So it turns out your phone is eavesdropping on you

Iain said:

I saw an article today that confirmed what I have suspected for years now - mobile phones have been monitoring us and using the info to sell to advertisers:

Per the article, neither the action nor the settlement - in which Apple denies wrongdoing and the claims - confirms or proves anything. 

Bunny said:

Per the article, neither the action nor the settlement - in which Apple denies wrongdoing and the claims - confirms or proves anything. 

This is just standard legal practice in lawsuits - but if you think a company with the immense legal defence resources of Apple would base a $95 million settlement on unsubstantiated claims then you would be naive in the extreme.

This is about as bad as it gets in lawsuit terms - the companies always settle so they can use NDAs to lock down any details and stop people talking about it.

Iain said:

This is just standard legal practice in lawsuits - but if you think a company with the immense legal defence resources of Apple would base a $95 million settlement on unsubstantiated claims then you would be naive in the extreme.

Don’t patronise me. My point stands.

The UK security services have a "no apple" policy for some reason.

Some also physically destroy the webcams on their none-apple laptops.

Don't ask me how I know this, because I'd have to...

... Lie. (Or refuse to answer of course, which I'd probably choose)

OK.  All understood.  I respect your right to write what you write.  I also respect Iain to write what he writes.  I personally choose to trust the other members of this (dwindling) community to draw whatever conclusion they chose to settle upon with regard to this matter.....and moreover....won't think any less of them whether they a) choose to care at all b) or fall on one side of this matter - or the other! 

Perhaps this is the difference between us Bunny?  I never need a right -v- wrong answer.  I think all answers and opinions are valid and worthy of air?  I am happy to leave matters hanging in the air, without fighting for a conclusion.

Iain said:

You can see why this led to me labelling you as naive - sorry if this hurts but is seems entirely justified by Apples own admission.

No. Being disrespectful and insulting me by accusing me of being naive - and then doubling down on it here - is not justified, either by the historic facts (which relate to a very particular set of circumstances) that you’re referring to in a continuing effort to browbeat me, or morally.

There are many different facets to this case, which both parties have agreed to settle.

I won’t be engaging with any more of your bullying.

The EU had made a ruling that Apple has to pay 13 Billion to the Irish government in unpaid taxes and the Irish government (revenue commissioners) has to accept this money in a totally bizarre case running for several years now 

Bunny said:

But I’m not going to quietly accept fake facts

With the links to law.com articles pointing out that Apple admitted to eavesdropping ( from https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2019/09/06/eavesdropping-and-spying-by-smart-tvs-and-devices/

"On August 28, Forbes reported that Apple apologized for the eavesdropping")

Are you still defending this as fake facts? You can see why this led to me labelling you as naive - sorry if this hurts but is seems entirely justified by Apples own admission.

Unknown said:

Perhaps, more importantly, I am pretty sure that Iain's defence of his own OPINION cannot amount to him being patronising towards you?!

Thank you for making my point for me.

My whole point is that Iain is (again) presenting his OPINION as if it is a FACT.

Iain is evidently strongly attached to the conclusion that he’s come to. I have no issue with him holding or defending his beliefs / opinions (obviously, I’d have hoped).

But I do feel it’s perfectly reasonable for me to point out when he makes factually false statements, when he is rude to me, and/or when he tries to bully / browbeat me in response. 

The article - objectively, factually - does not confirm what he said it does:

Iain said:

I saw an article today that confirmed what I have suspected for years now - mobile phones have been monitoring us and using the info to sell to advertisers:

Neither the claim, the settlement, nor the article constitutes confirmation of his hypothesis / OPINION as a fact.

I’ve actually been following this case for a while, btw. So it happens that I know quite a lot about it. But that’s neither here nor there. Because I haven’t posted at any point within this thread to state or discuss my own opinion.

Apple has always been vehemently protective of its users personal data and privacy. But I’m not saying they would have won or lost the case, or that they have or haven’t done anything wrong.

It is a fact that there are perfectly legitimate reasons why any party might choose to settle a matter for reasons other than any potential guilt on their part.

Iain tends to express his OPINIONS very strongly. I’ve noticed that, when challenged, rather than accept that he might be overly attached to his opinions, have presented them inaccurately, and/or and that there are are other potential opinions, he instead often seems to follow tactics that are typical in bullying: DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender). This includes questioning the credentials of the person who is holding them to account, before ultimately claiming to be the victim themselves.

