Microsoft’s Recall feature uses AI to capture and store user data. While it can be useful, it also poses a significant privacy risk. Here's what AdGuard is doing about it.
I am surprised by how rabid the Recall backlash continues to be compared to similar features elsewhere. Apple’s equivalent, in particular, seems to not be a concern to anybody. I don’t have anything Apple, so I’m not sure if they ever rolled this out, but they sure announced it to a whole bunch of crickets.
In fairness they’re not the same thing - recall records everything you do making a nice single honeypot of all your actions. Apple’s thing is really just a search bar that can reach into apps like email, calendar, etc - it’s not recording your bank logins. Google Play Services tracks everything you do on Android and sells it to advertisers.
Apple dropped a whole lot of vague shit that they “promised” would have some sort of holistic and on-device/private benefit to users if they pulled a full data profile of you together, kept it on-device, kept it secure, etc, etc.
Windows stealthed an update onto PCs that suddenly started capturing and processing unsecured screenshots of everything that users were doing without ever telling anyone why or what it’s for or how it would work. People found out that it was unsecured by looking in its unsecured folder. It wasn’t the same thing.
That said, obviously, Apple Intelligence is bullshit and doesn’t work or do anything of any use other than making Siri slightly prettier.
Windows “stealthed” recall onto people’s machines? What? It was a hugely advertised feature, exclusive to only the new copilot+ machines, and was an opt-in test feature lol
It is a stereotype but Apple diehards seem to go along with whatever Apple pushes, and people who don’t like them don’t use them anyways. Meanwhile Windows and Linux seems to have more people who are nitpicky about what they use, so group that tends to complain is going to be complaining more loudly about the OS they use would be my guess.
I do think you have a point about how Apple users tend to live with Apple choices while everybody else mostly ignores them. I think this manifests in less of a taking sides thing. Linux activists definitely root against Windows, sometimes more than they root for Linux, and they certainly don’t put the same amount of energy on Apple hostility.
I think this is wider than that, though. Linux and Apple users aren’t nearly as focused on their own quirks and foibles, but everybody loves to dunk on MS. Not that I don’t, necessarily, but sometimes the difference in attitude jumps at me.
It’s not just them, either. There’s a subset of companies, like Epic or Mozilla that get this a lot. It’s more so in gaming circles (EA! Ubisoft! Activision!) but not just there.
That is at least in part because Windows has actively undermined Linux for years, and the older ones of us also remember M$ killing OS/2 (&Novell on tge server side) and learnt our lesson not to trust them even when it looks like they’re playing nice
I feel like in these online conversations where everybody is mostly just viscerally reacting to a headline people forget that a lot, and that worries me about as much as the underlying subjects of conversation.
I’ll be honest, I’m about as exhausted with both sides of that argument. I use both Linux and Windows daily and I have zero patience for people parading out this type of train of thought. I care about what works and, for obvious reasons, I’d much prefer if the effective default was free and open source, but the “We root against Windows because it was mean to us” thing is a borderline non-sequitur as far as I’m concerned.
Now don’t try to tell me I made it up, there’s enough evidence for it to have its own wiki page.
Similarly there’s FUD an approach they most certainly didnt invent but did an excellent job of weaponising to a fine art.
And so on and so forth. Those of us who have been around a while know the true shape of it, and that leopard has never changed its spots.
I got my MCSE on NT4 back when CNE was much more respected. I still work in IT so yes I too use both windows & linux, that doesn’t stop me having a clear eyed view of them.
They’re also not the worst by a long chalk, google, meta, palantir are all far less principled and far more detrimental to society.
M$ still arent good though, and its woven into their culture
I’ve been around since MS-DOS 3, let me put that out there.
Also, a corporation isn’t a person where I’m from. You guys can sort your garbage legal system in your own time. (alright, so it’s a juridical person, which is a collective form of personhood where you can hold some rights, but you definitely do NOT have a physical person’s rights and you CERTAINLY don’t have an actual personality).
