Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Who's supposed to be doing "evil" again?
13 views
Skip to first unread message
Alan Baker
Jun 17, 2013, 9:20:45 PM6/17/13
to
'Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of
indiscriminately sharing customer data with government agencies, Apple
issued a clear response: We first heard of the government’s “Prism”
program when news organizations asked us about it on June 6. We do not
provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any
government agency requesting customer content must get a court order.'
<https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/>
Not quite what the trolls told us was going on, huh?
Oh, and:
"Similarly, we do not store data related to customers’ location, Map
searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form."
I wonder if Google could say the same?
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
indiscriminately sharing customer data with government agencies, Apple
issued a clear response: We first heard of the government’s “Prism”
program when news organizations asked us about it on June 6. We do not
provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any
government agency requesting customer content must get a court order.'
<https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/>
Not quite what the trolls told us was going on, huh?
Oh, and:
"Similarly, we do not store data related to customers’ location, Map
searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form."
I wonder if Google could say the same?
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Justin
Jun 18, 2013, 8:15:22 AM6/18/13
to
On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 18:20:45 -0700, Alan Baker wrote:
> 'Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of
> indiscriminately sharing customer data with government agencies, Apple
> issued a clear response: We first heard of the government’s “Prism”
> program when news organizations asked us about it on June 6. We do not
> provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any
> government agency requesting customer content must get a court order.'
>
> <https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/>
>
> Not quite what the trolls told us was going on, huh?
>
> Oh, and:
>
> "Similarly, we do not store data related to customers’ location, Map
> searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form."
>
> I wonder if Google could say the same?
The government wants access to servers to protect the children from child
> 'Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of
> indiscriminately sharing customer data with government agencies, Apple
> issued a clear response: We first heard of the government’s “Prism”
> program when news organizations asked us about it on June 6. We do not
> provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any
> government agency requesting customer content must get a court order.'
>
> <https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/>
>
> Not quite what the trolls told us was going on, huh?
>
> Oh, and:
>
> "Similarly, we do not store data related to customers’ location, Map
> searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form."
>
> I wonder if Google could say the same?
pornography.
The real question is how much taxes are they paying? Not paying as much
as you can afford is unethical.
Flint
Jun 20, 2013, 1:23:35 AM6/20/13
to
On 6/17/2013 9:20 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> 'Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of
> indiscriminately sharing� customer data with government agencies, Apple
> 'Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of
> issued a clear response: We� first heard of the government’s “Prismâ€
> program when news organizations asked us about it on June� 6. We do not
> provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any
> government agency requesting customer content must get a court� order.'
>
> <https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/>
>
> Not quite what the trolls told us was going on, huh?
>
> Oh, and:
>
> "Similarly, we do not store data related to customers’ location, Map
> <https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/>
>
> Not quite what the trolls told us was going on, huh?
>
> Oh, and:
>
> searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form."
>
> I wonder if Google could say the same?
>
What's more telling is what Apple *didn't* specifically say.
>
> I wonder if Google could say the same?
>
1> They may not >store< data as related to customer location, Map
searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form, but they DIDN'T
say they don't FORWARD such data, nor does the statement address the
metadata the NSA IS collecting - specifically sending phone#s and who
they're calling, and call duration.
2> Apple is trying to make it sound like they know nothing whatsoever,
and we all know that's flat out bullshit.
This is Apple-spon,e and simple.
--
MFB
Alan Baker
Jun 20, 2013, 4:02:38 AM6/20/13
to
In article <kpu3b9$qo6$1...@dont-email.me>,
> > issued a clear response: We� first heard of the government⤁s ⤦Prism�?
> > program when news organizations asked us about it on June� 6. We do not
>
> 2> Apple is trying to make it sound like they know nothing whatsoever,
> and we all know that's flat out bullshit.
Riiiiiiiiight.
>
> This is Apple-spon,e and simple.
