Apple Vision Pro is a mixed-reality headset – which the company hopes is a “revolutionary spatial computer that transforms how people work, collaborate, connect, relive memories, and enjoy entertainment” – that begins shipping to the public (in the United States).
The data Apple collects is not “consumer” data like the brand of toothpaste you buy. It is more akin to medical data.
For instance, analysing a person’s unconscious movements can reveal their emotional state or even predict neurodegenerative disease. This is called “biometrically inferred data” as users are unaware their bodies are giving it up.
Apple suggests it won’t share this type of data with anyone.
Has it been proven to work offline and that once online it doesn’t upload your offline activity?
A this WaPo article states, they doesn’t even have to upload your activity online to be very invasive. Imagine mapping your room and your house and loading it online to share with your visitors - this will happen. It technically comes within what Apple considers as private - but is still very dangerous. The yard stick to judge Apple by is the case of airtags. They didn’t care about the stalking problem of airtags until there was a huge uproar. And even then, the solution they released was very half-hearted.
What are you talking about?
Despite the fact that GPS trackers without restrictions literally already existed, are unconditionally legal and legitimate to have, and were readily available to bad actors, they heavily limited the functionality out of the gate to limit the benefit to malicious use cases.
Airtags aren’t just GPS trackers. They use the apple devices to ensure coverage. And no, Apple wasn’t too enthusiastic about limiting its functionality until it became a PR disaster. Even the solution now is not satisfactory.
They should be extremely useful anti-theft trackers, which unconditionally have every right to exist, and are not remotely dicey legally or ethically in any context. But they completely and utterly butchered their usefulness by making them notify everyone around them for the literal sole purpose of satisfying insane anti-technology nutjobs like you.
Yeah. Go ahead and start abusing when you have nothing meaningful to argue with. And like all such unimaginative abusers, you always get it wrong.
You’re attacking them for “not caring about” imaginary side effects they completely destroyed their product to limit, despite the fact that devices capable of actually doing what you claim unconditionally already exist and have a right to exist with literally no restrictions and do not violate any law in any way.
Unhinged lunatic is the only possible explanation. There is no theoretical possibility that you are a reasonable, informed person acting in good faith.
You can’t bill it as imaginary just because you don’t like it. Cases of stalking and spying using airtags are all over the news. And asking for people’s privacy to be respected isn’t anti-tech. You’re just so full of strawman arguments and nothing more.
And it’s rich for you to accuse me of bad faith when all you do to support your arguments are personal attacks.