Comment by lapcat

Comment by lapcat 3 days ago

4 replies

Trust is never all or nothing. I trust Apple to an extent, but trust needs to be earned and maintained. I trust my mom, but if she suggested installing video cameras in my home for my "safety", or worse, she secretly installed video cameras in my home, then she would lose my trust.

Likewise, you need to trust your spouse or significant other, but if there are obvious signs of cheating, then you need to be suspicious.

An essential part of trust is not overstepping boundaries. In this case, I believe that Apple did overstep. If someone demands that you trust them blindly and unconditionally, that's actually a sign you shouldn't trust them.

sbuk 3 days ago

> If someone demands that you trust them blindly and unconditionally, that's actually a sign you shouldn't trust them.

That's certainly a take, which you're clearly entitled to take. I don't disagree with the point that you make; this ought to have been opt in.

What you should do now is acknowledge this in your original post and then explain why they should have been more careful about how they released this feature. Homomorphic encryption of the data reframes what you wrote somewhat. Even though data is being sent back, Apple never knows what the data is.

  • lapcat 3 days ago

    > What you should do now is acknowledge this in your original post and then explain why they should have been more careful about how they released this feature. Homomorphic encryption of the data reframes what you wrote somewhat.

    Do you mean my original blog post? The one that not only mentions homomorphic encryption but also links to Apple's own blog post about it? I don't know how that can "reframe" what I wrote when it already framed it.

    • sbuk 3 days ago

      I apologise, I didn't fully read your original article as I find that your writing is prone to exaggeration. I've reread it a few times now and I stand by what I said. You mention homomorphic encryption only in a quoted piece of text and a link. You utterly fail to explain what it is. You didn't frame it at all. You hand-waived at it. I don't disagree with you on the point about this being opt in, but your blog post is a massive overreaction, heavy on prose and opinion, but light on any tangible facts.

      • lapcat 3 days ago

        > I apologise

        Wow, that's some apology. Everything after those words is an insult.