Hacker News Reader

Comment by quonn | Hacker News Reader

> what stops them from changing policy tomorrow?

> [...]

> not a benevolent player in the market.

The reason they have this policy today is not because they want to be a benevolent player in the market, but because it has a negligible impact on their business model and it can't be adopted by the competition (Google). I would also argue that that's what prevents them from changing it in the future. It makes perfect sense from a business perspective.

View on HN

I don't think we should say that it's either or. I think it's far more likely given their past history, that privacy is both something they care about and something that makes good business sense to them. Recall the pretty stern answer Tim Cook gave when questioned about their environmental programs: http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/tim-cook-soundly-reje...

That's exactly right. He's a businessman above all. His business is essentially the sale of semi-luxury goods (i.e. high margin). Their profit is astounding. He can cut way back on privacy violation without any effect while Google might go bankrupt doing that.

If he's so righteous, let's see him cut back on the prices or lock-in tactics of his devices. I'm betting his whole salary that he's not doing that.

Remember the last time you heard Google say don't be evil. I don't. My point was not that apple can do no wrong, but simply that times change, business models change. Today Apple is our benevolent leader tomorrow they are our cloud tyrant. No different than the slow erosions that we've seen from Google.

So why rely on market forces for privacy, because for this fight once lost will be hard to win back.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com