Is this directed at me? I'm not outraged at Apple at all, I think they're trying to play the long game here. I'm just sick of the word games, deception, and legalese from anyone regarding privacy. It's hard enough fully understanding exactly how all the pieces fit together (technology, laws, politics, etc.) for people that are genuinely interested in this, let alone the average consumer. Pointing out loopholes in wording helps to start conversations about what is/isn't happening as well as what could happen/be-abused.

Well, I think whatever Apple says, you will find a "loophole" in the wording that supposedly allows them to do evil things. Try it: pretend you are Apple and just try writing a statement that you would consider acceptable and that you wouldn't call "word games, deception and legalese".

Myself, I think they did fairly well, certainly the best of any tech company out there today.

> Try it: pretend you are Apple and just try writing a statement that you would consider acceptable and that you wouldn't call "word games, deception and legalese".

Ok. "We're enabling custom encryption key management. You may now generate and use your own encryption keys. In addition to ensuring the device data is encrypted, nothing in your iCloud account can be recovered if you lose your key because it is all pre-encrypted before being sent to iCloud. Again, if you lose your key, there is no recovery possible. We'll also be opening up a new bug-bounty program specifically for identifying weaknesses and exploits in our baseband, firmware, and OS that could result in the leaking of your encryption keys and personal data. Here at Apple, we take your privacy serious."

I don't see any promise there that they won't somehow store your encryption key in a place where they can access it. I see a huge line saying "we invite you to try and catch us and if so we will try to find another way that you haven't yet found out about". So I think you failed on your premise.

You'd still get "But they could just push an OS update that sends them the keys"

Absolutely correct, no amount of wording will provide adequate proof. Thats why if you are providing a security product or product providing security features, open up the source code and provide a way to validate that that source is actually what is running on the hardware.

Until then I assume it is unsecure.

Often it seems like the people want businesses to take up the fight for privacy, rather than the people themselves.

And why not? Businesses, through lobbying, essentially control the US government.

It's not unreasonable that American citizens might feel more empowered voting with their dollars than with ballot papers.

It was about three $3.2 billion last year in 2013 from the federally registered lobbyists. The state level is probably equal to that. Some think the real numbers are closer to $9 billion at the federal level because PR and consulting don't have to be filed with the Senate clerk.

https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/

Excellent point. So do it. iLobby.co

People don't care about privacy or they wouldn't be using Android.

Explain to me how businesses aren't people ?

Business are made of people, but a business is not a person in and of itself. That's why we have the saying "design by committee", because a group of people doing something will not lead to the same result of one person doing something.

I think people are outraged at both.

With the companies in question, it's not hard to vote with your feet and complain. With the government, it's very difficult.

You get the government you vote for.

No, that's not how it works. You get the most heavily marketed party that pissed the least number of people off in the last couple of years.

National elections have become such a farce anyways. A single senator or representative can change the political landscape, yet a single citizen cannot. I cannot vote for Senator Wyden, nor can I vote against Feinstein. Rubio is unfazed with my voting and McConnell couldn't care less about my opinions. Yet, these handful of senators have shaped the issues that I care about to be what they are today. The best I can do is not vote for Hatch, but his death from old age seems to be the looming reason for his departure from the senate.

When someone voted in by a single state can influence the entire country like that, it makes everyone feel powerless. I'd rather give my money to a company that has my interests in mind throughout the years in exchange for products and services than dump thousands of dollars into someone's campaign like a drunken bet at a Las Vegas casino every couple of years.

You get the government the majority of voters vote for.

You also get the one the majority didn't vote for, since it's more or less indistinguishable from the one they did vote for.

Minus that whole lobbying, "corps are people (only when convenient)", and gerrymandering thing, exactly!

I'd agree if US voters actually bothered to go voting, and participated in their own democracy instead of turning their brains off and watching TV. But seeing how they don't, the US really gets the government that the most active/noisy minory supports.

(The same is largely true in the EU, even though it's possibly more pronounced the US.)