• Interesting study on Apple privacy claims

    From Thomas E.@21:1/5 to All on Tue Nov 22 07:48:18 2022
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619

    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that the company collects personally identifiable information while explicitly promising not to."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Thomas E. on Tue Nov 22 10:47:06 2022
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619

    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that the company collects personally identifiable information while explicitly promising not to."

    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from someone who
    gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it includes a
    permanent, unchangeable ID number called a Directory Services
    Identifier, or DSID, according to researchers from the software company
    Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination Signaling
    Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and rotated periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web>

    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas E.@21:1/5 to Alan on Sat Nov 26 06:09:37 2022
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619

    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that the company collects personally identifiable information while explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from someone who
    gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it includes a
    permanent, unchangeable ID number called a Directory Services
    Identifier, or DSID, according to researchers from the software company Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination Signaling
    Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and rotated periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web>

    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple can tie that number to your device.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Thomas E. on Sat Nov 26 10:53:13 2022
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619

    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that the company collects personally identifiable information while explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from someone who
    gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it includes a
    permanent, unchangeable ID number called a Directory Services
    Identifier, or DSID, according to researchers from the software company
    Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination Signaling
    Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and rotated periodically.' >>
    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web>

    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple can tie that number to your device.

    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little shit.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas E.@21:1/5 to Alan on Sun Nov 27 07:34:28 2022
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619

    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that the company collects personally identifiable information while explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from someone who
    gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it includes a
    permanent, unchangeable ID number called a Directory Services
    Identifier, or DSID, according to researchers from the software company >> Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination Signaling
    Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and rotated periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web>

    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple can tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little shit.

    I get it. Challenged to not insult me with Liarboy, now I'm Little Shit!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas E.@21:1/5 to Alan on Sun Nov 27 07:33:36 2022
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619

    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that the company collects personally identifiable information while explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from someone who
    gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it includes a
    permanent, unchangeable ID number called a Directory Services
    Identifier, or DSID, according to researchers from the software company >> Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination Signaling
    Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and rotated periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web>

    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple can tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little shit.

    There you go again, trying to win an argument by insult. It would be trivial for Apple to use the DSID history to maintain a history of potentially useful user information. The identified iCloud account contains your Apple ID that has all kinds of useful
    data and can be tied to things like a device serial number. Knowing that the growing Apple advertising revenue enterprise can use that data to target ads to a device. Here is a take on what is going on in that area of Apple:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0aXRtl2aqk

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Thomas E. on Sun Nov 27 09:12:45 2022
    On 2022-11-27 07:34, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619

    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that the company collects personally identifiable information while explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from someone who >>>> gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it includes a
    permanent, unchangeable ID number called a Directory Services
    Identifier, or DSID, according to researchers from the software company >>>> Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination Signaling
    Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and rotated periodically.' >>>>
    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web>

    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple can tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little shit.

    I get it. Challenged to not insult me with Liarboy, now I'm Little Shit!

    You're still lying, Lying Little Shit.

    At no time did you make such a challenge.

    But I'll happily call you "Lying Little Shit" from here on out.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John@21:1/5 to Alan on Sun Nov 27 10:25:57 2022
    On 11/27/2022 9:12 AM, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-27 07:34, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619

    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found >>>>>> that the company collects personally identifiable information
    while explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from someone who >>>>> gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it includes a
    permanent, unchangeable ID number called a Directory Services
    Identifier, or DSID, according to researchers from the software
    company
    Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination Signaling
    Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and rotated
    periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web>

    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple can
    tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little shit.

    I get it. Challenged to not insult me with Liarboy, now I'm Little Shit!

    You're still lying, Lying Little Shit.

    At no time did you make such a challenge.

    But I'll happily call you "Lying Little Shit" from here on out.
    Name callers rarely have a sound technical argument.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Thomas E. on Sun Nov 27 10:33:26 2022
    On 2022-11-27 07:33, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619

    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that the company collects personally identifiable information while explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from someone who >>>> gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it includes a
    permanent, unchangeable ID number called a Directory Services
    Identifier, or DSID, according to researchers from the software company >>>> Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination Signaling
    Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and rotated periodically.' >>>>
    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web>

    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple can tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little shit.

