It’s as much a “harm they put in place themselves” as website cookies are - these are technical artifacts that were maliciously used. It is just not arguing in good faith to claim they made it for tracking purposes - it’s like basic software development practice to create some unique IDs, and it has plenty useful roles.
Yeah, google will return something for “covid is a hoax” as well, that doesn’t constitute a proof.
Also, from your very own article: “Broadly speaking, it collects a lot less information than Google or Facebook and has backed up its claims that it is privacy-focused”
Bullshit - what “research”? Apple is in no way comparable to goddamn Google and Facebook here. Their ad sector is pretty much “display my app in the AppStore search if they search for similar things” and things like that, that only uses the actual search term, and very basic stuff about the user. They can make relatively much money on that, because they artificially own the whole “Apple market”, so they don’t have any competition there. They don’t fingerprint you across the whole internet, that’s for sure.
Apple actually already sort of have it — you can go to settings and check whether any repairs/tampering happened on your device. That is I believe a correct approach - you can always check after a repair/second hand buy whether their claims are true, yet it is maximally usable.
Meh, I have been using linux desktop exclusively for a decade now, and I have to disagree. It.. sorta works, but it has definitely many many shortcomings and edge cases where it just shits itself completely — that is, the userspace. The kernel itself is rock solid.
Maybe some IQ one as well - it doesn’t have to be too high, something like 60 would already filter out this idiot..
I mean, criminals caught and put into jail by definition have less rights than someone free to walk anywhere.. though your actual point is taken.
@kaba0
@programming.dev