• disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Apple’s Cycle Tracking app is also locally and E2E encrypted in iCloud.

    When your phone is locked with a passcode, Touch ID, or Face ID, all of your health and fitness data in the Health app, other than your Medical ID, is encrypted. Any health data synced to iCloud is encrypted both in transit and on our servers. And if you have a recent version of watchOS and iOS with the default two-factor authentication and a passcode, your health and activity data will be stored in a way that Apple can’t read it.

    This means that when you use the Cycle Tracking feature and have enabled two-factor authentication, your health data synced to iCloud is encrypted end-to-end and Apple does not have the key to decrypt the data and therefore cannot read it.

    https://support.apple.com/en-us/120356

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I’m not sure what that license has to do with Apple’s privacy policy. Apple uses ML to place ads alongside relevant content. They provide no customer information to advertisers. They generate so much ad revenue by keeping a sizable 30% from the advertisers.

        https://support.apple.com/guide/news-publisher/earn-revenue-with-advertising-on-apple-news-apdd44eeeeeb/icloud

        https://support.apple.com/guide/adguide/generate-revenue-apd51c721ca9/icloud

            • PoopingCough@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              The link has nothing to do with the comment, some people just add that to all their posts because they think it will prevent LLMs from using their comments as training data. It’s useless and very stupid imo, equivalent to people on facebook a few years back copy and pasting that text about owning their pictures and not giving fb permission to use them even though permission was already given in the sign up agreement.

              • moonpiedumplings@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                I actually hate this take. Unlike facebook, on lemmy, you actually own your data. Will this ownership of data be enforced against LLM companies? Probably not. Stackoverflow had everything under a license that requires attribution, but LLM’s don’t attribute and got away scot free.

                But… the license that onlinepersona uses is less restrictive, rather than the default of an individual having absolute copyright over content they make. With onlinepersona’s comments, I know exactly what I can legally do with their comments.

                As for everybody’s else comments, like yours, I don’t really know. Can I quote you, with or with out attribution? Can I legally remix comments? Do I have to ask permission before I use your comment in my presentation? You didn’t sign any kind of license/agreement that explicitly stated what they can do with your comments, did you?

                I’m never gonna complain about someone explicitly releasing their work under a more free license. I find it frustrating that the fediverse is the “free culture” place and all that, but we don’t have a way to set copyright (or more likely, copyleft), on our comments. Instead, every comment is the equivalent of proprietary, source available software.

                People mad about onlinepersona’s CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license, like the other poster who is calling them stupid, are literally mad about receiving free shit. Stay mad, I guess. Personally, I’m happy that I am given content under a more free license than proprietary.

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          onlinepersona posts that on every comment they make. They’re licensing their comments under CC BY-SA-NC 4.0. Given the context of the conversation it may have sounded confusing.