone can afford.  A privacy gaffe here and there was not about turning their customers into another revenue stream. Their products are basically marketed as luxury products, and luxury products DO NOT have ads. Meanwhile Microsoft and many Windows PC's, the worst Microsoft has been accused of is being to willing to bundle software. Between Apple and Microsoft, they've maybe created software that could shortsightedly be seen as harming competition, but I'd make the case that if that was their goal, they would have just bought the competition, not be inspired to make something better.

 

Google, oh what can I say about google except that it kills beloved products after not supporting them, and finding no way to monetize them. Sad but true, but the most "evil" things Google has been found doing are related to the ad business that it should NEVER have been in, in the first place.

 

[mr moose]

12 hours ago, Kisai said:

I don't think Apple's ever been on "doing things to maximize profitability" train,

 

Do I need to list them?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Really?

 

 

 

 

 

Every company does that, it's the prime directive.

[Kisai]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

Do I need to list them?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Really?

 

 

 

 

 

Every company does that, it's the prime directive.

Go look at how Apple's stock is traded, and you'll see I'm correct. The day traders do not care about the equity or dividend, they know Apple is valuable and doesn't bet the farm on stupid endeavors. It's a question of does it make a LOT of money or a LOT AND LOT of money. They don't need to minmax profitability, because they have NEVER done that. The stock price moves for no other reason than stock traders being too optimistic. When was the last time Apple had a massive loss? They haven't. Their stock moves independent from the the rest of the market.

 

If they were doing that, there would be Macmini's at every price tier going down to raspberry Pi level. They would want to own the PC market, not just be the Luxury "full experience" out of the box. More to the point, if they were into minmaxing profitability, they would also have iphones at prices below the prices of Chinese market Android models. They do not. 

 

They know that their brand is a Luxury brand, and that people will pay to have an Apple product, so they choose not to do obviously stupid things to grow their customer base that will not sustain it.

 

Apple isn't laying off people to save money. They so far haven't. They've laid off 100 recruiters, meanwhile the other big tech companies are letting go of thousands of staff, and clearly that means projects are being discarded or abandoned.

 

[mr moose]

8 minutes ago, Kisai said:

Go look at how Apple's stock is traded, and you'll see I'm correct. The day traders do not care about the equity or dividend, they know Apple is valuable and doesn't bet the farm on stupid endeavors. It's a question of does it make a LOT of money or a LOT AND LOT of money. They don't need to minmax profitability, because they have NEVER done that. The stock price moves for no other reason than stock traders being too optimistic. When was the last time Apple had a massive loss? They haven't. Their stock moves independent from the the rest of the market.

 

If they were doing that, there would be Macmini's at every price tier going down to raspberry Pi level. They would want to own the PC market, not just be the Luxury "full experience" out of the box. More to the point, if they were into minmaxing profitability, they would also have iphones at prices below the prices of Chinese market Android models. They do not. 

 

They know that their brand is a Luxury brand, and that people will pay to have an Apple product, so they choose not to do obviously stupid things to grow their customer base that will not sustain it.

 

Apple isn't laying off people to save money. They so far haven't. They've laid off 100 recruiters, meanwhile the other big tech companies are letting go of thousands of staff, and clearly that means projects are being discarded or abandoned.

 

So again, do I need to list the things apple has done just for money?

 

Just because they make lots of money doesn't mean they don't do things just for money, or maybe it has escaped you that the reason they make so much money is because they do things just for money.

 

 

[Kisai]

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

So again, do I need to list the things apple has done just for money?

 

Just because they make lots of money doesn't mean they don't do things just for money, or maybe it has escaped you that the reason they make so much money is because they do things just for money.

 

 

Are we really having this argument? A corporation is supposed to make money, otherwise they would be a non-profit.

 

My point, that you seem to be hellbent on ignoring is that Apple isn't run by a sociopath billionaire who spends the company's equity on trying to to silence it's critics.

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, Kisai said:

Are we really having this argument? A corporation is supposed to make money, otherwise they would be a non-profit.

 

My point, that you seem to be hellbent on ignoring is that Apple isn't run by a sociopath billionaire who spends the company's equity on trying to to silence it's critics.

You said:

 

14 hours ago, Kisai said:

I don't think Apple's ever been on "doing things to maximize profitability" train,

 

I don't know why you keep making statements you can't backup, words have meaning and what you said was literally that you don't think apple has ever done anything to maximise their profits and that could not be more obviously wrong if you tried.

 

So here is a list of things apple have done to maximise their profits:

 

1. Forcing developers to use their app store and their payment system.

2. making it hard/impossible to get genuine parts to repair your device

3. using customs as their personal judicial system to prevent repairers from importing products that can be used to repair apple devices.

