All the trust is just one decisions or change away from current state.

That’s part of the agreement too. Ternus or next guy/gal messes up one huge thing in any significant way, trust is burned and they’re just another Google.

(They are on watchlist for Apple Maps & other ads…)

▲

roughly 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

And the reason to trust Apple is because they recognize this - they’re not under any illusion about why their products command a premium, and so the security and privacy angle is (or should be) one of the sacred cows inside Apple.

And you’re absolutely right - as soon as they break the value proposition, the value of their package and the price people are willing to pay for it drops in half and they’ve all the sudden gotta compete with Google and Samsung and Huaiwei and the rest of that jungle, and that market sucks.

	▲	j45 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I understand the argument that the lesser of two bad options is the better one. The massive issue in all of this is digital identity. Everyone is a citizen of a private corporation without any rights or access points to their digital identity. Humans rely on our digital identity (email accounts, iCloud, google, etc) for nearly everything. In many ways, it's like the equivalent of using our license or other ID in physical spaces. Except, humans are relying on digital identities provided as digital citizens of corporations (Google, Apple, Microsoft, etc), whereby they do no have teh same recourse that official access points of data do. If at any given time, the majority of the identity providers are generally or ultimately not on the side of the identity holders (human) wrt to their inalienable rights. There's no easy answer for this. Convenience has been used as a massive tradeoff for security for 10-15 years to the point that most people don't know better, or that there were and can be better options. Downplaying the fact that the single change of a few sentences could change for worse the promises any corporation makes (it's not entitled to serve the user's needs first, after all). Security and Privacy in Apple certainly seem to be better, but are not the best they could be. Privacy and security, especially where it comes to protecting people from increasing threats online including AI bots, is not going to come from corporations alone, they haven't been able to build or roll them out while they learn at the expense of people. There's no answer being pointed to, only that Apple being the only vendor with some promises isn't very good at all.

▲

j45 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

There are valid arguments to owning your hardware independent of the software that runs on it.

Otherwise you don't really own your hardware.

LLMs will be able to secure (and insecure) more and more hardware as time goes on.

▲

dd8601fn an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

More than one. The Apple Wallet fiasco, apple maps thing, etc have tested customer perception, before. Even some utter bullshit ones like the battery thing… they still sound like trust violations to dummies.

There’s some resilience, there.

	▲	j45 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Some resilience there for sure, sometimes the products were just plain early... Apple Maps comes to mind when it first came out, it took a while for it to become more.. complete. The new ability to add one's own passes to Apple Wallet is nice though. Long overdue.