It's good that you're principled enough to do that but you guys will be rounding errors in Apple's revenue. Most people don't even know about this and those that do, most wont care. Even of those who do know and do care, most aren't motivated enough to change their habits beyond writing a few angry words on a forum Apple are never going to read anyway. Those that do change their buying habits, yourselves, are by far in the minority. And while you might have some influence over what tech your friends, family and significant other might buy, let's be completely honest, it's not going to be enough to sway them into using an unbranded phone over a feature that they themselves likely don't care much about but happily assume the role of outrage when around you because we are generally social animals.
This is companies consistently get away with pissing off their customers. It's the same reason politicians get away with pissing off their electorate. Even in a crowded space people seldom get outraged enough to change their buying habits. But in an industry where the options are already limited (Android or iOS) and where people only buy products, at most, once every two years...? Sorry but literally nobody outside your social circle will notice if you stopped buying Apple products.
I get this is a depressing response and I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't follow through with your threat. But I hear this threat posted unironically a lot and it seems to me that people think they have the power to invoke change simply by moaning on a few message boards or buying a competitors products for a couple of years (then that competitor does something to earn our outrage and we're back to the first company again). But real change takes effort. A lot of effort. More effort than most are willing to commit. Hence why the GP rightfully commented that in a months time people will have moved on to their next outrage.
The best you can do is raise tech awareness, take apple interviews and cite this reason for not moving forward. Facebook faced constraint not just after a avalanche of bad press but also as the tech workers (employees and applicants) pushed back and worked to improve things. The biggest asset in information economy is the people; the employees can enact change. See many examples in how Google direction has been influenced in military contracts or what not.
Facebook hasn't changed -- if anything, they're bigger now and sucking up more personal data than ever. Your Google example is an interesting one though it's worth noting it was the employees who objected. However it's not inconceivable that a public outcry could cause Apple employees to rethink and then challenge their management's decision.
I completely agree, I have managed to influence parts of my family and a few friends to shift to better products (like Signal) but I simply don't like having all of my communications scanned by anyone, whether it be by disinterested (in me particularly) humans or computers. The often unspoken (ha) part of free speech is the bit about it being my choice to whom and when I share my thoughts. That means a lot to me. Apple, Google, Twitter and Facebook will go on without me but they will only find out about me second hand, and that's fine by me.
What you are saying isn't that depressing, I think it makes a lot of sense. But perceived abuses do take time for people to eventually take action that can actually effect companies/states bottom lines.
I can imagine at some point a 0day targeting iOS devices that when they connect to a public wifi network with a compromised router, it distributes CP malware/botnet on to their device and then everyone else that connects to that device in the future (muddying the waters).
Similar actions could also be taken against other companies and state entities systems.
And these actions don't need to rely on most of the population to take them.
The more these "kill chain" like systems become automated and cheap to deploy, the more incentive individuals will have to pursue these types of attacks.
I think the problem with your response is that you aren't proposing anything better. It just sounds like you're saying "give in, it doesn't make a difference anyway".
That capitulating, "crabs in a barrel" attitude is why things are the way they are. The majority just sits around waiting for something to happen and for some miracle to happen; for a leader to show up, galvanize the masses to change their ways and save the day. At the same time you don't believe that will ever happen, so you stay complacent, non-active and immobile (physically and mentally).
Stop preaching futility and do something positive. Try and be the positive change you want to see. Just because you've given up doesn't mean you have to try and convince somebody else to give up. You're part of the problem.
> I think the problem with your response is that you aren't proposing anything better.
That's because I honestly can't think of anything better. However that doesn't make my response invalid.
> The majority just sits around waiting for something to happen and for some miracle to happen; for a leader to show up, galvanize the masses to change their ways and save the day. At the same time you don't believe that will ever happen, so you stay complacent, non-active and immobile (physically and mentally).
I think the issue is more that most people are too busy with their own lives to give a crap about a theoretical problem that doesn't visibly and directly affect them. We've head leaders before and it didn't change people's attitudes. If Snowden couldn't influence people's behaviours then what chance does a few random posts on a niche message board have?
> Stop preaching futility and do something positive. Try and be the positive change you want to see. Just because you've given up doesn't mean you have to try and convince somebody else to give up. You're part of the problem.
That's a bit harsh. I'm just as free to post my views are you are to post yours. And if you can't be arsed to get off your seat and campaign for real change then you're in no position to delegate that responsibility onto me.
Also I think you misunderstand the point of my post. I'm not trying to talk people out of action. In fact I've explicitly stated otherwise when I said "It's good that you're principled enough" and "I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't follow through with your threat". I'm just expressing my expectations about the futility of it all. A futile action can still give ourselves comfort that we've done the right thing even if we know it will make no wider change: like how I always vote in each election despite my constituency being so overwhelmingly in favour of the opposition that my vote is literally meaningless.
If yourself switching manufacturer brings yourself comfort that you've done the right thing then that's reason enough to change. But the pragmatic truth of the matter is that it'll take more than that to influence a company as large and successful as Apple.
I think your proclamation of it all being futile is a bit premature and can be disheartening for those that do want to act. It may even play a part in negative change, leading to some people dropping their original intention because you successfully convinced them that nothing can possibly change.
Yet, I'm not convinced that you can reasonably know this. So if we can all agree that what's happening here with Apple is a bad thing, perhaps it's for the best to refrain from posting pessimistic takes?
All actions have consequences, even posting to a message board. I think it is wise to formulate an intended consequence in mind before you act.
This is companies consistently get away with pissing off their customers. It's the same reason politicians get away with pissing off their electorate. Even in a crowded space people seldom get outraged enough to change their buying habits. But in an industry where the options are already limited (Android or iOS) and where people only buy products, at most, once every two years...? Sorry but literally nobody outside your social circle will notice if you stopped buying Apple products.
I get this is a depressing response and I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't follow through with your threat. But I hear this threat posted unironically a lot and it seems to me that people think they have the power to invoke change simply by moaning on a few message boards or buying a competitors products for a couple of years (then that competitor does something to earn our outrage and we're back to the first company again). But real change takes effort. A lot of effort. More effort than most are willing to commit. Hence why the GP rightfully commented that in a months time people will have moved on to their next outrage.