Re: Apple changed their documentation at my request but it proves they don't care about privacy

Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> These are basic networking concepts.
> 
> We didn't ask to have it explained. Knowing this is not about skills, 
> though. A mathematician can have very high skills, yet know nothing 
> about networks. Even a skilled computer programmer may not know about 
> them, and be a world master on IBM big iron assembler programming (and 
> being paid handsomely - a tiny fact I happen to know) and not know 
> offhand what the BSSID is.

Hi Carlos,

The facts are incontrovertible, where only Jon went to the trouble to
reproduce them (AFAwK). Everyone else simply used their stone-age knowledge
of networking (which we all knew decades ago) to apply to this thread.

Winston just did that, multiple times in this thread, as if stating his own
stone-age knowledge of networking has anything to do whatsoever with the
topic. Franklin Slootweg tried the same worthless trolling as Winston did.

Please note that there's nothing wrong with people's stone-age knowledge of
networking, but their stone-age knowledge, while true, doesn't apply here.

If all they can do in response to the facts posted in this thread is repeat
their stone-age thought processes, then they can't possibly add value.

Then you have the trolls like Keith Thompson claiming that running python
on Windows to prove what Apple & Android devices do by default with respect
to Wi-Fi protocols has absolutely nothing to do with running python on
windows to prove how Apple & Google devices differ from how they handle
Wi-Fi metadata.

WTF?

These people are all applying their stone-age knowledge of networking, but
without taking into account the verified *new* information in this thread.

Not a single person who trolled this thread shows any understanding of it.

>> I don't even know how to explain to people who claim that the router never
>> travels as their belief system is so absurd as to warn me that if they
>> don't understand that people take their routers with them when they move,
>> then that kind of person will never be able to understand, well, anything.
> 
> No, we don't travel with our routers.
> 
> My router belongs to the ISP and I have to return it when I move, then I 
> will get a new one at my destination. You should be intelligent enough 
> to accept this. Maybe doesn't happen in your nook of the world, but you 
> must understand that you are posting to an international medium.

WTF?
What kind of absurd arguments are you claiming Carlos?

I don't like broccoli, so nobody on the planet likes broccoli?

More to the point, I don't bring the paintings on my wall with me when I
move, but that doesn't mean that nobody brings their paintings with them.

The fact you get your access point from the ISP, while true, is an absurd
way of your attempt to refute the facts proposed in this respected paper.

 *Surveilling the Masses with Wi-Fi-Based Positioning Systems*
 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.14975>

I do take my many access points with me, Carlos. Dozens of them.
And even if I didn't, it would still refute NOTHING in that research paper.

The fact that's your major rebuttal indicates you haven't read the paper.
Read it. Please.

>> I had given up, but recently, I happened to look at Apple's documentation,
>> and I realized Apple proved they had no intent of honoring the long-held
>> intention of a hidden broadcast, by simply changing their documentation.
>>   <https://support.apple.com/en-ie/102515>
> 
> Ok, finally. The crux of the issue.

It's not hidden.
It is, after all, in the SUBJECT line of this thread, Carlos.

Every person who tried it, found out every single statement to be true.
-- 
My role on Usenet is to always add value that other people aren't aware of.