Apple has been focusing on privacy as a part of their core offering since long, long before the iCloud photo leak. Them being imperfect is not a sign that they are willfully malevolent actors.
The post they replied to doesn’t make anything “evident” it just claims without basis that if you want privacy you should stop using Apple products.
I mean sure in an absolute sense that’s true. Using Apple products gives them some information about you. But relatively speaking, Apple tends to collect significantly less data about its users than its competitors: Meta, Google, Microsoft, et al.
I don't find the "not as bad as" argument to be a convincing one. Given that users can run hardware and software that doesn't give out any information about them, it seems defeatist to only consider software which does give out information. A lot of people have spent a lot of time and effort to make software like Linux and LineageOS available and easy; choosing the least-bad of bad options makes no sense when actual good options are available.
The OP of this thread gave a specific example of Apple circumventing user privacy in a way that I would find unacceptable. "Replied to" was not the best phrasing for that, I admit.
Users can also live in a shack in the woods which is even more privacy-preserving.
Presumably just like most users don’t want to do that, most users also don’t want to learn enough to admin a Linux system, run their own domain and email server, and keep a NAS at home as their “cloud” storage.
If you assume that users want someone else to handle this stuff for them, then yes, “not as bad as” is a great argument.
Wow, nice analogy - you really think that using Linux is like living in a shack in the woods, huh. It's actually very easy to use these days. Have you tried it?
I’ve used Linux for the last twenty five years, both as my daily driver personal desktop and as an admin.
My point is that if you want to chase privacy absolutism, a shack in the woods is where you inevitably end up. If you accept that people want to use consumer-focused goods and services that come with some privacy cost—as basically fucking everyone but a minute rounding error does—there are alternatives that are better than others. And so it’s absolutely worth comparing those alternatives.
If you want to run Tails on RISC V, route all your traffic through Tor, and conduct all your transactions with Monero then more power to you.
I don't accept that, actually. Since you like exaggerated analogies, here's one for you:
Imagine a world where, in the past twenty years, big companies started making transparent bathroom doors. And thanks to marketing, media, celebrity endorsemets etc., transparent bathroom doors have become the new norm. It worked, and most bathroom doors are now transparent or translucent.
I'm one of the people pointing out that we can get doors made of wood, and it's pretty easy to do so.
And you're the guy saying "that's so weird! Basically fucking everyone uses some degree of transparency on their bathroom doors, therefore it's normal and good, and should continue to be encouraged. Besides, this one company makes translucent bathroom doors - that's better, right?"
The post they replied to doesn’t make anything “evident” it just claims without basis that if you want privacy you should stop using Apple products.
I mean sure in an absolute sense that’s true. Using Apple products gives them some information about you. But relatively speaking, Apple tends to collect significantly less data about its users than its competitors: Meta, Google, Microsoft, et al.