    There you go again, trying to win an argument by insult. It would be trivial for Apple to use the DSID history to maintain a history of potentially useful user information. The identified iCloud account contains your Apple ID that has all kinds of
    useful data and can be tied to things like a device serial number. Knowing that the growing Apple advertising revenue enterprise can use that data to target ads to a device. Here is a take on what is going on in that area of Apple:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0aXRtl2aqk

    So you assume that when some gets basic facts right, you can still trust
    their conclusions, you Lying Little Shit?

    Is that what you've learned in your life?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas E.@21:1/5 to John on Mon Nov 28 06:57:18 2022
    On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 1:26:02 PM UTC-5, John wrote:
    On 11/27/2022 9:12 AM, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-27 07:34, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619

    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found >>>>>> that the company collects personally identifiable information
    while explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from someone who >>>>> gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it includes a
    permanent, unchangeable ID number called a Directory Services
    Identifier, or DSID, according to researchers from the software
    company
    Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination Signaling
    Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and rotated
    periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web> >>>>>
    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple can
    tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little shit.

    I get it. Challenged to not insult me with Liarboy, now I'm Little Shit!

    You're still lying, Lying Little Shit.

    At no time did you make such a challenge.

    But I'll happily call you "Lying Little Shit" from here on out.
    Name callers rarely have a sound technical argument.

    Alan uses harassment and name calling when he needs to deflect from a losing argument. He simply cannot stand to see Apple criticized or to be on the losing side.

    His behavior makes him smaller and smaller.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas E.@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Nov 28 07:00:53 2022
    On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 1:33:29 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-27 07:33, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619

    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that the company collects personally identifiable information while explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from someone who >>>> gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it includes a
    permanent, unchangeable ID number called a Directory Services
    Identifier, or DSID, according to researchers from the software company >>>> Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination Signaling
    Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and rotated periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web>

    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple can tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little shit.

    There you go again, trying to win an argument by insult. It would be trivial for Apple to use the DSID history to maintain a history of potentially useful user information. The identified iCloud account contains your Apple ID that has all kinds of
    useful data and can be tied to things like a device serial number. Knowing that the growing Apple advertising revenue enterprise can use that data to target ads to a device. Here is a take on what is going on in that area of Apple:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0aXRtl2aqk
    So you assume that when some gets basic facts right, you can still trust their conclusions, you Lying Little Shit?

    Is that what you've learned in your life?

    You just implied one of Apple's major fans is a lying little shit! I don't think Rene would appreciate that. Your grammar "some gets basic facts" is also an error. Some is plural and gets is singular. You must be in a real snit. Love it.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas E.@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Nov 28 07:02:58 2022
    On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 12:12:47 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-27 07:34, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619

    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that the company collects personally identifiable information while explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from someone who >>>> gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it includes a
    permanent, unchangeable ID number called a Directory Services
    Identifier, or DSID, according to researchers from the software company >>>> Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination Signaling
    Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and rotated periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web>

    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple can tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little shit.

    I get it. Challenged to not insult me with Liarboy, now I'm Little Shit!
    You're still lying, Lying Little Shit.

    At no time did you make such a challenge.

    But I'll happily call you "Lying Little Shit" from here on out.

    I did make a challenge. In a different conversation I simply said I wanted you to stop calling me Liarboy. Do I need to cite that thread?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Thomas E. on Mon Nov 28 09:48:08 2022
    On 2022-11-28 07:00, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 1:33:29 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-27 07:33, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan
    wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619



    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that
    the company collects personally identifiable information while
    explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from
    someone who gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it
    includes a permanent, unchangeable ID number called a
    Directory Services Identifier, or DSID, according to
    researchers from the software company Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination
    Signaling Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and
    rotated periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web>



    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple
    can tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little
    shit.