So besides repeating common tropes of online commentariat, which are by and large memes more than arguments, I’d point out that it’s not just that they aren’t the worst offenders, it’s that the conversation is about why they get that exact set of tropes waved in every conversation where other companies that do those same things do not.
The example I’m using is Apple, just because they’ve deployed the closest example to this, but they work because… well, you didn’t list them.
You seem to think that this is about being “for” or “against” companies. This is about why people would think it’s one or the other, and why they assign different attributes to corporations that largely operate in similar ways.
It also probably helps that it is easy to ignore Apple and there might not be a feeling of missing out for those who don’t care for the Apple ecosystem. As big as Apple is it is kind of niche in the sense that a Windows or Linux user can just ignore its existence and not feel affected.
But, when it comes to Windows there’s lot of mainstream software, games, and even hardware compatibility that is affected by Windows dominance. Stuff like wine and proton being needed and not getting the same video card driver support leads to more resentment Windows actually having offerings people who tend to complain want.
I think there’s something to the idea that Apple walls its garden so well people outside the wall don’t care about what happens inside it even when they disagree with it on principle.
I think you’re underplaying how big the garden is, though. You are thinking about this just in terms of PC OSs, but that’s not where Apple’s biggest presence is.
You may want to have a conversation with Nobody, I don’t think he got the memo.
Regardless, the point is Apple gets more of a pass. If I say “nobody actually expects privacy from Microsoft” that’s undeniably true, but hardly works as an excuse, does it?
Ah, so Apple just happens to be one of the good massive megacorps routinely deploying anti-consumer practices. Gotcha.
See, it’s that gap in perception I’m interested in. Microsoft wants nothing more than having the closed ecosystem Apple has. From their Surface line to their much maligned store to their subscription-forward, always signed-in account environment.
Why they suck so much at selling that where Apple can get away with murder is much more interesting to me than the perceived differences between the implementations, which I would argue in a number of cases are worked backwards from the brand perception anyway. Part of it is the implementation and the execution rakes Apple chooses not to step on, but certainly not all of it, and that’s fascinating.
Apple locked down their shit way after home computers were a necessity. I’d argue it was the rollout of handheld devices that needed a home computer to fully work that made their walled garden viable.
And Windows is the main player in home computer OSs. You can take issue with their choices, but it’s certainly functional. I’d argue Win11 is annoying, but not even in the top 3 least functional versions of Windows. I mean, I was there for Me, 8.0 and Vista.
But yes, Apple successfully deployed a locked-down, closed space, and I’m curious about why people are ok with it. That they did it early is… a solid hypothesis, I suppose.
Right. But the reaction they get to their shittiness is very different, which is the thing I keep wondering about. Everybody keeps telling me why Microsoft is shitty and how Apple isn’t shitty in those ways specifically while conceding they are in others.
I want to know why Apple’s shitty doesn’t make them the poster boy for shittiness but MS’s shitty does. And it does. As far back as Windows 95, Windows is the thing you use that you hate to use and love to hate. That takes work and luck. I want to know how you can dig that hole so effectively while your competition can be just as overtly crappy and still come across as sleek and all the way above good and evil. There’s a fundamental truth about branding and squishy human brains buried in that phenomenon.
See, we disagree. You and I agree they’re both shitty. The rest of this social network does not, and the larger world ABSOLUTELY does not.
I’d argue once you get into normie land entirely maybe MS starts losing some of the stink, too, but for a lot of that middle space the perception is absolutely not the same, which is why this thread exists in the first place.
I am surprised by how rabid the Recall backlash continues to be compared to similar features elsewhere. Apple’s equivalent, in particular, seems to not be a concern to anybody. I don’t have anything Apple, so I’m not sure if they ever rolled this out, but they sure announced it to a whole bunch of crickets.
