Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone
Subject: Re: Academics Probe Apple's Privacy Settings...
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2024 10:40:37 +1200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <uusj14$2bg83$1@dont-email.me>
References: <xn0ok98w6f0pzr3000@post.eweka.nl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2024 22:40:38 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f66af19c11ef4be95f62ad0f3e8cf366";
	logging-data="2474243"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18IT2C+PIxA1KwJV5dScnRxUlpXlQeutu8="
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:I18erHEiqqhK2rq99EAKrOKFj9M=
Bytes: 3021

On 2024-04-06 16:10:53 +0000, Blueshirt said:
> 
> Academics probe Apple's privacy settings and get lost and
> confused
> 
> Just disabling Siri requires visits to five submenus
> 
> https://www.theregister.com/2024/04/05/apple_apps_privacy_study/
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Copied this post from another newsgroup as reading the article
> brought up this gem...
> 
> "The authors also conducted a survey of Apple users and quizzed
> them on whether they really understood how privacy options
> worked on iOS and macOS, and what apps were doing with their
> data."
> 
> Which all sounds fine. After all, a survey of Apple users seems
> a fair way to conduct investigation... every study needs some
> research behind it.
> 
> BUT, it carries on...
> 
> "While the survey was very small – it covered just 15
> respondents – the results indicated that Apple's privacy
> settings could be hard to navigate."
> 
> 15 users! 15?! That's like conducting a survey among members of
> your own family. How can anyone write a serious article on a
> phone that has over a billion users worldwide based on a survey
> of just fifteen people? Has journalism really become this bad?
> Or does "The Register" need the 'clicks' that badly?!

Almost no surveys ever have a useful number of respondents, and always 
use statistical manipulation and misleading wording to make fools 
believe the results are meangful for "everyone". Add to that they they 
also usually have intentionally directional questions, drop any 
respndents that do not fit their requirements (i.e. whatever result the 
person paying for the survey wants), and that some respondents simply 
lie (intentionally or unintentionally), and you'll find that almost all 
surveys are completely useless for anything in reality ... and in the 
case of the reporting of medical studies, it can be extremely dangerous 
- some people have died due to following the results of such studies 
reported by the news media.