    There you go again, trying to win an argument by insult. It would
    be trivial for Apple to use the DSID history to maintain a
    history of potentially useful user information. The identified
    iCloud account contains your Apple ID that has all kinds of
    useful data and can be tied to things like a device serial
    number. Knowing that the growing Apple advertising revenue
    enterprise can use that data to target ads to a device. Here is a
    take on what is going on in that area of Apple:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0aXRtl2aqk
    So you assume that when some gets basic facts right, you can still
    trust their conclusions, you Lying Little Shit?

    Is that what you've learned in your life?

    You just implied one of Apple's major fans is a lying little shit! I
    don't think Rene would appreciate that. Your grammar "some gets basic
    facts" is also an error. Some is plural and gets is singular. You
    must be in a real snit. Love it.

    Nope. I've implied that you've accepted the conclusions in the earlier
    article when that researcher has gotten basic facts wrong, you Lying
    Little Shit.

    And you've drawn a connection from that fallacious security report to
    Ritchie's talk about Apple's ad strategy.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas E.@21:1/5 to Alan on Mon Nov 28 10:22:21 2022
    On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 12:48:11 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-28 07:00, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 1:33:29 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-27 07:33, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan
    wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619



    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that
    the company collects personally identifiable information while
    explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from
    someone who gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it
    includes a permanent, unchangeable ID number called a
    Directory Services Identifier, or DSID, according to
    researchers from the software company Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination
    Signaling Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and
    rotated periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web> >>>>>>


    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple
    can tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little
    shit.

    There you go again, trying to win an argument by insult. It would
    be trivial for Apple to use the DSID history to maintain a
    history of potentially useful user information. The identified
    iCloud account contains your Apple ID that has all kinds of
    useful data and can be tied to things like a device serial
    number. Knowing that the growing Apple advertising revenue
    enterprise can use that data to target ads to a device. Here is a
    take on what is going on in that area of Apple:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0aXRtl2aqk
    So you assume that when some gets basic facts right, you can still
    trust their conclusions, you Lying Little Shit?

    Is that what you've learned in your life?

    You just implied one of Apple's major fans is a lying little shit! I
    don't think Rene would appreciate that. Your grammar "some gets basic facts" is also an error. Some is plural and gets is singular. You
    must be in a real snit. Love it.
    Nope. I've implied that you've accepted the conclusions in the earlier article when that researcher has gotten basic facts wrong, you Lying
    Little Shit.

    And you've drawn a connection from that fallacious security report to Ritchie's talk about Apple's ad strategy.

    Alan, the two are directly related. And you know that.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Thomas E. on Mon Nov 28 10:28:01 2022
    On 2022-11-28 10:22, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 12:48:11 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-28 07:00, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 1:33:29 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-27 07:33, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan
    wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619



    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that
    the company collects personally identifiable information while
    explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from
    someone who gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it
    includes a permanent, unchangeable ID number called a
    Directory Services Identifier, or DSID, according to
    researchers from the software company Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination
    Signaling Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and
    rotated periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web> >>>>>>>>


    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple
    can tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little
    shit.

    There you go again, trying to win an argument by insult. It would
    be trivial for Apple to use the DSID history to maintain a
    history of potentially useful user information. The identified
    iCloud account contains your Apple ID that has all kinds of
    useful data and can be tied to things like a device serial
    number. Knowing that the growing Apple advertising revenue
    enterprise can use that data to target ads to a device. Here is a
    take on what is going on in that area of Apple:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0aXRtl2aqk
    So you assume that when some gets basic facts right, you can still
    trust their conclusions, you Lying Little Shit?

    Is that what you've learned in your life?

    You just implied one of Apple's major fans is a lying little shit! I
    don't think Rene would appreciate that. Your grammar "some gets basic
    facts" is also an error. Some is plural and gets is singular. You
    must be in a real snit. Love it.
    Nope. I've implied that you've accepted the conclusions in the earlier
    article when that researcher has gotten basic facts wrong, you Lying
    Little Shit.

    And you've drawn a connection from that fallacious security report to
    Ritchie's talk about Apple's ad strategy.

    Alan, the two are directly related. And you know that.

    Since KNOW that the security researcher got basic, simple facts wrong,
    we cannot trust that researchers conclusions.

