Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 16th Apr 2012 08:26 UTC
Internet & Networking "The principles of openness and universal access that underpinned the creation of the internet three decades ago are under greater threat than ever, according to Google co-founder Sergey Brin. The threat to the freedom of the internet comes, he claims, from a combination of governments increasingly trying to control access and communication by their citizens, the entertainment industry's attempts to crack down on piracy, and the rise of 'restrictive' walled gardens such as Facebook and Apple, which tightly control what software can be released on their platforms." That governments - east and west - are trying to destroy the open web, that we know. As for Facebook and Apple... Well, all I know is that it is completely and utterly impossible to check what information Apple has about you. Unlike Google (more here) and to a lesser degree Facebook, Apple provides zero means to see, export, or delete the information they have on you, associated with your Apple ID or otherwise. In 2012, that's just sinister.
Thread beginning with comment 514411
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: About walled gardens ...
by WorknMan on Mon 16th Apr 2012 21:49 UTC in reply to "RE: About walled gardens ..."
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

However, they could just as easily choose to allow other shady dealings, and those would fly right under your radar if you choose to just straight-up trust Apple.


Right, as opposed to Google, who always has my best interest in mind? If you use pretty much ANY walled garden, you're putting some amount of trust in whoever maintains it, and Apple isn't the only one pulling apps for reasons other than security. For example, Wireless Tether and other apps have been yanked from the Android market. Even with Linux distro app repositories, which I imagine is mostly run by 'free love' people, if some major corporation came threatening with a lawsuit because of a particular app, do you think that app is going to remain in the repository?

They might want to use personal data and usage metrics for profit and marketing (see the Carrier IQ debacle), they could be strong-armed by governments or carriers or the MPAA to give up your sensitive data, et cetera.


And this is different than Google, how exactly? Hell, Google probably has a lot more sensitive info about me than Apple and Facebook do. And why do you suppose they wouldn't keep some of that info under wraps and/or do anything nefarious with it? Because they say they won't? LMAO!!! Surely, you're not that naive?

I personally feel that doing some research and using some common sense before installing apps is a small trade-off for not having a corporation decide what's "safe" for me.


And that's fine... for you. But is it really up to you to make that decision for everyone else? For some people (a lot of people, actually), there's nothing outside of the walled garden that they'd have a particular need for anyway.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: About walled gardens ...
by einr on Tue 17th Apr 2012 07:46 in reply to "RE[2]: About walled gardens ..."
einr Member since:
2012-02-15

Apple was just a convenient example, since you were kind of implying with your original post that the Apple App Store was preferable to something like Google Play because it is a walled garden with taller walls. I don't mean to say Apple is particularly bad, I just mean to say that "letting someone else do the curating" is dangerous no matter what.

For the record, I don't trust Google in the slightest. I've stopped using Gmail and I now use DuckDuckGo for search. I also don't own a smartphone – so I don't mean to come off as biased. If I have a bias, it is against the idea that most corporations have ethics.


And that's fine... for you. But is it really up to you to make that decision for everyone else? For some people (a lot of people, actually), there's nothing outside of the walled garden that they'd have a particular need for anyway.

Nope, but I think ideally people should think about what they're actually getting themselves into when they cede control of many aspects of their personal life to corporations. If you do know the facts, and then decide to do it, great, knock yourself out!

Edited 2012-04-17 07:46 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

Apple was just a convenient example, since you were kind of implying with your original post that the Apple App Store was preferable to something like Google Play because it is a walled garden with taller walls.


I meant to imply that it is preferable to SOME people, not specifically me ;)

Nope, but I think ideally people should think about what they're actually getting themselves into when they cede control of many aspects of their personal life to corporations.


Ideally, people wouldn't open files like Angelina_Joline_Nude.jpg.exe, but hey... what are you gonna do?

Reply Parent Score: 2

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

Facebook most definitely has most of your most sensitive information. Painting Google as being worse than Facebook is just plain uninformed.

If you're an Apple user than Apple has much more sensitive information than Google. And with Siri, they have even more. Google's information is surprisingly advertisement oriented, or I guess it's no surprise.

Obviously, if you're Google user then Apple has practically no information about you.

PS: And their ecosystem is as protected as it possibly can, without involving error-prone human review or castrating developers.

Edited 2012-04-17 11:39 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2