And how is telling you in great detail about what they’re planning to do months before they do it and giving you a way to opt out in advance a breach of trust? What more did you expect from them?
why even ask the question " What more did you expect from them?" if you didn't care about the answer?
I gave a pretty obvious and clear answer to that, and apparently you didn't care about the question in the first place, and have now misdirected to something else.
I am also not sure what possible definition of "privacy" that you could be using, that would not include things such as on device photo scanning, for the purpose of reporting people to the police.
Like, lets say it wasn't Apple doing this. Lets say it was the government. As in, the government required every computer that you own, to be monitored for certain photos, at which point the info would be sent to them, and they would arrest you.
Without a warrant.
Surely, you'd agree that this violates people's privacy? The only difference in this case, is that the government now gets to side step 4th amendment protections, by having a company do it instead.
My question was directed at someone who claimed their privacy was violated, and I asked them to explain how they would’ve liked their service provider to handle a difference in opinion about what to build in the future. I don’t think your comment clarifies that.
> how they would’ve liked their service provider to handle a difference in opinion about what to build in the future
And the answer is that they shouldn't implement things that violate people's privacy, such as things that would be illegal for the government to do without a warrant.
That is the answer. If it is something that the government would need a warrant for, then they shouldn't do it, and doing it would violate people's privacy.
It’s almost certain the “leak” was from someone they had pre-briefed prior to a launch. You don’t put together 80+ pages of technical documentation with multiple expert testimony in 16 hours.
