Posts by Lord Elpuss

Insofar as it's a tracking device and therefore to a certain degree incompatible by nature with privacy, you're correct.

However; devices to track objects have existed for decades, and the very concept is open to abuse. In my view Apple have done their best to create a device which can be used for it's primary purpose (tracking 'stuff') whilst making it as difficult as possible to use it for secondary purposes such as tracking people.

The alternative would be to not enter this market at all, and leave it open to the tens of thousands of tracker manufacturers out there who couldn't give 2 hoots about privacy in any context, whose mission is simply to sell as many trackers as possible regardless of the use cases, and who offer not even a pretence of caring. These manufacturers still exist, and are hopefully feeling a little threatened by the success of AirTags.

Apple are getting a kicking for going 2000x further than ANY other 'stuff tracker' manufacturer to safeguard privacy; they would probably have received less abuse if they just made the damn thing and didn't bother putting any safeguards in at all. But then; people do love to hate on Apple.

It’s been explained well enough. If that’s not enough for you, well… some people can’t be taught. I’m certainly not prepared to invest any more time in it, so I suggest you either research on your own time, or learn to live with your discomfort.

I’ve explained it all above, including how the AirTag ‘knows’ it’s with a stranger as opposed to it’s owner.

The 150 reports simply mean somebody saw Apple and smelt $$$. Apple have sold millions of AirTags; orders of magnitude more than any other tracking devices from any other single manufacturer. It speaks to nothing more than some lawyers seeing a very juicy target for malicious litigation.

”Like Google Glass, privacy was barely an afterthought.“

No. AirTags were designed from the ground up with privacy as the default.

Like yeah, if I own an iPhone then it won't track me.

No. Whether you own an iPhone or not has no bearing on your ‘trackability’.

But I don't own an iPhone. "But you can download an app for Android...". So I have to be a smart phone user in order to have a claim to privacy when out in public?

No. In addition to the ‘smart’ features, AirTags emit an audible signal when they believe they are being used to track an individual, or property which does not belong to the AirTag owner. You also only need to download the app if you want to disable or otherwise manage the AirTag; you will receive the tracking notification regardless of whether you have installed an app or not.

A person going about their business in public without a phone cannot help that there are loads of people around them who are carrying iPhones which will, without their consent, relay the coordinates of the stealth device they do not realise they are carrying.

No. Once an AirTag has determined it is being used to track an individual, it will do it’s best to render itself unusable for that purpose. AirTags do not continually ‘broadcast’ their location; they don’t have the battery power for that (1x CR2032, designed to last a year). They report their location, on demand.

If you as a person have gone to extreme lengths to detach yourself from modern society including not owning a smartphone, AND nobody around you carries a smartphone either; AND you have disabled your own ears, then you might be trackable; by AirTags or any of the tens of thousands of tracking devices out there. Except all those other devices would be much better at it than AirTags.

The claimants in this lawsuit were never aware such a thing could happen to them, nor should this be expected. There is a reasonable expectation of privacy there.

There is a reasonable expectation, which is being safeguarded more by Apple than any of the tens of thousands of manufacturers of tracking devices out there; practically none of whom integrate the anti-stalking features I’ve described above.

If you're going to thumb me down, then please reply and explain how any of the points I'm making in any of my replies are incorrect. Or do you genuinely not care about people who fit the cases I describe?

You are being aggressive and easily triggered. People tend not to engage with attitudes like that.

If I'm correct, then the privacy points are not at all unlike Google Glass, where the privacy rights of unknown third parties, facing the prospect of video of themselves in public being surreptitiously captured and stored, seem never to have entered the thought process.

As explained patiently, several times, by multiple commenters above, privacy is central to the AirTag designers’ thought processes. They have taken the concept of protecting privacy as far - in fact further - than is compatible with a device who’s primary purpose is to track belongings. In fact, Apple have substantially compromised the core functionality of the device in order to safeguard privacy, and effectively cut themselves out of a MAJOR AirTag market - theft prevention - because of their privacy restrictions.

