Can we start a class action suit?

The output stays local on your disk (in theory). So I’m not sure that breaks any rule. But in theory, Apple Intelligence can query it. Again, close to 0 documentation, so it is hard to know how this is consumed.

▲

fschuett 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

In Germany, it breaks TDDDG §25 verbatim, storage of data not explicitly consented to and not technically necessary is already illegal.

▲

otterley 2 days ago | parent [-]

So sue them. You will then learn whether you are right or not.

▲

nephihaha 2 days ago | parent [-]

If you have the time and money.

In the meantime the German government probably uses that info.

▲

jdiff a day ago | parent [-]

Conspiracy talk. Show any indication that this data ever leaves its store first.

▲

nephihaha 19 hours ago | parent [-]

Just about every major criminal case in the west has a computer/telecommunications component these days. It is a major part of the investigation. I was at a murder trial not long ago - I knew the victim - and phone, computer and banking information were all major components of the evidence, as was WhatsApp, and cameras on shop tills.

Electronics in that murder case had clearly been used to build up a profile of the suspects' social circle including witnesses with very little to add.

This is not some stupid "conspiracy" as you put it. It is used openly in such cases in Europe and elsewhere. In fact tech companies can get people to consent to things that governments have to jump through hoops to get with warrants etc. Tech companies do a better job of recording your interactions than they do. Smoothbrains click on boxes consenting to everything and do not remove permissions.

It's easier to go to the tech companies directly than applying for warrants to do things the old fashioned way. They don't just do this for severe criminal cases, but people considered to hold anti-government views, especially activists.

▲

otterley 15 hours ago | parent [-]

> Smoothbrains click on boxes consenting to everything and do not remove permissions.

Spare us the insults.

	▲	nephihaha 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		"Conspiracy talk" was an insult, and an attempt to shut down discussion, but for some reason you're not complaining about that. I'm afraid to say many people do click on "consent" to whatever a website or program says. Google is bad for that. I was trying to set something up yesterday, and continually given boxes to check with "agree" and "got it". They did not make it clear what I was supposed to be agreeing to, and most people would not bother to read it. Google's business model revolves around data harvesting and selling on private information. Small print is the curse of the modern age. It's how we sign up to things we don't want or don't need. Including surveillance in apps. (I see you say you are an attorney, so you should be well aware of the dangers of small print.)

▲

rpdillon 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm from the US, but I did do some research after I saw other commenters claiming it violates GDPR. I tend to agree with them after reading up a bit on it and asking a couple of AIs. Apple can avoid some of the cross-border entanglements, but GDPR does not care where the processing happens, just what the scope of it is, what its purpose is, whose information is being used.

It'll be interesting to see if anybody goes after Apple for this.