Incredible how many people skip the article and substitute their own reality before commenting.

Article says nothing about Apple allowing law enforcement access to any user data.

There has always been plenty to criticize about Apple, but some of you people see their name and just get so [TRIGGERED]

Yep.

I'd happily crap on them for being an e-waste factory, for making it insanely hard to install anything outside of their app store, etc.

This ain't it. This is nothing.

Yep, the article is about Apple showing cops how to use the tech, what apps the police in other countries is using to support their daily work and the police evaluating the use of more Apple tech in their daily duty (Carplay, Vision, etc.).

There’s nothing about spying on normal Apple users or Apple handing out your personal data to the cops in that article.

Clickbait headline.

After reading the article, it doesn’t look like any of this contradicts what they’re been selling. Encrypted data is still locked down. IMHO, this title is fairly clickbaity.

A lot of this looks like iOS / CarPlay versions of policing / public records database software that was previously on platforms like Windows.

I don’t assume they are perfect. But I do absolutely believe they are significantly better on privacy than any other major player in the smartphone space.

Even if you don’t pay any attention to their policies and programs, the mere fact that iPhones aren’t running an OS owned by an advertising company should be enough to demonstrate this.

Apple is still not offering governments a backdoor into encrypted content

You mean like they have to under the USA PRISM Act?

They don't have to have a backdoor. They are most likely in possession of a master key to decrypt your data:

arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/0…

Took me several reads of the headline to start with.

Then connecting it to the article contents, at least this is "accurate clickbait" (if there is such a thing). It actually describes what's going on, we just interpret it differently initially because of current circumstance (which I suppose you could say is the fldefinition of clickbait).

Still clickbait, but at least it's not an outright lie like so many, just worded to make us want to click!

I'm a bit chagrined to have been taken in by the extreme interpretation of the headline, when the milder interpretation (in a different climate) would be inoffensive.

Ffs, how far have we come when I'm showing appreciation for a clickbait headline's milder interpretation is accurate enough to not be a lie, but just attention-grabbing?