That doesn't explain why 94% of people opted out of tracking when given the option. It's more like "people don't miss their privacy if you don't tell them you're taking it away from them."
Strongly agree with the issue of choice around tracking but I don't like that the article somewhat sidelines Apples own tracking.
I do not find the argument convincing at all that Apple tracking anyone is less severe because it happens under the same roof. To pick up the analogy from the piece, if someone tracks me in the shower, I don't care if the house, the showerhead, and the window and the guy peeking are from one or five different companies. Apple also consistently needs to apply the same standards to its own services. Apple's size and reach are not an excuse to justify double standards, if anything it ought to invite more scrutiny.
Tracking ought to be defined as the exchange of information between distinct services regardless of the provider of said services, similar to the scrutiny that say, the EU applies to data exchange between WhatsApp and Facebook.
9 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 29.7 ms ] threador
not enough to matter*
I do not find the argument convincing at all that Apple tracking anyone is less severe because it happens under the same roof. To pick up the analogy from the piece, if someone tracks me in the shower, I don't care if the house, the showerhead, and the window and the guy peeking are from one or five different companies. Apple also consistently needs to apply the same standards to its own services. Apple's size and reach are not an excuse to justify double standards, if anything it ought to invite more scrutiny.
Tracking ought to be defined as the exchange of information between distinct services regardless of the provider of said services, similar to the scrutiny that say, the EU applies to data exchange between WhatsApp and Facebook.
As said above however Apple does not consider this 'tracking' because they don't share the information with third parties.