    And as always, just like the lying little shit you've always been, you
    lie by claiming with certainty that which you know you cannot know with certainty.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas E.@21:1/5 to Alan on Tue Nov 29 07:15:17 2022
    On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 1:28:04 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-28 10:22, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 12:48:11 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-28 07:00, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 1:33:29 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-27 07:33, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan
    wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619



    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that >> the company collects personally identifiable information while
    explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from
    someone who gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it
    includes a permanent, unchangeable ID number called a
    Directory Services Identifier, or DSID, according to
    researchers from the software company Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination
    Signaling Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and >>>>>>>> rotated periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web> >>>>>>>>


    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple >>>>>>> can tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little
    shit.

    There you go again, trying to win an argument by insult. It would >>>>> be trivial for Apple to use the DSID history to maintain a
    history of potentially useful user information. The identified
    iCloud account contains your Apple ID that has all kinds of
    useful data and can be tied to things like a device serial
    number. Knowing that the growing Apple advertising revenue
    enterprise can use that data to target ads to a device. Here is a >>>>> take on what is going on in that area of Apple:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0aXRtl2aqk
    So you assume that when some gets basic facts right, you can still
    trust their conclusions, you Lying Little Shit?

    Is that what you've learned in your life?

    You just implied one of Apple's major fans is a lying little shit! I
    don't think Rene would appreciate that. Your grammar "some gets basic >>> facts" is also an error. Some is plural and gets is singular. You
    must be in a real snit. Love it.
    Nope. I've implied that you've accepted the conclusions in the earlier
    article when that researcher has gotten basic facts wrong, you Lying
    Little Shit.

    And you've drawn a connection from that fallacious security report to
    Ritchie's talk about Apple's ad strategy.

    Alan, the two are directly related. And you know that.
    Since KNOW that the security researcher got basic, simple facts wrong,
    we cannot trust that researchers conclusions.

    And as always, just like the lying little shit you've always been, you
    lie by claiming with certainty that which you know you cannot know with certainty.

    Just another Baker Lie!

    The evidence is circumstantial. I said that Apple could be using that information to track you. So does the article:

    "It’s possible that Apple processes DSID data to shelter personally identifying details when the company receives the information, separating your personal information from other data. But there’s no way to know, because so far Apple seems unwilling
    to explain its practices. The company may not use the data if you turn the related privacy settings off, despite still receiving it, but that’s not how the company explains what the settings do in its privacy policy."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Thomas E. on Tue Nov 29 08:50:55 2022
    On 2022-11-29 07:15, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 1:28:04 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-28 10:22, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 12:48:11 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-28 07:00, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 1:33:29 PM UTC-5, Alan
    wrote:
    On 2022-11-27 07:33, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan
    wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5,
    Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619





    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that
    the company collects personally identifiable information while
    explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a
    report from someone who gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows
    it includes a permanent, unchangeable ID number
    called a Directory Services Identifier, or DSID,
    according to researchers from the software company
    Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID
    (Destination Signaling Identifier) that’s tied to
    the iCloud account and rotated periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web> >>>>>>>>>>




    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if
    rotated Apple can tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy,
    little shit.

    There you go again, trying to win an argument by insult.
    It would be trivial for Apple to use the DSID history to
    maintain a history of potentially useful user
    information. The identified iCloud account contains your
    Apple ID that has all kinds of useful data and can be
    tied to things like a device serial number. Knowing that
    the growing Apple advertising revenue enterprise can use
    that data to target ads to a device. Here is a take on
    what is going on in that area of Apple:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0aXRtl2aqk
    So you assume that when some gets basic facts right, you
    can still trust their conclusions, you Lying Little Shit?

    Is that what you've learned in your life?

    You just implied one of Apple's major fans is a lying little
    shit! I don't think Rene would appreciate that. Your grammar
    "some gets basic facts" is also an error. Some is plural and
    gets is singular. You must be in a real snit. Love it.
    Nope. I've implied that you've accepted the conclusions in the
    earlier article when that researcher has gotten basic facts
    wrong, you Lying Little Shit.

