Mr Al-Hames, in Silicon Valley, there seems to be only one issue: privacy.
The companies have recognized that they can no longer Dodge the issue of privacy. But most of them were rather pushed in this direction, as they had moved there willingly. To put it very clear: Facebook and Google do only what is absolutely necessary.
It is merely lip-service?
Evil tongues would say that the brushes lipstick on a pig. The promise to sound good, but are not to be taken seriously: Both Google and Facebook to collect as many data users as possible and sell them. The don’t make a mess of your own business.
Who has pushed the companies because the users of the policy?
There is a group of users, the power for years on the topic of data privacy closely. But the policy in Europe has recognized the issue and a good regulatory set up. Now we have seen how privacy is gradually becoming a mass movement. I would not go so far that the majority of the users of the business model of Facebook and Google as a matter of principle.
This is after scandals, such as the Cambridge Analytical is actually surprising.
I ask myself constantly, why people get involved all of this yet. However, it is also a very abstract Problem. Many believe that they have nothing to hide – until you have seen your own record. At least then, you know, we talk about a perfect recording of our life. Facebook, for example, privacy has never understood and does not understand even now.
what about Google?
Google has always had a core that privacy is important. Over the years, but the Business side has gained the upper hand. Therefore, I think that here, too, the promise is not credible. It is a billion would lose business. Google has an unusual Definition of privacy. The group wants to make sure nobody gets your data, except of course Google itself. Because that’s where the data is to be repealed, of course, very good. The company itself does not see himself as a violator of privacy. This is absurd.
Google collects data not only with the help of services like Gmail, Youtube or the Play Store, but also in the network.
Google provides 80 percent of everything you make in the network. Even if you consciously decide against services in the group, so no Chrome Browser, never do a Google search, a Youtube Video and not a Gmail address. The group is the largest ad-Tracker on the Internet!
What is recognized, when I click my way through various web pages?
Google looks at which websites I visit and know, therefore, whether I’m on the topic of house buying, diseases, or about political parties. Individually, these data tell us snippets of not very much. But the changes, if intelligent Algorithms sort the data and systematically evaluate it. You get comprehensive Profiles about users, which are formed across multiple devices.
you can read here: “What happens on your iPhone stays on your iPhone,” says Apple. Only: How is this possible? The star visited the annular Central and was able to throw the first German media a glimpse of two strictly shielded laboratories.
you are talking about the Fingerprinting.
on the Basis of positive characteristics, such as screen resolutions, or versions of browsers is the advertising industry will be able to follow us from your Smartphone via the Tablet to the Notebook. Which nothing escapes.
Apple has announced this practice in the past year, the fight. The Safari Browser has a relatively small share of the market.
Apple’s market share is not as small as people think. The Browser is pre-installed on every iPhone and iPad. Among the big players, Apple is definitely the one who takes privacy, in the most first.
Craig Federighi, Apple’s Software chief: “We have no interest in discovering everything about them” By Christoph Fröhlich
The group has model also a completely different business.
Apple earned with the sale of products and not with the use of data and advertising. Perfect which is not, however. The biggest compromise is to search on every Apple device preset Google. Each key stroke in the Safari Browser is transmitted to Google. Tim Cook does not know that this is actually in order. But people want the best search engine, and the is from Google. The truth is, however, also: Google pays Apple a lot of money that they are pre-installed on every iPhone. The last estimate was nine billion dollars per year.
Apple Collects no data?
But, of course. Without data it is not today. Apple chooses a different approach: data will only be collected for a specific purpose and they are not passed on and there will be no Profiles.
What do you mean by purpose-bound data?
we Take the two map services of the Smartphone operating systems. Apple anonymizes the location data of the user and prepares them technically so that they can be used for nothing else than for the improvement of the map service. Google uses the location data not only to optimize the map, but also, in order to form comprehensive Profiles about users and to switch to more appropriate advertising.
Many claim that Google’s services are superior because of the larger amount of data to those of Apple.
This is total nonsense. Technically, Google could build a good product and respecting the privacy of the eighth. Privacy and convenience are not mutually exclusive. It would just take longer and might be slightly more expensive and more time-consuming. But then Google is not as accurate Profiles could sell to advertisers, and would threaten its most important business.