4. outright declining to repair devices instead suggesting you buy a new one

5. refusing warranty claims because of faulty moisture tags

6. their whole anti right to repair saga

7. suicide workers in their factories, if any company has the money to pay proper wages and give proper breaks it's fucking apple

8. 6 yo children dying in cobalt mines

 

 

I'm sure there is more than this, but if you think these things are being done or for any reason other than maximising profit then I have a bridge to sell you.

 

 

[mr moose]

7 minutes ago, Kisai said:

 

My point, that you seem to be hellbent on ignoring is that Apple isn't run by a sociopath billionaire who spends the company's equity on trying to to silence it's critics.

Well that point would be wrong too.  Apple have indeed tried to silence critics over issues that might cost them money:

 

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/sec-rejects-apples-argument-that-it-doesnt-try-to-silence-workers-after-former-employee-disputed-it-11640218188

 

[vertigo220]

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

Well that point would be wrong too.  Apple have indeed tried to silence critics over issues that might cost them money:

 

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/sec-rejects-apples-argument-that-it-doesnt-try-to-silence-workers-after-former-employee-disputed-it-11640218188

 

They also never told people they were holding it wrong so they wouldn't have to address the actual issue, and they never lied about intentionally slowing down older devices. I was also informed by someone that said they worked for Apple that they would bury issues that affect customers rather than admit and/or fix them, though that's hearsay, so take it with a grain of salt.

[Kisai]

11 hours ago, mr moose said:

 

 

So here is a list of things apple have done to maximise their profits:

 

1. Forcing developers to use their app store and their payment system.

 

You want to sell on the App store, you follow the App store rules. Don't like it? don't make iPhone apps. Did you realize you need a Mac to sign binaries to even put them on the App store? I'm sure the same people whining about the App Store, don't even own a Mac.

 

11 hours ago, mr moose said:

2. making it hard/impossible to get genuine parts to repair your device

Apple was not doing that for monetary reasons but consumer safety, because repair places have been using counterfeit parts.

 

11 hours ago, mr moose said:

3. using customs as their personal judicial system to prevent repairers from importing products that can be used to repair apple devices.

Preventing them from importing counterfeit parts. It's illegal to buy, let alone import counterfeit parts.

 

11 hours ago, mr moose said:

4. outright declining to repair devices instead suggesting you buy a new one

Fair, they've done that. So does everyone else. Especially Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft and HP.

 

11 hours ago, mr moose said:

5. refusing warranty claims because of faulty moisture tags

*shrug* I want to say prove it, but all computers companies have been proven to do that, and I doubt "faulty" is the operative word, but maybe "improperly repaired", is story is from 2008.

 

11 hours ago, mr moose said:

6. their whole anti right to repair saga

Nobody is disputing that, and that is again, not a "attempt to minmax" profitability. That goes back to the entire problem with counterfeit parts. Apple may appear on the wrong side of the argument, but singling them out while all the Android manufacturers do the same, is dishonest.

 

11 hours ago, mr moose said:

7. suicide workers in their factories, if any company has the money to pay proper wages and give proper breaks it's fucking apple

That's not on Apple, and that's the same across all hardware produced in China by Foxconn, including HP. If you want to take a stand against Apple for than, then you must only use hardware that doesn't say "made in China" Good luck with that.

 

11 hours ago, mr moose said:

8. 6 yo children dying in cobalt mines

That's not Apple, that is  Zhejiang Huayou Cobalt Company, that is everyone producing batteries. Samsung, Tesla, etc. That story is also from 2017. Perhaps you need to actually look at the current status hmm? https://www.faircobaltalliance.org/supply-chain-wide-collaboration/our-members/signify/ , Huayou, LG, Tesla, Google, etc are now part of that.

 

 

11 hours ago, mr moose said:

 

I'm sure there is more than this, but if you think these things are being done or for any reason other than maximising profit then I have a bridge to sell you.

 

 

These are all reaches, and you relied on 5+ year old stories for all of them.

 

The point is, this is not Apple going "oh, we're going to do evil sh*t to minmax profitability" which is what companies like Oracle do, but Cisco, Google and Microsoft don't. Some people on this forum, are completely dishonest about Apple. They see something that Apple gets fined or investigated for, and then pretend that the same thing hasn't happened to these other companies, that are known for doing "evil" things at some point, or continue to do so in the case of Oracle, Amazon, and Tesla.

 

It's not a crime to be rich, but it should be a red flag to not buy from companies who have CEO's using the company as a piggy bank to build vanity projects.