LOL
Flint <agen...@section-31.net> wrote:
> On 6/17/2013 9:20 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> > 'Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of
> > indiscriminately sharing� customer data with government agencies, Apple
> On 6/17/2013 9:20 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
> > 'Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of
> > issued a clear response: We� first heard of the government⤁s ⤦Prism�?
> > program when news organizations asked us about it on June� 6. We do not
> > provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any
> > government agency requesting customer content must get a court� order.'
> >
> > <https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/>
> >
> > Not quite what the trolls told us was going on, huh?
> >
> > Oh, and:
> >
> > "Similarly, we do not store data related to customers⤁ location, Map
> > <https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/>
> >
> > Not quite what the trolls told us was going on, huh?
> >
> > Oh, and:
> >
> > searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form."
> >
> > I wonder if Google could say the same?
> >
>
> What's more telling is what Apple *didn't* specifically say.
>
> 1> They may not >store< data as related to customer location, Map
> searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form, but they DIDN'T
> say they don't FORWARD such data, nor does the statement address the
> metadata the NSA IS collecting - specifically sending phone#s and who
> they're calling, and call duration.
LOL!
> >
> > I wonder if Google could say the same?
> >
>
> What's more telling is what Apple *didn't* specifically say.
>
> 1> They may not >store< data as related to customer location, Map
> searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form, but they DIDN'T
> say they don't FORWARD such data, nor does the statement address the
> metadata the NSA IS collecting - specifically sending phone#s and who
> they're calling, and call duration.
>
> 2> Apple is trying to make it sound like they know nothing whatsoever,
> and we all know that's flat out bullshit.
>
> This is Apple-spon,e and simple.
Flint
Jun 21, 2013, 9:32:43 AM6/21/13
to
On 6/20/2013 4:02 AM, Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <kpu3b9$qo6$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Flint <agen...@section-31.net> wrote:
>
>> On 6/17/2013 9:20 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>> 'Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of
> In article <kpu3b9$qo6$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Flint <agen...@section-31.net> wrote:
>
>> On 6/17/2013 9:20 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>>> 'Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of
>>> indiscriminately sharing� customer data with government agencies, Apple
>>> issued a clear response: We� first heard of the government⤠s ⤦Prism�?
>>> program when news organizations asked us about it on June� 6. We do not
>>> provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any
>>> government agency requesting customer content must get a court� order.'
>>>
>>> <https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/>
>>>
>>> Not quite what the trolls told us was going on, huh?
>>>
>>> Oh, and:
>>>
>>> "Similarly, we do not store data related to customers⤠location, Map
>>> <https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/>
>>>
>>> Not quite what the trolls told us was going on, huh?
>>>
>>> Oh, and:
>>>
>>> searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form."
>>>
>>> I wonder if Google could say the same?
>>>
>>
>> What's more telling is what Apple *didn't* specifically say.
>>
>> 1> They may not >store< data as related to customer location, Map
>> searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form, but what they DIDN'T
>>>
>>> I wonder if Google could say the same?
>>>
>>
>> What's more telling is what Apple *didn't* specifically say.
>>
>> 1> They may not >store< data as related to customer location, Map
>> say was they don't FORWARD such data, nor does the statement address the
>> metadata the NSA IS collecting - specifically sending phone#s and who
>> they're calling, and call duration.
>
> LOL!
What's so funny? You haven't heard of the META-DATA ISSUE? What, they
>> they're calling, and call duration.
>
> LOL!
don't have news up your way? Either that, or the concept of meta-data
simply eludes an iPad repairman, I guess. ::shrug::
>
>>
>> 2> Apple is trying to make it sound like they know nothing whatsoever,
>> and we all know that's flat out bullshit.
>
> Riiiiiiiiight.
Oh no, Apple would NEVER do such a thing, right? Riiiiiight...
>>
>> 2> Apple is trying to make it sound like they know nothing whatsoever,
>> and we all know that's flat out bullshit.
>
> Riiiiiiiiight.
>> This is Apple-spin and simple.
>
> LOL
>
Keep LOL-ing, Laughing boy. This is exactly what Apple is doing...