He has denied my observation (citing his supposed superior knowledge), attacked me (by strongly - and very condescendingly / patronisingly - by implying that I am “naive in the extreme”), and started the reversal efforts by claiming that “Patronising is … starting to sound a lot like you at the moment.”.

This isn’t the first time that Iain has turned to these tactics when, instead, he could simply have accepted the factual observation, and acknowledged that his conclusion was just his opinion and that other conclusions are possible.

Black and white thinking is to be expected with autism. But I’m not going to quietly accept fake facts, or accept being bullied for pointing them out.

Unknown said:

Perhaps, more importantly, I am pretty sure that Iain's defence of his own OPINION cannot amount to him being patronising towards you?!

Thank you for making my point for me.

My whole point is that Iain is (again) presenting his OPINION as if it is a FACT.

Iain is evidently strongly attached to the conclusion that he’s come to. I have no issue with him holding or defending his beliefs / opinions (obviously, I’d have hoped).

But I do feel it’s perfectly reasonable for me to point out when he makes factually false statements, when he is rude to me, and/or when he tries to bully / browbeat me in response. 

The article - objectively, factually - does not confirm what he said it does:

Iain said:

I saw an article today that confirmed what I have suspected for years now - mobile phones have been monitoring us and using the info to sell to advertisers:

Neither the claim, the settlement, nor the article constitutes confirmation of his hypothesis / OPINION as a fact.

I’ve actually been following this case for a while, btw. So it happens that I know quite a lot about it. But that’s neither here nor there. Because I haven’t posted at any point within this thread to state or discuss my own opinion.

Apple has always been vehemently protective of its users personal data and privacy. But I’m not saying they would have won or lost the case, or that they have or haven’t done anything wrong.

It is a fact that there are perfectly legitimate reasons why any party might choose to settle a matter for reasons other than any potential guilt on their part.

Iain tends to express his OPINIONS very strongly. I’ve noticed that, when challenged, rather than accept that he might be overly attached to his opinions, have presented them inaccurately, and/or and that there are are other potential opinions, he instead often seems to follow tactics that are typical in bullying: DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender). This includes questioning the credentials of the person who is holding them to account, before ultimately claiming to be the victim themselves.

He has denied my observation (citing his supposed superior knowledge), attacked me (by strongly - and very condescendingly / patronisingly - by implying that I am “naive in the extreme”), and started the reversal efforts by claiming that “Patronising is … starting to sound a lot like you at the moment.”.

This isn’t the first time that Iain has turned to these tactics when, instead, he could simply have accepted the factual observation, and acknowledged that his conclusion was just his opinion and that other conclusions are possible.

Black and white thinking is to be expected with autism. But I’m not going to quietly accept fake facts, or accept being bullied for pointing them out.

The UK security services have a "no apple" policy for some reason.

Some also physically destroy the webcams on their none-apple laptops.

Don't ask me how I know this, because I'd have to...

... Lie. (Or refuse to answer of course, which I'd probably choose)

OK.  All understood.  I respect your right to write what you write.  I also respect Iain to write what he writes.  I personally choose to trust the other members of this (dwindling) community to draw whatever conclusion they chose to settle upon with regard to this matter.....and moreover....won't think any less of them whether they a) choose to care at all b) or fall on one side of this matter - or the other! 

Perhaps this is the difference between us Bunny?  I never need a right -v- wrong answer.  I think all answers and opinions are valid and worthy of air?  I am happy to leave matters hanging in the air, without fighting for a conclusion.

Iain said:

You can see why this led to me labelling you as naive - sorry if this hurts but is seems entirely justified by Apples own admission.

No. Being disrespectful and insulting me by accusing me of being naive - and then doubling down on it here - is not justified, either by the historic facts (which relate to a very particular set of circumstances) that you’re referring to in a continuing effort to browbeat me, or morally.

There are many different facets to this case, which both parties have agreed to settle.

I won’t be engaging with any more of your bullying.

The EU had made a ruling that Apple has to pay 13 Billion to the Irish government in unpaid taxes and the Irish government (revenue commissioners) has to accept this money in a totally bizarre case running for several years now 

Bunny said:

But I’m not going to quietly accept fake facts

With the links to law.com articles pointing out that Apple admitted to eavesdropping ( from https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2019/09/06/eavesdropping-and-spying-by-smart-tvs-and-devices/

"On August 28, Forbes reported that Apple apologized for the eavesdropping")

Are you still defending this as fake facts? You can see why this led to me labelling you as naive - sorry if this hurts but is seems entirely justified by Apples own admission.