Applehas released another category-defining product but not in the way it wouldve wanted.
While Apple has come under fire for the releasing the product, AirTags operate in a gray area.
40% off TNW Conference!
This raises a number of questions.
How do they compare to other trackers on the market?
And what is Apples responsibility after releasing such a product?
Its impossible to overlook the impact a company of Apples size has on individual behavior.
Tile, a smaller company that makes a similar product, doesnt have to contend with worries like this.
But thats not where the differences between Apple and it stop.
AirTags operate via a Bluetooth mesh web link, specifically Apples Find My infrastructure.
This technology in itself isnt novel.
Again,Tile does something similar.
And although we dont have.
While the Cupertino-based company arguably makes the most efficient Bluetooth-first trackers, the technology itself contains fundamental flaws.
GPS units hardware that use satellite-based radionavigation can provide precise information on someones location.
This gives bad actors unprecedented access and knowledge of victims movements.
This is not to say AirTags arent accurate.
As Moore says, Apples trackers are accurate enough to find out where someone broadly is.
For example, at home or the gym which in many cases is sufficient.
Another area of differentiation between Bluetooth and satellite-based trackers is battery life.
ProPrivacys Dawson told me that while GPS devices have greater coverage, their operation is more energy intensive.
Apple has taken this danger into account.
Yet these safety features havent been enough.
To be fair to it, Apple has shown a capacity and desire to address these issues.
When the latter features will launch is currently unknown, but its slated to be later in 2022.
Wood told me itd be interesting to see if these new measures will assuage concerns.
Despite this, he [fears] this will be an ongoing issue with AirTags.
Apples eagerness for improving the AirTags is admirable, but is also substantially flawed.
Many of the aforementioned safety features, such as phone alerts, only work by default on Apple devices.
In other words, the burden of responsibility is on the potential victims.
The question is whether this level of accountability is fair to lay at Apples feet.
And what of GPS trackers?
Dawson engaged in this argument.
In essence, AirTags do not replace GPS trackers for long-term surveillance, he told me.
On paper, Apples technology is little or no more dangerous than other easily available tracking products.
Despite this, it must bear the responsibility of the two main things AirTags launch has enabled.
The first is Apple gave potential criminals another tool in their arsenal.
And the second is it has normalized and popularized trackers in a way weve never seen before.
With this, comes abuse.
This is where we get to the crux of the matter.
Asking whether AirTags are more or less dangerous than other trackers is the wrong question.
Its undeniable that AirTags have pushed trackers mainstream and made them more accessible, but this works both ways.
We cant overlook the companys role, nor can we condemn it entirely.
Digital support is alsoavailable via live chatMonday-Friday 3-10pm GMT.
If youre in the US, you’re able to connectthe National Center for Victims of Crime.
They are available to call on +1 202 467 8700.