In fairness they’re not the same thing - recall records everything you do making a nice single honeypot of all your actions. Apple’s thing is really just a search bar that can reach into apps like email, calendar, etc - it’s not recording your bank logins. Google Play Services tracks everything you do on Android and sells it to advertisers.
that’s because “Apple Intelligence” is nearly 100% vaporware
So was/is Copilot+ and Recall (seriously, how do I turn it on to test it?) and that didn’t stop people.
Apple dropped a whole lot of vague shit that they “promised” would have some sort of holistic and on-device/private benefit to users if they pulled a full data profile of you together, kept it on-device, kept it secure, etc, etc.
Windows stealthed an update onto PCs that suddenly started capturing and processing unsecured screenshots of everything that users were doing without ever telling anyone why or what it’s for or how it would work. People found out that it was unsecured by looking in its unsecured folder. It wasn’t the same thing.
That said, obviously, Apple Intelligence is bullshit and doesn’t work or do anything of any use other than making Siri slightly prettier.
Windows “stealthed” recall onto people’s machines? What? It was a hugely advertised feature, exclusive to only the new copilot+ machines, and was an opt-in test feature lol
It is a stereotype but Apple diehards seem to go along with whatever Apple pushes, and people who don’t like them don’t use them anyways. Meanwhile Windows and Linux seems to have more people who are nitpicky about what they use, so group that tends to complain is going to be complaining more loudly about the OS they use would be my guess.
I do think you have a point about how Apple users tend to live with Apple choices while everybody else mostly ignores them. I think this manifests in less of a taking sides thing. Linux activists definitely root against Windows, sometimes more than they root for Linux, and they certainly don’t put the same amount of energy on Apple hostility.
I think this is wider than that, though. Linux and Apple users aren’t nearly as focused on their own quirks and foibles, but everybody loves to dunk on MS. Not that I don’t, necessarily, but sometimes the difference in attitude jumps at me.
It’s not just them, either. There’s a subset of companies, like Epic or Mozilla that get this a lot. It’s more so in gaming circles (EA! Ubisoft! Activision!) but not just there.
That is at least in part because Windows has actively undermined Linux for years, and the older ones of us also remember M$ killing OS/2 (&Novell on tge server side) and learnt our lesson not to trust them even when it looks like they’re playing nice
Corporations aren’t people. Brands aren’t people.
I feel like in these online conversations where everybody is mostly just viscerally reacting to a headline people forget that a lot, and that worries me about as much as the underlying subjects of conversation.
I’ll be honest, I’m about as exhausted with both sides of that argument. I use both Linux and Windows daily and I have zero patience for people parading out this type of train of thought. I care about what works and, for obvious reasons, I’d much prefer if the effective default was free and open source, but the “We root against Windows because it was mean to us” thing is a borderline non-sequitur as far as I’m concerned.
Setting aside the fact that legally a corporation actually is a person, there is such a thing as a corporate culture, and a corporate ethos.
Let’s start with an old microsoft ethos: embrace extend extinguish
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish
Now don’t try to tell me I made it up, there’s enough evidence for it to have its own wiki page.
Similarly there’s FUD an approach they most certainly didnt invent but did an excellent job of weaponising to a fine art.
And so on and so forth. Those of us who have been around a while know the true shape of it, and that leopard has never changed its spots.
I got my MCSE on NT4 back when CNE was much more respected. I still work in IT so yes I too use both windows & linux, that doesn’t stop me having a clear eyed view of them.
They’re also not the worst by a long chalk, google, meta, palantir are all far less principled and far more detrimental to society.
M$ still arent good though, and its woven into their culture
I’ve been around since MS-DOS 3, let me put that out there.
Also, a corporation isn’t a person where I’m from. You guys can sort your garbage legal system in your own time. (alright, so it’s a juridical person, which is a collective form of personhood where you can hold some rights, but you definitely do NOT have a physical person’s rights and you CERTAINLY don’t have an actual personality).