Google has now announced in its Chrome Browser, also the Fingerprinting practice to curb. In addition, users of data should get some kind of expiration date. How do they fit together?
This may seem at first glance far-fetched, but this change in strategy will strengthen Google’s advertising business. To do this, we come back again to Google’s Definition of privacy: We may collect, but others do not. Google’s experiences with the Chrome Browser a lot about its users, but all other ad-provider will be blocked. By the group defined, which data should be collected and what not, he can keep unwelcome competitors very easily from the neck. To Thema expiry date: I don’t see any evidence that Google deletes the data for the business is essential.
Google has with Android the most popular Smartphone operating system in the world, plays in the Smartphone sector but only a tiny role. Samsung and Huawei are the biggest devices-the Smartphone manufacturer, but Android instructed. In the case of Apple hardware and Software comes from one source. This is from your point of view is an advantage?
I think the Software is more important, because with it, you can now control almost everything. But, through the optimization of hardware and Software, Apple can implement things in Software are difficult to implement. It is a small competitive advantage. The case, Huawei also shows that The Android Smartphone manufacturers do not need to throw only rules that Google self-dictated, but also state regulators, the Android as an Instrument of market power very closely.
does not Mean that the reverse conclusion, that there is no way around an iPhone, if you privacy worth?
no. You may as well buy an Android phone. You will need to invest an hour to the Google disable services and a few Tools to install, make the phone more secure. The iPhone, a lot of privacy are pre-set function, however, already.
as soon As I open an App, the thing is already different. Everyone is familiar with the pop-up window, in which the access to the contacts, the will be asked the location of the data or the microphone. How much control Google and Apple have, anyway?
You should only install those Apps that you trust. Look at the business model: you Pay for the App or is it free? If you are free, you should ask yourself how the providers make money. Mostly, they pay in the Form of their data. Since the platform operator must warn in this case, Apple and Google, in my opinion, more transparent.
Many politicians are asking that the App Stores of the company to be encapsulated. You think it’s a good idea?
It is all about monopolies, by about other App Stores are allowed. Currently, has per operating system is only a platform. I think there should be more competition.
Why do we need alternative software shops? In the pre-installed, but there are already millions of Apps. And in the case of an external provider, the risk that you will download potentially malicious Software.
That’s right. But then I, as a user, however, is a choice. There was a case in which one could discuss whether there was an actual risk for the users or more of a danger to the business of the Stores. In my opinion the user should always have the freedom to install Apps on their own responsibility. There is the danger of censorship is otherwise.
the report of the week star> exclusive To visit in Apple’s Secret lab Of Christoph Fröhlich
Just because the users have no Alternative, nothing is questioned. There are Alternatives, would be the reasons to look different: Banished Apple’s App of privacy from the App Store, you could download it off somewhere else. But everyone would ask three times, why it was ever banned.
you are very optimistic. According to surveys, the majority of users don’t read terms and conditions and agrees to all requests.
On the iPhone there is an App Store and on Android devices, the is for 99 percent of the people the reality. The knowledge does not come out as there, the decisions state. And that is why the press also in all messages, just the OK Button, because you know that you have no Alternative.
There is a powerlessness for the users?
most people think, your data are already everywhere. At the end, but it is also the responsibility of the user to change the practice of corporations. Here, the policy is required. It is socially unacceptable for commercial companies to spy on our complete range of live and recording – because the politicians have to intervene.
If the mass violation of privacy would be legally hampered, would be Software such as Cliqz then superfluous?
We earn our money, we admit the people of their privacy back. But I think, even in a highly regulated world, there are good business models for clean working company. The fact that the seat belt in the car was mandatory, of course, is not the security industry in the car to be extinct. Quite to the contrary.
so you have no fear for your Job?
I think, in twenty years the world will look completely different. Then people will look back on today and laugh at how naive we all were. However, I think it must be worse before it gets better. For the next three to five years, I see no change. The comfort that people have, outweigh feel Far from the pain.
More on the subject of privacy there is in the current star
star no 24/2019 star print • more to the star 24/19
• star -individual issues experienced order
• star in the Abo cheap star test download Digital App and digital editions secure:
Interview: Christoph Fröhlich