 

[Uttamattamakin]

Well well well you don't say?  It turns out that corporations would rather risk a fine that is 0.1% of their gross and screw customers (by not acting in their interest, or acting against their interest) than loose money to not screw them?  Hmm 

[HenrySalayne]

8 hours ago, Kisai said:

21 hours ago, mr moose said:

7. suicide workers in their factories, if any company has the money to pay proper wages and give proper breaks it's fucking apple

That's not on Apple, and that's the same across all hardware produced in China by Foxconn, including HP. If you want to take a stand against Apple for than, then you must only use hardware that doesn't say "made in China" Good luck with that.

8 hours ago, Kisai said:

21 hours ago, mr moose said:

8. 6 yo children dying in cobalt mines

That's not Apple, that is  Zhejiang Huayou Cobalt Company, that is everyone producing batteries. Samsung, Tesla, etc. That story is also from 2017. Perhaps you need to actually look at the current status hmm? https://www.faircobaltalliance.org/supply-chain-wide-collaboration/our-members/signify/ , Huayou, LG, Tesla, Google, etc are now part of that.

Word of the day: Lieferkettensorgfaltspflichtengesetz - a word so strong it will even break the layout of the Google search.

 

 

Quote

The law requires companies to carry out analyses on supply chain contracts to identify risks to human rights and requires companies to take action against identified risks. The companies will have to publish an annual report containing the analyses. Companies must also establish a complaint procedure for workers to report potential risks. The law additionally gives civil society organisations the ability to sue companies on behalf of workers over breaches of human rights in supply chains. Companies that fail to respect the terms of the law can face fines of up to two percent of the company's annual revenues.^[3]

The came into effect starting with 2023, only applying to companies with over 3000 employees in its first year. In 2024, the provisions of the law will extend to apply to all companies with over 1000 employees. In 2026, the federal government will carry out an evaluation of the law's effectiveness.

 

If you are up the chain, it is your responsibility to make sure you sub-contractors are not kicking human rights with their feet. That you are defending Apple in this regard is despicable and sickening. Apple is among the largest and most valuable companies in the world with a annual revenue exceeding the GDP of many countries (they would come in at 39th place wordlwide out of ~200 countries). They absolutely have the power to force basic human rights for their entire supply chain. They choose to not do it.

 

[jagdtigger]

On 1/18/2023 at 10:27 PM, Commodus said:

Apple did a bad thing here, but it's not necessarily an evil mastermind, either.

https://www.engadget.com/2019-01-05-apple-ces-2019-privacy-advertising.html

Saying one thing an doing something else behind everyone's back. I think this pretty much warrants the "evil" and "malicious" designation.... Just another item on my list why apple deserves a permanent place on my blacklist. (The scandal about them scanning photos without authorization from the user aint helping either.)

[mr moose]

10 hours ago, Kisai said:

You want to sell on the App store, you follow the App store rules. Don't like it? don't make iPhone apps. Did you realize you need a Mac to sign binaries to even put them on the App store? I'm sure the same people whining about the App Store, don't even own a Mac.

 

Apple was not doing that for monetary reasons but consumer safety, because repair places have been using counterfeit parts.

 

Preventing them from importing counterfeit parts. It's illegal to buy, let alone import counterfeit parts.

 

Fair, they've done that. So does everyone else. Especially Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft and HP.

 

*shrug* I want to say prove it, but all computers companies have been proven to do that, and I doubt "faulty" is the operative word, but maybe "improperly repaired", is story is from 2008.

 

Nobody is disputing that, and that is again, not a "attempt to minmax" profitability. That goes back to the entire problem with counterfeit parts. Apple may appear on the wrong side of the argument, but singling them out while all the Android manufacturers do the same, is dishonest.

 

That's not on Apple, and that's the same across all hardware produced in China by Foxconn, including HP. If you want to take a stand against Apple for than, then you must only use hardware that doesn't say "made in China" Good luck with that.

 

That's not Apple, that is  Zhejiang Huayou Cobalt Company, that is everyone producing batteries. Samsung, Tesla, etc. That story is also from 2017. Perhaps you need to actually look at the current status hmm? https://www.faircobaltalliance.org/supply-chain-wide-collaboration/our-members/signify/ , Huayou, LG, Tesla, Google, etc are now part of that.

 

 

These are all reaches, and you relied on 5+ year old stories for all of them.

 

The point is, this is not Apple going "oh, we're going to do evil sh*t to minmax profitability" which is what companies like Oracle do, but Cisco, Google and Microsoft don't. Some people on this forum, are completely dishonest about Apple. They see something that Apple gets fined or investigated for, and then pretend that the same thing hasn't happened to these other companies, that are known for doing "evil" things at some point, or continue to do so in the case of Oracle, Amazon, and Tesla.