I trust this adequately explains why you’re being downvoted.

True: and I’ve ‘defanged’ all my AirTags in similar ways (which interestingly makes them legally controversial where I live).

They’re still easy to track down electronically though, which as an ‘anti-lost’ device is of course what they’re intended for.

Pretty much everything you wrote was wrong.

Wrong.

I mean - in many cases involving tech companies you'd be correct, but specifically as far as AirTags are concerned, wrong. Extreme efforts have been made to make it as private as possible, including (in my view) deeply compromising its ability to be used for its ACTUAL purpose; tracking my stuff.

It's essentially useless as an anti-theft device (what I wanted it for), and useless and risky to a stalker, because it will alert the victim AND provide owner information to the victim+law enforcement on who it belongs to and where it's been.

"It's unfortunate, but an AirTag obviously can't know if you attached it to your own car or to your pretty neighbour's car."

It absolutely can, and in fact that's key to how AirTags work. It uses the proximity of your iDevices (iPhone, iPad, iWatch, Mac) to determine whether it is still with you; if yes, it stays quiet and is trackable by you only.

If your AirTag becomes separated from your devices, it assumes you are not with it. It will then use an algorithm (including motion and proximity sensors) to determine whether it is moving, moving with multiple other people (e.g. in your bag on a bus), or whether it appears to be travelling in close proximity to a specific person who is NOT it's owner. It does this by listening out for electronic devices including other iPhones, Android phones, smartwatches, any device which communicates through Bluetooth BLE.

If it determines it is travelling with a specific person, it switches into anti-stalking mode and starts broadcasting a signal to the device(s) nearby that (1) it is an AirTag which can track location, (2) it has been travelling with that device for some time, and (3) these are the instructions to locate it and switch it off. It also starts to beep, to allow people without a smart device that can show detailed messages (e.g. a watch) to locate and disable it.

On a smartphone (iPhone or Android), it also shows a map of where it's been and how long it has been with that device/person, and provides a link with (abbreviated) information about the owner, which can either be used to return it if in error (e.g. you picked up somebody else's suitcase at the airport by mistake), or to provide to law enforcement if you believe it is being used to track you.

It's actually a very well executed system.

Re: Odd joke revived

I have to say; whilst I hate the idea of returning to the office, my productivity has gone through the floor since WFH. My mind just isn't attuned to it and I don't have the willpower to knuckle down and get on with things when there are distractions around.

Maybe the decision should be more based around human factors; psychological assessments of who is actually ABLE to WFH, versus those who can't (including me). Those who can't could be asked respectfully to come in. If I was asked, I'd probably comply; at least for 3 days/week or thereabouts.

Re: If everyone is back in the office..

Upvote for the IT Crowd reference ;)

Re: Hmmm

In BP it most definitely is. Along with (gag) Teams.

"Holidays are not just for celebrations, they are also for remembrances."

Eh, no. Holidays are for generally positive/happy things, marked by a period of leisure and recreation. Remembrance days, commemorations or days of mourning are for the more sombre occasions.

Re: Camera makes little difference, subject is king.

Skill and 'feeling' are essential in good photography, but the quality of your equipment is also important; and should reflect the branch of photography you're working in. For street photography you may be able to take some incredibly atmospheric photos with a minimum of equipment, right down to a FED or LOMO, or even a pinhole camera, but for most other branches the camera and lenses must be up to standard. A £400 street camera will simply not be able to perform acceptably in professional wedding, portrait, sports or studio work.

The UK is not a secular country. The official religion is Christianity.

There's an etymological reason for the X in Xmas. Something to do with Chi being the first letter of Christ in the original Greek or something. Point being: it's not just a random abbreviation.

Re: It goes far beyond that ...

Did you hear about the dyslexic agnostic insomniac?

Sat up all night wondering if there was a dog.