So besides repeating common tropes of online commentariat, which are by and large memes more than arguments, I’d point out that it’s not just that they aren’t the worst offenders, it’s that the conversation is about why they get that exact set of tropes waved in every conversation where other companies that do those same things do not.
The example I’m using is Apple, just because they’ve deployed the closest example to this, but they work because… well, you didn’t list them.
You seem to think that this is about being “for” or “against” companies. This is about why people would think it’s one or the other, and why they assign different attributes to corporations that largely operate in similar ways.
It also probably helps that it is easy to ignore Apple and there might not be a feeling of missing out for those who don’t care for the Apple ecosystem. As big as Apple is it is kind of niche in the sense that a Windows or Linux user can just ignore its existence and not feel affected.
But, when it comes to Windows there’s lot of mainstream software, games, and even hardware compatibility that is affected by Windows dominance. Stuff like wine and proton being needed and not getting the same video card driver support leads to more resentment Windows actually having offerings people who tend to complain want.
I think there’s something to the idea that Apple walls its garden so well people outside the wall don’t care about what happens inside it even when they disagree with it on principle.
I think you’re underplaying how big the garden is, though. You are thinking about this just in terms of PC OSs, but that’s not where Apple’s biggest presence is.
Nobody acturally expects privacy from Apple, if you use an Apple device they know Apple has all your information.
You may want to have a conversation with Nobody, I don’t think he got the memo.
Regardless, the point is Apple gets more of a pass. If I say “nobody actually expects privacy from Microsoft” that’s undeniably true, but hardly works as an excuse, does it?
Well:
Ah, so Apple just happens to be one of the good massive megacorps routinely deploying anti-consumer practices. Gotcha.
See, it’s that gap in perception I’m interested in. Microsoft wants nothing more than having the closed ecosystem Apple has. From their Surface line to their much maligned store to their subscription-forward, always signed-in account environment.
Why they suck so much at selling that where Apple can get away with murder is much more interesting to me than the perceived differences between the implementations, which I would argue in a number of cases are worked backwards from the brand perception anyway. Part of it is the implementation and the execution rakes Apple chooses not to step on, but certainly not all of it, and that’s fascinating.
M$ is trying to take an open system and forcibly close it - after driving their user base by force into an unstable OS
Apple were smart enough to start locking their shit down before home computers became an absolute necessity …and do it with a functional OS
Apple locked down their shit way after home computers were a necessity. I’d argue it was the rollout of handheld devices that needed a home computer to fully work that made their walled garden viable.
And Windows is the main player in home computer OSs. You can take issue with their choices, but it’s certainly functional. I’d argue Win11 is annoying, but not even in the top 3 least functional versions of Windows. I mean, I was there for Me, 8.0 and Vista.
But yes, Apple successfully deployed a locked-down, closed space, and I’m curious about why people are ok with it. That they did it early is… a solid hypothesis, I suppose.
No they’re just a different type of shitty.
Right. But the reaction they get to their shittiness is very different, which is the thing I keep wondering about. Everybody keeps telling me why Microsoft is shitty and how Apple isn’t shitty in those ways specifically while conceding they are in others.
I want to know why Apple’s shitty doesn’t make them the poster boy for shittiness but MS’s shitty does. And it does. As far back as Windows 95, Windows is the thing you use that you hate to use and love to hate. That takes work and luck. I want to know how you can dig that hole so effectively while your competition can be just as overtly crappy and still come across as sleek and all the way above good and evil. There’s a fundamental truth about branding and squishy human brains buried in that phenomenon.
It doesn’t. They’re both shitty.
See, we disagree. You and I agree they’re both shitty. The rest of this social network does not, and the larger world ABSOLUTELY does not.
I’d argue once you get into normie land entirely maybe MS starts losing some of the stink, too, but for a lot of that middle space the perception is absolutely not the same, which is why this thread exists in the first place.