*spinmeistering* Although fangurlz don't want to admit it, Apple is
kind of in a similar boat as Google on this one. Google is scared
shitless about their rep being tainted by this whole affair, but they
don't want to admit Apple's walled garden/ecosystem/iCloud stands to
take a similar hit also.
--
MFB
Justin
Jul 1, 2013, 10:12:44 PM7/1/13
to
On 6/20/13 1:23 AM, Flint wrote:
> On 6/17/2013 9:20 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>> 'Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of
>> indiscriminately sharing customer data with government agencies, Apple
> On 6/17/2013 9:20 PM, Alan Baker wrote:
>> 'Two weeks ago, when technology companies were accused of
>> issued a clear response: We first heard of the government’s
>> “Prismâ€
>> program when news organizations asked us about it on June 6. We do not
>> provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any
>> government agency requesting customer content must get a court order.'
>>
>> <https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/>
>>
>> Not quite what the trolls told us was going on, huh?
>>
>> Oh, and:
>>
>> "Similarly, we do not store data related to customers’ location, Map
>> searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form."
>>
>> I wonder if Google could say the same?
>>
>
> What's more telling is what Apple *didn't* specifically say.
>
> 1> They may not >store< data as related to customer location, Map
> searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form, but they DIDN'T say
> they don't FORWARD such data, nor does the statement address the
> metadata the NSA IS collecting - specifically sending phone#s and who
> they're calling, and call duration.
So you think they forward data in an non-identifiable form.
>> <https://www.apple.com/apples-commitment-to-customer-privacy/>
>>
>> Not quite what the trolls told us was going on, huh?
>>
>> Oh, and:
>>
>> "Similarly, we do not store data related to customers’ location, Map
>> searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form."
>>
>> I wonder if Google could say the same?
>>
>
> What's more telling is what Apple *didn't* specifically say.
>
> 1> They may not >store< data as related to customer location, Map
> searches or Siri requests in any identifiable form, but they DIDN'T say
> they don't FORWARD such data, nor does the statement address the
> metadata the NSA IS collecting - specifically sending phone#s and who
> they're calling, and call duration.
Alot of good that does.
Wouldn't that be like having a bunch of receipts for bomb making
material without a name or date associated with it?
>
> 2> Apple is trying to make it sound like they know nothing whatsoever,
> and we all know that's flat out bullshit.
>
> This is Apple-spon,e and simple.
forward it to authorities. Google simply opens everything up to any
government agency, so they can go in and out of there as they please.
Apple has never been one to cater to government demands.
Flint
Jul 2, 2013, 12:51:19 AM7/2/13
to
Metadata is very verifiable as it includes originating phone#s,
carrier info, date/time/geo location info. It may not provide
content, or digital voiceprints, but that info can be stored and later
retrieved as well with a court order by means of the metadata
identification. No individually specific court order is required for
obtaining metadata as FICA court has already issued an
all-encompassing warrant *years* ago empowering NSA, FBI and DHS to
freely and regularly obtain metadata.
Apple, not being a carrier per se can likely claim they don't
>store< metadata, but they don't uneqivocally state that iPhones
don't forward identifying data via the carriers they operate on >to<
government operated data storage servers. Subtle and very
disingenuous on Apple's part...
> Wouldn't that be like having a bunch of receipts for bomb making
> material without a name or date associated with it?
transactions break a chain of custody for both the illegally purposed
materials you describe as well as the cash to purchase them.
>
>>
>> 2> Apple is trying to make it sound like they know nothing whatsoever,
>> and we all know that's flat out bullshit.
>>
>> This is Apple-spon,e and simple.
>
> Sure, they know all sorts of stuff. With a court order they will
> forward it to authorities. Google simply opens everything up to any
> government agency, so they can go in and out of there as they please.
>
> Apple has never been one to cater to government demands.
reveal the scope of FISA court orders. Apple is no exception and
isn't any more/less immune to being lawfully coerced into cooperation.
Any claims on their part are just corporate spin which also happens
to serve the NSA's interests as well.
--
MFB
0 new messages