    And you've drawn a connection from that fallacious security
    report to Ritchie's talk about Apple's ad strategy.

    Alan, the two are directly related. And you know that.
    Since KNOW that the security researcher got basic, simple facts
    wrong, we cannot trust that researchers conclusions.

    And as always, just like the lying little shit you've always been,
    you lie by claiming with certainty that which you know you cannot
    know with certainty.

    Just another Baker Lie!

    The evidence is circumstantial. I said that Apple could be using that information to track you. So does the article:

    "It’s possible that Apple processes DSID data to shelter personally identifying details when the company receives the information,
    separating your personal information from other data. But there’s no
    way to know, because so far Apple seems unwilling to explain its
    practices. The company may not use the data if you turn the related
    privacy settings off, despite still receiving it, but that’s not how
    the company explains what the settings do in its privacy policy."


    Let me help you, you Lying Little Shit:

    'Alan, the two are directly related.'

    That's not saying "could be", is it?

    And since the article incorrectly states what the DSID IS...

    ...why would one trust their conclusion about what can be DONE with it?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John@21:1/5 to Thomas E. on Tue Nov 29 10:26:01 2022
    On 11/28/2022 6:57 AM, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 1:26:02 PM UTC-5, John wrote:
    On 11/27/2022 9:12 AM, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-27 07:34, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619

    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found >>>>>>>> that the company collects personally identifiable information
    while explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a report from someone who >>>>>>> gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows it includes a
    permanent, unchangeable ID number called a Directory Services
    Identifier, or DSID, according to researchers from the software
    company
    Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID (Destination Signaling
    Identifier) that’s tied to the iCloud account and rotated
    periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web> >>>>>>>
    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if rotated Apple can
    tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy, little shit.

    I get it. Challenged to not insult me with Liarboy, now I'm Little Shit! >>>
    You're still lying, Lying Little Shit.

    At no time did you make such a challenge.

    But I'll happily call you "Lying Little Shit" from here on out.
    Name callers rarely have a sound technical argument.

    Alan uses harassment and name calling when he needs to deflect from a losing argument. He simply cannot stand to see Apple criticized or to be on the losing side.

    His behavior makes him smaller and smaller.


    Real Mac Advocacy means admitting when Apple does screw up and not
    trying to dodge it. Apple makes fine products most of the time but on
    occasion is capable of some real screw ups.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas E.@21:1/5 to Alan on Thu Dec 1 03:31:09 2022
    On Tuesday, November 29, 2022 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-29 07:15, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 1:28:04 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-28 10:22, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 12:48:11 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-28 07:00, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 1:33:29 PM UTC-5, Alan
    wrote:
    On 2022-11-27 07:33, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan
    wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5,
    Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619





    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that
    the company collects personally identifiable information while
    explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a
    report from someone who gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows
    it includes a permanent, unchangeable ID number
    called a Directory Services Identifier, or DSID,
    according to researchers from the software company
    Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID
    (Destination Signaling Identifier) that’s tied to
    the iCloud account and rotated periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web> >>>>>>>>>>




    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if
    rotated Apple can tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy,
    little shit.

    There you go again, trying to win an argument by insult.
    It would be trivial for Apple to use the DSID history to
    maintain a history of potentially useful user
    information. The identified iCloud account contains your
    Apple ID that has all kinds of useful data and can be
    tied to things like a device serial number. Knowing that
    the growing Apple advertising revenue enterprise can use
    that data to target ads to a device. Here is a take on
    what is going on in that area of Apple:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0aXRtl2aqk
    So you assume that when some gets basic facts right, you
    can still trust their conclusions, you Lying Little Shit?

    Is that what you've learned in your life?

    You just implied one of Apple's major fans is a lying little
    shit! I don't think Rene would appreciate that. Your grammar
    "some gets basic facts" is also an error. Some is plural and
    gets is singular. You must be in a real snit. Love it.
    Nope. I've implied that you've accepted the conclusions in the
    earlier article when that researcher has gotten basic facts
    wrong, you Lying Little Shit.

    And you've drawn a connection from that fallacious security
    report to Ritchie's talk about Apple's ad strategy.

