More evidence we need far more privacy controls in mobile operating systems.
More evidence we need far more privacy controls in mobile operating systems.
I'm stoked about the Librem 5 project, and I hope it succeeds enough to not disappear in a couple years. I just bought a phone, but I'll likely buy the next rev if the first one works out. I don't need much from my phone, and as long as I can make/receive calls/texts, browse the web, and can get consistent security patches from the community (e.g. some Linux distro supports the platform outside of Purism), I'm happy.
Android and iOS already support privacy controls (and root to an extent), but you're usually at the mercy of the manufacturer for updates and have to trust them to not remotely access your phone. And many manufacturers just stop sending updates once their new model is out, which is unacceptable for most people for laptops and desktops, so I don't know why it's tolerated on phones and tablets...
MAIDSAFE network!
[1] https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-9941-how_facebook_tracks_you_on_...
Also there is F-Droid (only open source apps for Android) and the Yalp Store (alternative to Google Play with faked account so you don't have to own one).
Hacking my device like with jailbreak (iOS) or rooting (android) is not the way I want to have to go to feel secure and it's nothing I want to have to do before I think I can use my phone.
[1] https://forum.fairphone.com/t/list-of-fairly-fair-electronic...
Government regulation on telecom companies is the only way to ensure that there's even a line that they're required to toe.
Whoa!
LineageOS on a used android phone might be the better solution here.
Google/Apple have enough power etc. and I hope Librem5 will be here to show that it is possible to create a descent smartphone with a REAL linux (no, not android) under the hood.
Freedom is only real if you own & control it - not if someone tells you that you're free to go now (to rise the shares probably) ;-)
That was already proven possible with Ubuntu's smartphone adventure. What we need is a sustainable effort. We've managed on the desktop, hopefully the smartphone is possible too.
Of course there is the problem of all those proprietary IOS and Android only apps…
At a hackathon in 2012 our team in just a few hours built tech that would detect who you were standing next to or walking past, all while your phone is in your pocket - we were trying to build a tool that would replace exchanging business cards at conferences.
edit: Huh, turns out you can add a toggle. I can't believe I never noticed that, thanks!
In my case it's a longstanding habit from when I was told that GPS could drain battery faster :p (maybe it still? does, I don't know)
Turning it off/on would be difficult, but I do set most apps to only allow location services during use... but the maps I have set to always. I also don’t have the Facebook app installed
No idea if the app phones home with all historical location data if you re-enable data though...
Maybe that’s why Google likes to expire it’s offline maps ?
You're spending time and effort turning this on and off.
The rest of us don't.
If you estimate privacy risk as high, then you're naturally willing to make your life harder to avoid this risk, and you naturally come to regard those with lower risk estimates as reckless. Likewise, if you're in the other camp, privacy-preserving measures look like wastes of time and money.
It's hard to say at this point who's right. We haven't actually seen a lot of privacy-related disasters, the lack of which might seem to promote the low-risk camp, but the high-risk people would reply that the breaches that do occur will only become more damaging over time as we move online.
I'm not in the high-risk camp myself, but I do think that this camp has some valid points, since information is power, and power is ultimately a corrupting force. It should be easier to live a privacy-risk-mitigating lifestyle.
Sure you could just give in and "go with the flow" because that's what majority does and it's very convenient.
Also people as social beings want to belong to groups and doing the same stuff they do is the easiest way to gain access to groups.
That's the reason why so many use WA and FB and don't even care about their data. They already gave up and make fun about those who haven't.
If you have courage and a strong personality you can withstand this peer pressure. If you are cool enough there will be others to follow you. If not you can also learn to deal with that and in the end it's only necessary to have a few really good friends in your life.
TLDR; You gain more control over your life and strengthen your personality.
Have you ever tried putting yourself in the shoes of people who leave their GPS on? Can you see how much better the user experience is? Can you understand why someone who never had a negative experience involving their location data might prefer to leave their GPS on?
I leave my GPS on all the time. I love going back in time and see where I was at any given time. I can download the data and correlate it with a bunch of other metrics I keep track on. If it wasn't free, I would pay for it.
I'm not floored that you turn your GPS off. I've met many people just like you. Some of them had traumatic experiences in the past, others generally don't think other people are trustworthy. I can respect that. Just don't assume it's the default sentiment, because it's not.
