From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:

Chris wrote:

Given the fact that...
a. iOS cannot granularize Contacts permissions by field.
b. iOS cannot show which fields an app will access.
c. iOS cannot granularize Contacts permissions by field.
d. iOS cannot show which fields an app will access.
e. iOS cannot replace the system dialer with a privacy-aware one.

Two of the "facts" are duplicated.

Stop it. So what? I spent HOURS writing that post and made many edits.

Lol. You spend "hours" on a post and *still* get so much wrong!? You need
to get a different hobby.


--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2026-05-07, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:

Chris wrote:

Given the fact that...
a. iOS cannot granularize Contacts permissions by field.
b. iOS cannot show which fields an app will access.
c. iOS cannot granularize Contacts permissions by field.
d. iOS cannot show which fields an app will access.
e. iOS cannot replace the system dialer with a privacy-aware one.

Two of the "facts" are duplicated.

Stop it. So what? I spent HOURS writing that post and made many edits.

Lol. You spend "hours" on a post and *still* get so much wrong!? You need
to get a different hobby.

Dude literally spends all of his time weak trolling news groups for
products he hates with every fiber of his being. Fucking pathetic excuse
of a human being.
--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Chris wrote:

Lol. You spend "hours" on a post and *still* get so much wrong!?

Ignoring your incessant insults, if the only thing you can find wrong with
the technical discussion is a typographical error, then you agree, Chris.

It's impossible to have iOS contacts privacy due to stated privacy flaws.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On 2026-05-07 2:02 p.m., Jolly Roger wrote:

On 2026-05-07, Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote:

Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:

Chris wrote:

Given the fact that...
a. iOS cannot granularize Contacts permissions by field.
b. iOS cannot show which fields an app will access.
c. iOS cannot granularize Contacts permissions by field.
d. iOS cannot show which fields an app will access.
e. iOS cannot replace the system dialer with a privacy-aware one.

Two of the "facts" are duplicated.

Stop it. So what? I spent HOURS writing that post and made many edits.

Lol. You spend "hours" on a post and *still* get so much wrong!? You need
to get a different hobby.

Dude literally spends all of his time weak trolling news groups for
products he hates with every fiber of his being. Fucking pathetic excuse
of a human being.

The worst part is that he has no good reason to hate those products.
--
CrudeSausage
Zephyrus G14 2021
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Maria Sophia <mariasophia@comprehension.com> wrote:

Chris wrote:

Lol. You spend "hours" on a post and *still* get so much wrong!?

Ignoring your incessant insults, if the only thing you can find wrong with the technical discussion is a typographical error, then you agree, Chris.

You commented on the four or five other errors I found.

It's impossible to have iOS contacts privacy due to stated privacy flaws.

False.


--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On May 7, 2026 at 11:55:57rC>AM MST, "Maria Sophia" wrote <10tin7t$1vtt$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

Chris wrote:

Lol. You spend "hours" on a post and *still* get so much wrong!?

Ignoring your incessant insults, if the only thing you can find wrong with the technical discussion is a typographical error, then you agree, Chris.

It's impossible to have iOS contacts privacy due to stated privacy flaws.

Can you give a real-world example?

Hint: darn unlikely, at least where iOS users are at more risk than Android users.
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.21f-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

Chris wrote:

Ignoring your incessant insults, if the only thing you can find wrong with >> the technical discussion is a typographical error, then you agree, Chris.

You commented on the four or five other errors I found.

Hi Chris,

I explained how iOS contacts work with respect to inherent privacy flaws.

All you ever do when you attempt to refute facts, is you say all facts are wrong, but you never seem to show any indication you know how it works.

It was clear to me, from what you wrote, you have no idea how it works.

Hence, you just claiming everything is wrong without explaining how you
think it works, is not something that anyone can possibly discuss with you.

It's impossible to have iOS contacts privacy due to stated privacy flaws.

False.

I explained very clearly where iOS contacts privacy is impossible, Chris.
For you to simply say 'false', means you actually agree with me, Chris.

But I won't be hard on you as it's clear you have no idea how contacts
work, so I think you're just saying "false" because you don't like that I
shoed that it's impossible (as far as we know) to have iOS contacts
privacy.

Note, it's very clear, to me, which I explained in earlier threads and on
the Android newsgroup, that iOS contacts are certainly "more private" than Android contacts, out of the box.

But while you can easily make Android contacts private, it's impossible to
make iOS contacts private (unless, of course, you jailbreak the device).
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.advocacy

On May 8, 2026 at 12:58:27rC>PM MST, "Maria Sophia" wrote <10tlf93$277d$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com>:

Chris wrote:

Ignoring your incessant insults, if the only thing you can find wrong with >>> the technical discussion is a typographical error, then you agree, Chris. >>

You commented on the four or five other errors I found.

Hi Chris,

I explained how iOS contacts work with respect to inherent privacy flaws.

All you ever do when you attempt to refute facts, is you say all facts are wrong, but you never seem to show any indication you know how it works.

It was clear to me, from what you wrote, you have no idea how it works.

Hence, you just claiming everything is wrong without explaining how you
think it works, is not something that anyone can possibly discuss with you.

It's impossible to have iOS contacts privacy due to stated privacy flaws. >>

False.

I explained very clearly where iOS contacts privacy is impossible, Chris.
For you to simply say 'false', means you actually agree with me, Chris.

They are private. You are simply wrong.

But I won't be hard on you as it's clear you have no idea how contacts
work, so I think you're just saying "false" because you don't like that I shoed that it's impossible (as far as we know) to have iOS contacts
privacy.

You cannot have per-contact privacy. It is all-or-nothing.

Note, it's very clear, to me, which I explained in earlier threads and on
the Android newsgroup, that iOS contacts are certainly "more private" than Android contacts, out of the box.

What is clear -- to you -- is not tied to reality.

But while you can easily make Android contacts private, it's impossible to make iOS contacts private (unless, of course, you jailbreak the device).

Or just use it as designed and they are private unless you give permissions
(or some zero day exploit).
--
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2