    Alan, the two are directly related. And you know that.
    Since KNOW that the security researcher got basic, simple facts
    wrong, we cannot trust that researchers conclusions.

    And as always, just like the lying little shit you've always been,
    you lie by claiming with certainty that which you know you cannot
    know with certainty.

    Just another Baker Lie!

    The evidence is circumstantial. I said that Apple could be using that information to track you. So does the article:

    "It’s possible that Apple processes DSID data to shelter personally identifying details when the company receives the information,
    separating your personal information from other data. But there’s no
    way to know, because so far Apple seems unwilling to explain its practices. The company may not use the data if you turn the related privacy settings off, despite still receiving it, but that’s not how
    the company explains what the settings do in its privacy policy."
    Let me help you, you Lying Little Shit:

    'Alan, the two are directly related.'

    That's not saying "could be", is it?

    And since the article incorrectly states what the DSID IS...

    ...why would one trust their conclusion about what can be DONE with it?

    Directly related. Just because a detail is not true does not mean that the entire premise is false. Rene is talking about an Apple effort aimed at increasing third party ad content sales. The article is about how Apple might be collecting data to
    customize that ad content to make it more attractive to customers.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas E.@21:1/5 to Alan on Thu Dec 1 03:25:57 2022
    On Tuesday, November 29, 2022 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-29 07:15, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 1:28:04 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-28 10:22, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 12:48:11 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-28 07:00, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 1:33:29 PM UTC-5, Alan
    wrote:
    On 2022-11-27 07:33, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5, Alan
    wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM UTC-5,
    Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619





    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that
    the company collects personally identifiable information while
    explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a
    report from someone who gets a basic term wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple shows
    it includes a permanent, unchangeable ID number
    called a Directory Services Identifier, or DSID,
    according to researchers from the software company
    Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID
    (Destination Signaling Identifier) that’s tied to
    the iCloud account and rotated periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web> >>>>>>>>>>




    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if
    rotated Apple can tie that number to your device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer privacy,
    little shit.

    There you go again, trying to win an argument by insult.
    It would be trivial for Apple to use the DSID history to
    maintain a history of potentially useful user
    information. The identified iCloud account contains your
    Apple ID that has all kinds of useful data and can be
    tied to things like a device serial number. Knowing that
    the growing Apple advertising revenue enterprise can use
    that data to target ads to a device. Here is a take on
    what is going on in that area of Apple:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0aXRtl2aqk
    So you assume that when some gets basic facts right, you
    can still trust their conclusions, you Lying Little Shit?

    Is that what you've learned in your life?

    You just implied one of Apple's major fans is a lying little
    shit! I don't think Rene would appreciate that. Your grammar
    "some gets basic facts" is also an error. Some is plural and
    gets is singular. You must be in a real snit. Love it.
    Nope. I've implied that you've accepted the conclusions in the
    earlier article when that researcher has gotten basic facts
    wrong, you Lying Little Shit.

    And you've drawn a connection from that fallacious security
    report to Ritchie's talk about Apple's ad strategy.

    Alan, the two are directly related. And you know that.
    Since KNOW that the security researcher got basic, simple facts
    wrong, we cannot trust that researchers conclusions.

    And as always, just like the lying little shit you've always been,
    you lie by claiming with certainty that which you know you cannot
    know with certainty.

    Just another Baker Lie!

    The evidence is circumstantial. I said that Apple could be using that information to track you. So does the article:

    "It’s possible that Apple processes DSID data to shelter personally identifying details when the company receives the information,
    separating your personal information from other data. But there’s no
    way to know, because so far Apple seems unwilling to explain its practices. The company may not use the data if you turn the related privacy settings off, despite still receiving it, but that’s not how
    the company explains what the settings do in its privacy policy."
    Let me help you, you Lying Little Shit:

    'Alan, the two are directly related.'

    That's not saying "could be", is it?

    And since the article incorrectly states what the DSID IS...