Here's an interesting survey about trust:
https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/05/ssc-survey-results-on-...
I've worked in ad tech before. I used to write code to do some of this tracking and enable analytics on it. Nobody I worked with was out to antagonize users, but in principle I'd rather not feed a master profile about myself that gets matched, bought, and sold between companies and their partners. There's nothing controversial about my movement throughout the day but I feel better not being tracked.
> Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
turning gps on before i launch maps is 1 extra tap on the toggle on my home screen.
I think the one with a traumatic experience here is you - one that prevents you from seeing very basic logic for the use case of GPS off.
Google’s implementation looks really convenient but feels too creepy to me.
It's about the 1-3% who will f* you for being a naive sheep.
That is why we can't trust these corporations and that they get more powerful everyday doesn't ease my mind (accumulation until we only have "the shop").
The problem with our economy is the basis for that. In our world (at least in the west, can't really compare that to the east as I only know it from western propaganda) the biggest goal is MONEY (=POWER).
Ethics, environment and people just don't count in this equation (ok they do if you want to improve your image).
Sure that's not what majority of the people sees but also they don't know anything about computers & software and most of them probably haven't thought much about ethics & philosophy. Just because majority does something is not a very good argument (see lemmings).
Go fishing in a secluded area regularly to establish a pattern. Then go hide your phone there one day, do crime, come back and get phone.
At worst, you're somewhere unfortunate (doing something benign and unrelated) and someone brings you in for questioning about it. Wouldn't they do that in many cases even if your GPS was off (for example, from seeing you on cameras or other means)? It seems better to be able to bring in as many people as possible to get whatever information is needed to help with whatever situation was unfortunate in the first place.
If asked, it's not like you're going to lie and say you were somewhere else if your GPS was off. This way, you at least have proof you were exactly where you said you were.
I think it's pretty safe to say bad LEOs make the news because they're extremely rare, and the backlash against each one found signifies that the oversight exists to ensure they don't last long.
Tens of thousands of people confess to crimes is because they are given the option:
- 6 months for a plea bargain confession
- 10-20yrs if they "fight the charges" but get convicted in court
Many cannot afford expensive lawyers, so often times, the odds are stacked against them in court.
In more select scenarios, people confess to crimes they had nothing to do with because of pressure applied. One of many examples would be that of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Burge In summary: [Innocent person] + [cowprod electrocution] = [guilty confession]
Edit: flow
Looks like this, and I find it extremely awesome/useful: https://i.imgur.com/jxxjg1g.jpg
Proof: https://www.zdnet.com/article/us-cell-carriers-selling-acces...
And in Europe they can't sell or pass on personal data. They can aggregate it, and sell aggregated data (e.g. for transport planning purposes)
"This includes cell tower and cell sector location, assisted GPS and cell tower trilateration."
"This includes cell tower and cell sector location, assisted GPS and cell tower trilateration."
The article literally says "cell phone location data from nearby cell towers. It's less accurate than using GPS".
"This includes cell tower and cell sector location, assisted GPS and cell tower trilateration."
An internet search showed I was not alone with such problems, and that the solution was to manually revoke some permissions for the app (thankfully it was possible).
I find it amazing that an app can make use of the GPS when it's disabled! I'm actually seriously pissed about it, but there's not much I can do about it.
Also, the only non Android phones are essentially from Apple, and they are too big for my taste. (also, ridiculously expensive ; also, my wife uses iPhones, they all ended their (short) career with a swollen battery; not sure what she does with them)
For location also Wi-Fi is used. So GPS can be turned off but they can track your location by looking at the available Wi-Fi spots around you.
And most of the time you do not need to give the app permission to use the location to do route planning even in unfamiliar neighborhood. You can just input street name or public transport stops have logical unique identifiers.
But of course most people do give permission at some point because it is easier to do so and the app i nagging constantly for the permission.
Unfortunately I believe there's not much users can do other than stopping using Facebook and any of their and similar products for good, then keep being alert because tracking people is both a business for companies and a tool for governments to suppress dissent, so anyone involved in any technology related to communications will inevitably be incentivized to implement anti-privacy features.