On 3/2/2023 1:11 PM, sms wrote:

> I'm sure that by now you understand that Samsung does not
> store any of your data or your applications.

You're the only one who is concerned about the data store location.

> I suppose that you also don't use any e-mail providers, Amazon, PayPal,
> online banking etc., or an Apple account, since all of those have ways
> to retrieve forgotten passwords, and all are "impersonal companies."

That you think it's about that means you still don't understand the issues.

> It would be great to know what your _actual_ objection is to Secure
> Folders because clearly it's not that Samsung is providing a way to
> retrieve forgotten credentials. The only explanation that's plausible is
> that you're upset that Apple doesn't yet offer a similar feature.

It's the same problem with Apple accounts as with Samsung accounts.

If I repeated a thousand times that the corporation can lock you out of
your own data you won't understand that it has nothing to do with the
password. It's that you have to maintain an account 24/7 for decades.

You can't learn so let's both just give up but don't blame me because you
can't understand one of the most tried & true of basic security concepts.

On 3/2/2023 12:18 PM, Big Dog wrote:

<snip>

> If I repeated a thousand times that the corporation can lock you out of
> your own data you won't understand that it has nothing to do with the
> password.

Actually they can't lock you out of your own data. You never have to
sign in or connect to Samsung as long as you don't ever forget your
credentials. You could even delete your Samsung account once you set up
Secure Folder, though this would be pretty stupid.

Before Secure Folder was included with the Android versions used by
Samsung it had over a billion downloads.

You can learn more about it here:
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2020/08/01/this-samsung-security-app-has-passed-1-billion-downloads-heres-why-secure-folder-privacy/?sh=53b01cd73ac1>.

Hopefully you're willing to be educated on how Secure Folder works. No
one will think any less of you for admitting that you were in error.

On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 11:31:19 -0800, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

> I'm pretty sure that anyone who NEEDS to use the feature WILL use the
> feature regardless of what the rescue subsequently COSTS...

No, even in "the richest country of the world" (I mean USA)
people scream: "Please don't call an ambulance!", because they
can't afford that.

> ...you incredible simpleton.

That's a clear case of projection.
--
Kees Nuyt

Kees Nuyt wrote:

>> I'm pretty sure that anyone who NEEDS to use the feature WILL use the
>> feature regardless of what the rescue subsequently COSTS...
>
> No, even in "the richest country of the world" (I mean USA)
> people scream: "Please don't call an ambulance!", because they
> can't afford that.

While I have no objection to emergency communications, my main point is
that Apple uses a predation on fear as a fundamental marketing strategy.

If this was the only time Apple was a fear monger, I might let it slip.

However, I could likely list for an hour just offhand very many clearly
predatory practices Apple MARKETING has as their basic fear-mongering
strategy because Apple sells to desperate uneducated non-technical people
who are desperate for Apple to make them _feel_ safe.

It's Apple's main strategy of predating on fear which I wish to point out.
The problem is that it's only a _feeling_ of safety. Not actual safety.