    ...why would one trust their conclusion about what can be DONE with it?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan@21:1/5 to Thomas E. on Thu Dec 1 11:03:15 2022
    On 2022-12-01 03:31, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 29, 2022 at 11:50:58 AM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-29 07:15, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 1:28:04 PM UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-28 10:22, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Monday, November 28, 2022 at 12:48:11 PM UTC-5, Alan
    wrote:
    On 2022-11-28 07:00, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Sunday, November 27, 2022 at 1:33:29 PM UTC-5, Alan
    wrote:
    On 2022-11-27 07:33, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 1:53:16 PM UTC-5,
    Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-26 06:09, Thomas E. wrote:
    On Tuesday, November 22, 2022 at 1:47:23 PM
    UTC-5, Alan wrote:
    On 2022-11-22 07:48, Thomas E. wrote:
    https://gizmodo.com/apple-iphone-privacy-dsid-analytics-personal-data-test-1849807619







    "A new test of how Apple gathers usage data from iPhones has found that
    the company collects personally identifiable information
    while explicitly promising not to."
    Perhaps you shouldn't assume the accuracy of a
    report from someone who gets a basic term
    wrong:

    'But an analysis of the data sent to Apple
    shows it includes a permanent, unchangeable ID
    number called a Directory Services Identifier,
    or DSID, according to researchers from the
    software company Mysk.'

    Only one problem:

    'The identifier is generated from a DSID
    (Destination Signaling Identifier) that’s tied
    to the iCloud account and rotated
    periodically.'

    <https://support.apple.com/en-ca/guide/security/seca4b33e8c9/web> >>>>>>>>>>>>






    So:

    Not what they say it is.

    Not unchangeable.

    It's still a signal tied to an account. Even if
    rotated Apple can tie that number to your
    device.
    I'm glad you're such an expert on computer
    privacy, little shit.

    There you go again, trying to win an argument by
    insult. It would be trivial for Apple to use the DSID
    history to maintain a history of potentially useful
    user information. The identified iCloud account
    contains your Apple ID that has all kinds of useful
    data and can be tied to things like a device serial
    number. Knowing that the growing Apple advertising
    revenue enterprise can use that data to target ads to
    a device. Here is a take on what is going on in that
    area of Apple:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0aXRtl2aqk
    So you assume that when some gets basic facts right,
    you can still trust their conclusions, you Lying Little
    Shit?

    Is that what you've learned in your life?

    You just implied one of Apple's major fans is a lying
    little shit! I don't think Rene would appreciate that.
    Your grammar "some gets basic facts" is also an error.
    Some is plural and gets is singular. You must be in a
    real snit. Love it.
    Nope. I've implied that you've accepted the conclusions in
    the earlier article when that researcher has gotten basic
    facts wrong, you Lying Little Shit.

    And you've drawn a connection from that fallacious
    security report to Ritchie's talk about Apple's ad
    strategy.

    Alan, the two are directly related. And you know that.
    Since KNOW that the security researcher got basic, simple
    facts wrong, we cannot trust that researchers conclusions.

    And as always, just like the lying little shit you've always
    been, you lie by claiming with certainty that which you know
    you cannot know with certainty.

    Just another Baker Lie!

    The evidence is circumstantial. I said that Apple could be using
    that information to track you. So does the article:

    "It’s possible that Apple processes DSID data to shelter
    personally identifying details when the company receives the
    information, separating your personal information from other
    data. But there’s no way to know, because so far Apple seems
    unwilling to explain its practices. The company may not use the
    data if you turn the related privacy settings off, despite still
    receiving it, but that’s not how the company explains what the
    settings do in its privacy policy."
    Let me help you, you Lying Little Shit:

    'Alan, the two are directly related.'

    That's not saying "could be", is it?

    And since the article incorrectly states what the DSID IS...

    ...why would one trust their conclusion about what can be DONE with
    it?

    Directly related. Just because a detail is not true does not mean
    that the entire premise is false. Rene is talking about an Apple
    effort aimed at increasing third party ad content sales. The article
    is about how Apple might be collecting data to customize that ad
    content to make it more attractive to customers.

    I'm sorry, but when you proceed from a false premise (that the DSID is something it's not), then you cannot trust the conclusion drawn from
    that premise.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)