Apple, along with Google and other companies, gives the government access to pretty much all of our data: https://www.theverge.com/2013/6/6/4403868/nsa-fbi-mine-data-...

As far as I'm aware, none of those companies knowingly gave that information over to the NSA. In Google's example, the NSA had tapped their inter-datacenter fiber lines to steal the data. That's why all inter-datacenter traffic at Google is always encrypted now.

Yep, that's why our data is a liability for them, thus they are trying to collect as less as possible.

Which, is also the main argument of the OP for preferring Apple.

Apple gives the government a backdoor into your iPhone. So I'd argue that you don't have privacy when you use an iPhone, period. Same goes for any smartphone, really.

I'd guess that Apple really collects less data because they want to preserve your battery life, not your privacy.

Please provide a source or don’t post unsubstantiated comments.

That comment was based on the title of the article I linked to above: "Secret program gives NSA, FBI backdoor access to Apple, Google, Facebook, Microsoft data".

I assumed that PRISM data came from a "backdoor" it had to iPhones. There's no proof that PRISM data didn't come from a backdoor to iPhones. But there's no proof it did come from a backdoor either. So I'll take back that comment.

"Snowden: FBI Saying It Can't Unlock iPhone is 'Bullsh'"

http://fortune.com/2016/03/09/snowden-fbi-apple-iphone/

Sorry, how has Apple given the gov’t a backdoor?

Sources? I hear this way too often.

Source?

Important questions:

1. Do they share this data with people?

2. Is this data anonymized?

3. Is this data directly monetized, or otherwise give incentives to violate user privacy?

I'd argue that other questions around how the data is:

- handled

- available for access by employees

- retained, deleted, and stored

etc.. are at least as important for your privacy.

As someone who works in security, I am as concerned or more about the seemingly inevitable breach's impact on my privacy.

Apple is a business like any other, all it will take is for the right financial incentives for them to engage in data sharing if they don't already.

There is a financial incentive to NOT share data because there is a demand in the market for privacy. Apple can pursue this market because they charge for hardware. Google had no way of making money on privacy because they don’t sell a physical product.

So it is simple: Apple has a choice. Google doesn’t.

> There is a financial incentive to NOT share data because there is a demand in the market for privacy

Where? I can't identify a single non-tech-oriented person in my life who makes phone purchasing decisions based off of vague notions like privacy.

In fact, I'd say that the market does not demand privacy, it is ambivalent to it. I don't agree with ambivalence, but I also don't see consumers making privacy-minded purchases, either.

As long as the money is flowing in. I don't think people will be buying $1500 smartphones in a recession.

Few people in America pay full price for the phone. All of the carriers offer zero percent interest payment plans as does Apple. Yes I know it’s paying the full price but psychologically, most people only care about the monthly amount.

Sure, but what do you think those incentives could probably be for a company that makes its living based not on data collection but selling physical products whose 'best product is now privacy' according to the post, and who are more profitable than anyone else?

Profit, pure and simple. Just because they're profitable, does not mean they will not seek other avenues of revenue. I won't pretend to be able to predict the future, but markets shift, and should Apple find themselves in less favorable position than the one they're in today, I'd have a hard time believing they wouldn't sell user data.

Google was once the "don't be evil" company.

This is something all businesses do. The issue is whether or not they sell that information.

Why is that "the issue"? There are many other problems with excessive telemetry besides data being sold to third parties. Besides, both Google and Apple claim that they don't sell telemetry data to third parties, so how is that aspect of the issue even relevant here?

Well, ok but Apple also

- does not use that data to sell stuff to you.

- don't have a reason to profile you and store those profiles constantly updated.

- don't have a reason to "follow" you across the web everywhere you go to update that profile.

Just having that profile on you makes a company a liability. C you trust a company that makes money solely based on the information they collect about you to make decisions that benefit you? or your privacy and security?

Well, the question I always ask is who has more to gain (financially) from selling user telemetry: Apple or Google?

Any third party that would pay google enough for the data would probably be seen by Alphabet as a company ripe for disruption.

Do you have a source for this?

I’d love to learn more