“The Register is a British technology news website co-founded in 1994 by Mike Magee, John Lettice and Ross Alderson. The online newspaper's masthead sublogo is "Biting the hand that feeds IT." Their primary focus is information technology news and opinions.”

You’re welcome.

No. You’re wrong. We ‘have’ any and all holidays celebrated by a multiracial, multi-ethnic population, and that’s fine. But that doesn’t mean the specific holiday of Christmas must be renamed or ignored, because the UK is a Christian country and therefore ‘officially’ celebrates Christian holidays.

Diwali gets called Diwali. Ramadan gets called Ramadan. Why should Christmas be different?

On a UK website, it's not a bizarre thing to say at all. The UK is a Christian country, and celebrates Christmas in December. If you or yours have a different celebration, knock yourself out. But that won't change the fact that in the UK it's the Christmas Holidays.

And if you're going to include Õmisoka, you also have to include ALL World celebrations, all year round. Which means we can't call ANY of them by name, because they're guaranteed to conflict with something else somewhere. Are YOU going to be the one to tell Muslims they have to say Holidays instead of Ramadan? Or ban Hindus from saying Diwali because it occurs in the same week as Nepalese Bhai Tika?

Halloween's in muddyfunstering OCTOBER. So no. It's not Halloween. In the US they have Hannukah which kinda-sorta-maybe gives an excuse for calling it the Holidays, but in UK and Europe it should be Christmas. No ifs or buts.

Re: Muppets

@Is It Me

You're right. The downvotes are from pissed off Garmin or Suunto users who just realised the AW Ultra is better than theirs; for the first time.

Re: Muppets

WR100 means 100m static depth, i.e. not moving. Meaningless in real life. Apple didn't just quote that though, unlike most manufacturers; they also said it's diveable to 40m. i.e. you can actually dive, swim and use it at 40m. That's impressive.

Re: Priorities

My local watch shop has always offered both options; a straight battery replacement for around a tenner, or battery+waterproofing for €30. Puts the $99 replacement charge for an AW battery into a different perspective.

Re: Priorities

The equation is dividing $99 by 24 months; as that's the cost of replacing the battery. That's just over $4/month assuming it's dead in 24 months, which it isn't. My AW series 2 battery has only recently started to not make it through a full day, nearly 6 years on ($1,37/month).

Before I had my Apple Watch, I had a Tissot T-Touch and an Oris F1. The T-Touch chewed through batteries (I seem to remember it had 2?) and my local watch shop charged me €30 to replace it/them and make the watch waterproof again. Compared to this, $99 to replace an AWUltra battery is not a bad deal.

Re: Errrr.... But....

@Steve Davies 3

"Can't you claim on your household insurance policy for the repair/replacement?

If you do have cover then you are not alone in forgetting that for accidental damage to expensive devices like phones."

No, no, and I didn't forget; I chose not to do it. Costs €16/month for accidental damage, and given I've managed to go 10 years without cracking a phone, that would have been €1,920 in insurance payments for a €699 one-off. No thanks.

Re: Repairability vs component theft

Personally I think coding parts is a GOOD idea. I know there are arguments for and against, but I despise thieves and muggers so as long as the coding is (very close to) unbreakable, I'm happy to pay an Apple premium to put them out of business.

The argument against coding tends to work in 2 parts:

1. It doesn't stop theft because thieves will still nick it and sell it down the pub for £20 even non-working, and;

2. Coding monopolises parts supply, driving parts prices up.

My argument is yes there will still be that undercurrent of pond scum who will nick and sell non-working phones anyway, but that represents a small portion of the organised theft market; and a non-working phone is still FAR less attractive to thieves. Therefore the whole 'nicked phone' market shrinks massively.

And 2 whilst it's definitely true that coded parts limits supply and keeps parts prices up, this is partially offset by the shrinking of the theft market and the maintaining of the quality level by using OEM parts which reduces overall support costs.