 

It's not a crime to be rich, but it should be a red flag to not buy from companies who have CEO's using the company as a piggy bank to build vanity projects.

 

What a load of codswallup.  You basically just said that everything that is within apples legal control, moral/ethical control and within their ability to fix is not their responsibility.  

 

You can't argue this one because everything I listed makes apple more money and does so at the expense of someone else.  Plain and simple.

 

 

[Commodus]

3 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

https://www.engadget.com/2019-01-05-apple-ces-2019-privacy-advertising.html

Saying one thing an doing something else behind everyone's back. I think this pretty much warrants the "evil" and "malicious" designation.... Just another item on my list why apple deserves a permanent place on my blacklist. (The scandal about them scanning photos without authorization from the user aint helping either.)

That was foolish on Apple's part, but evil? Really? It's marketing, not a solemn vow. And Apple never actually implemented the photo feature (which was really just looking for known hashes, not looking at the pictures); it admittedly took a public blowback, but it did the right thing.

 

Besides, if that's the kind of thing that warrants putting a company on your blacklist... be ready to immediately destroy every Amazon, Google, Microsoft and Samsung product you own. They're companies, not charities; we should push for ethical behaviour, but cynical marketing tactics are not exactly uncommon or heinous.

[HumdrumPenguin]

And yet people thought the most valuable company in the planet would be a fair one Hahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahaha

[Arika]

13 hours ago, Kisai said:

because repair places have been using counterfeit parts

because they couldn't get official parts without signing up to their bullshit "authorised repair centre" program that basically just gives them the middle finger anyway.

 

13 hours ago, Kisai said:

Preventing them from importing counterfeit parts. It's illegal to buy, let alone import counterfeit parts.

as above

 

On 1/19/2023 at 8:54 AM, Kisai said:

I don't think Apple's ever been on "doing things to maximize profitability" train

so i guess they just stumbled and fell into position 2 of the world's most profitable companies by accident?

 

[Kisai]

31 minutes ago, Arika S said:

 

so i guess they just stumbled and fell into position 2 of the world's most profitable companies by accident?

 

It is not a crime to make money, be a luxury product, or make smart business decisions. You know what Apple and Berkshire Hathaway have in common? Their CEO's aren't narcissist's that feel they need to be surrounded by expensive toys. Buffet is on record as saying cryptocurrency is foolish and he is right. Apple didn't even touch it, and in fact made the app store rather hostile towards it.

 

This is something that I find people are often alarmingly arrogant about. That some company or person "didn't earn" their money, and that, they, someone who never worked for them, is somehow entitled to that money as a customer. If you think their products are too expensive, then don't buy them.

 

The only company out there that Americans might be in debt to is Amazon, because so many other companies were late on creating online presences, that Amazon had the pool to itself. Amazon has a lot more "evil" things notable about it.

[mr moose]

19 hours ago, Kisai said:

It is not a crime to make money, be a luxury product, or make smart business decisions. You know what Apple and Berkshire Hathaway have in common? Their CEO's aren't narcissist's that feel they need to be surrounded by expensive toys. Buffet is on record as saying cryptocurrency is foolish and he is right. Apple didn't even touch it, and in fact made the app store rather hostile towards it.

 

This is something that I find people are often alarmingly arrogant about. That some company or person "didn't earn" their money, and that, they, someone who never worked for them, is somehow entitled to that money as a customer. If you think their products are too expensive, then don't buy them.

 

The only company out there that Americans might be in debt to is Amazon, because so many other companies were late on creating online presences, that Amazon had the pool to itself. Amazon has a lot more "evil" things notable about it.

You are conflating way to many unrelated and broad issues and trying to make simple absolutes out of them all.

 

Absolutely apple do things just (read: solely, only and without any other reason) to maximize profits, whether their CEO is a narcissist or not does not change this.  I don't even know in what logical arrangement of facts you could define an intrinsic link between the two.  

 

[hishnash]

From my understanding the data apple was collection was only from within apple apps were you were signed in with your apple user ID.

In such cases other vendors (like Facebook) are permitted to track users, (even fi the app is not owned by FB) the add tracking prevention settings only stoped FB (and others) from tracking suers between aps were those users had not signed in to FB so had no readable expectation that FB had any way to link what they were doing in this third party app to their FB account (or shadow Facebook id if they had no account). 

Tracking what a user does within an app (yours or a third party) were they are signed in to an account was never restricted and did not require the user to agree to the prompt.