Lack of openness means a lack of privacy in theory, but in practice, openness often results in less privacy. The average user lacks the knowledge, time, and motivation to install and configure open systems to maximize privacy. They're likely to make mistakes that expose private data.
A closed system that prioritizes privacy will result in more users benefiting from greater privacy overall, even if it does give the platform more control than is ideal. And that's the issue with the wallet ads: Apple makes users more secure on average, but it depends on user trust, which it just betrayed.
Those who can take advantage of total control are a minority, and they are not really the people Apple cares about.
It’s not a dichotomy, but an observation about how data privacy tends to work in the real world. You can easily refute it with practical examples of how openness has actually improved privacy for the average user relative to Apple’s closed, managed privacy programs. Would an average non-technical Apple user be exposed to higher or lower security and privacy risk if they moved from Apple platforms to open platforms?
It is a dichotomy though as its confusing correlation with causation.
There is no causal relationship between open platforms and being bad for privacy. Look at bluesky vs facebook.
Just because android failed in some ways doesnt mean apples way is better. Its a duopoly. There are open source alternatives focused on privacy...with very low user bases.
A non-open system is not verifyable and therefore not trustable. Therefore a non-open system can never deliver privacy. At best it can attempt to trick you into believing it does.
Risk isn’t an absolute. Open systems may be verifiable, but they are also more difficult to use, inconvenient, and lack the features users want. So most people won’t use them or will use them badly. Apple reduces privacy risk relative to open solutions used by non-expert users. The purist approach to privacy increases risk to ordinary users. It’s better to be pragmatic; Apple isn’t ideal, but it’s better than the realistic alternatives.
A closed system that prioritizes privacy will result in more users benefiting from greater privacy overall, even if it does give the platform more control than is ideal. And that's the issue with the wallet ads: Apple makes users more secure on average, but it depends on user trust, which it just betrayed.
Those who can take advantage of total control are a minority, and they are not really the people Apple cares about.