• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 year ago

      Ah yes, an open source popular browser that is made by a nonprofit organization is less trustworthy than a close source browser made by a public company

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        An open source organization with a track record of dubious user-hostile behavior.

        Example one

        Example two

        Apple does not add plugins to my browser without my consent, nor do they show ads in my browser.

    • TheSaneWriter
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      Isn’t Safari made by Apple? It’s not like Apple is some paragon of corporate virtue, why do you trust them?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        9
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If you’re running Safari, you’re already running their OS. If Apple wants to spy on you, they’ve already got the means to do so, so you’ve already decided to trust them.

        Switching to Chrome or Firefox means trusting one more entity in addition to Apple. This expands your possible exposure.

        • TheSaneWriter
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 year ago

          You’re always both. With Apple, it doesn’t sell your data, but it does sell curated ad space where they use your data to power their tools. While this is less of an invasion of privacy than Google or the atrocity of Meta’s privacy policy, it still exists on a spectrum of how much companies are willing to use your data for extra profit. I’m not saying to not use Apple, hell I’m currently using Microsoft Edge, but I think it’s important to understand that literally every profit-driven company is subject to the same systemic flaws and none of them can be completely trusted.