Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 19th Apr 2013 14:09 UTC
Apple "All of those questions, messages, and stern commands that people have been whispering to Siri are stored on Apple servers for up to two years, Wired can now report. Yesterday, we raised concerns about some fuzzy disclosures in Siri's privacy policy. After our story ran, Apple spokeswoman Trudy Muller called to explain Apple's policy, something privacy advocates have asking for." Apple cares about your privacy.
Thread beginning with comment 559426
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: caring
by jared_wilkes on Sun 21st Apr 2013 20:35 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: caring"
jared_wilkes
Member since:
2011-04-25

Well, it's not in my own constitution anyways, but generally speaking I think it's absolutely the case.


It's against YOUR constitution to commit murder, but generally MOST PEOPLE absolutely would commit murder if they weren't "pressured" by the law not to? Seriously? You're going to argue that? Based on what?

I believe there were a lot more murders in the lawless wild west and probably also places like the roman empire where murder was rampant (at least according to Hollywood, any historians feel free to correct this misconception).


Oh... based on MOVIES set 150 or 4000 years ago. Good argument.

My point apparently hasn't sunken in yet. Apple undoubtedly WOULD keep the data IF they thought they could get away with it without public criticism. Good companies can ANTICIPATE public criticism BEFORE it gets to that point. I still view this as a form of public pressure, and it's good when things happen this way.


Your point is understood by me and it's wrong. We don't write articles about the entire population everyday saying, "John Doe Finally Pressured into Not Killing." It's absurdity to claim that Apple was pressured or finally acted in response to a single article. Another example, if Google announced Maps updates tomorrow, it would be nonsense to say, "Google finally responds to competitive pressure from Apple Maps." You can regressively say that it is generally true that companies respond to competitive pressures or you can point to a year old blog post that says Apple Maps will hurt Google, but if I made that claim in comments or in an article, people would have every right to say there is no basis for such a claim. Argue and argue all you want about how you can justify that which you have no evidence for (or are you going to mention Westerns again?) but my sole point initially was that "finally" was fundamentally absurd and something you rarely see being perpetrated against any company other than Apple in a generally routine, systematic, and accepted fashion.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[10]: caring
by Alfman on Mon 22nd Apr 2013 01:02 in reply to "RE[9]: caring"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

jared_wilkes,

"It's against YOUR constitution to commit murder, but generally MOST PEOPLE absolutely would commit murder if they weren't 'pressured' by the law not to? Seriously? You're going to argue that? Based on what?"

Please don't stoop this low, I never indicated that most people would commit murder. I think it was tasteless to use murder as an example (my example was taxes), but the point stands even at the extreme of murder. The laws and consequences for it are undoubtedly better at discouraging it than having no laws or consequences at all. If this is wrong, then ask yourself why there are laws on the books against murder?


"Oh... based on MOVIES set 150 or 4000 years ago. Good argument."

It was half joking there, there's no denying humanity can be brutal when there are no rules.


"Your point is understood by me and it's wrong. We don't write articles about the entire population everyday saying, 'John Doe Finally Pressured into Not Killing.' It's absurdity to claim that Apple was pressured or finally acted in response to a single article..."


You are obviously not getting it. Your too stubborn in your quest to defend apple at all costs that you don't realize that this criticism is waged at all corporations. Corporations don't care except to the extent that it would hurt sales, apple is not an exception. This is what Laurence, Soulbender, and I have been saying from the get go. If you truly did get it, then you'd have to admit that your argument is a straw man because I certainly never said apple's actions are a response to a single article. This article is not relevant to my views at all.

Edited 2013-04-22 01:16 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[11]: caring
by MOS6510 on Mon 22nd Apr 2013 04:43 in reply to "RE[10]: caring"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Jared may be considered stubborn defending Apple, but he is right that Apple didn't got pressured in revealing the retention period of Siri data.

What is more impressive is people still trying to claim Apple DID got pressured, even when they didn't, because apparently all companies and people are under constant pressure to behave a certain way.

I consider pressure an active force influenced on someone or something to achieve something. Apple, or any other company, can live by the law and still be pressured to do something. Just following the law or in this case just answering a question doesn't equal giving in to pressure.

Do you feel pressured to stop for a red light?

If you don't obey the law there could be consequences. This is what you evaluate when you are tempted to break a law. Being pressured is being forced to do or change something.

Despite laws people are still getting murdered, sometimes in groups. I doubt many murders were prevented, because someone was pressured by the law not to kill someone.

It's a kind of deja vu, but each time people try to accuse Apple of something, someone points out they are wrong and then people go to great lengths to twist and turn to try and prove Apple is in the wrong anyway.

In this case were are talking about a spokeswoman answering a question. How did we get from her to movies set in the past, the Roman Empire and the dark side of human nature?

Reply Parent Score: 2