Hacker News Reader

Comment by mattmaroon | Hacker News Reader

This is idiotic. For one, it's no secret which apps are popular. Facebook doesn't need a trojan horse to figure that out, they just need to look at App Annie.

For another, any app with location services permissions can do exactly what he's describing.

Also what does "Android allows Facebook to do whatever it wants on the platform, and that means accessing the hardware as well," mean? Unless you're rolling your own version of Android (is that what's on the HTC First?) that's simply not true. You have access to a few things you don't on iOS but it's not "whatever you want" if you're putting it in the Play app store.

As far as I can tell this is just another third party launcher with the same privacy implications as any app that has GPS permissions.

View on HN

> As far as I can tell this is just another third party launcher with the same privacy implications as any app that has GPS permissions.

Except for the part where no other app collects or maintains anywhere near as much data about your personal history, your friends, what you look like, what your friends look like, what you like, what your friends like, who you talk to, what you talk about, what your friends talk about, which services you subscribe to, where you went to school, where you worked, when you worked, when you graduated, when you began a relationship, when you ended a relationship, your sexual preferences...

I could keep going.

Facebook already has that data and gives most of it away via connect to third parties with a click. If you're already using Facebook, and using location-based apps, then getting upset over this is silly.

You're free to feel any way you'd like. I don't have a strong opinion.

That said – Facebook's long record of privacy over-reaches is well established. My hunch is that given the high value a smartphone, and its data, has in people's lives, a position of caution is probably a lot more reasonable than plugging one's ears and saying "Everything is going to be just fine."

Software is changeable. Who knows what they'll do once they're entrenched.

Who knows what will become possible.

Well, any other app could. Facebook is not exclusive in having access to this information, they're just one of the few asking you for it. Every other app could ask for it as well.

> Every other app could ask for it as well.

They really couldn't. Facebook benefits from network effects they've spent years building. You pour data into Facebook because your friends are there. Other apps would find the same data much harder to collect at scale.

Regardless, this isn't a hypothetical could situation. Facebook is real. And Facebook does these things. More successfully than anyone else. And now they want to saddle up on your phone's most-used piece of UI. All that data, floating past that one crucial screen. Now.

That's a big responsibility for a company with a less-than-stellar track record on privacy.

I agree with OM, Facebook Home is not just one app but a suite of apps running on your phone. The scary part is that these would be bundled by OEM's and might be harder to stop and even uninstall :( Think about the scenarios when you start to see all kinds of ad's popping up on your home screen and impossible to remove? . Remember, fb still needs to solve the problem of serving ad's on mobile well.

Exactly, this is "the money quote":

"The scary part is that these would be bundled by OEM's and might be harder to stop and even uninstall".

I don't see how an informed consumer can't avoid this. I really started to dislike OEM's and decided to go Nexus. The number of bundled apps that went dead (Blockbuster went bankrupt and yet I was stuck with that app) or unsupported just drove me away.

I understand that now instead of worrying about unsupported apps you have to worry about what these apps track in the background, however there are a number of other phone options - why not just use another?

The appeal of this Launcher is there, it seems like a fairly clean interface that is satisfying to use, but like Facebook.com, if you don't feel comfortable using it, then you don't have to.

Not to mention most OEMs put a custom launcher of some sort on their Android devices already and pretty much always have. I don't see Facebook as being any more odious than Samsung just because they know I like The Black Keys and Mad Men too. My phone's manufacturer could collect much more personal information about me than Facebook does. For all I know they're recording all my calls and uploaded them somewhere.

Really it's just so easy in the tech blog world to get page views by decrying whatever Facebook does as an invasion of privacy and that's what Om is doing. He should be ashamed for writing such a brainless piece of linkbait.

Once again, "Black Keys and Mad Men" is different to "your personal history, your friends, what you look like, what your friends look like, what you like, what your friends like, who you talk to, what you talk about, what your friends talk about, which services you subscribe to, where you went to school, where you worked, when you worked, when you graduated, when you began a relationship, when you ended a relationship, your sexual preferences..."

Facebook doesn't need any apologists, least of all from the HN community. Whether the article is linkbait or not, Facebook does need constant critique. Om Malik points out that Facebook Home means a new kind of persistent data-gathering wrapped in a trendy (?) skin that most facebook users will want to try out. It is bad enough that a billion people blithely use their web and phone apps without them having something that sinks its hooks in deeper

This wasn't a useful critique though, it was idiotic scaremongering. If the article gave some useful reasons why you maybe shouldn't install this (they can track your movements and sell ads to people near you in real time) that'd be one thing. But it was idiocy like "they'll see what apps you use and clone them!" or gibberish like "they can access the hardware!"

It's pure linkbait and Om should be ashamed for writing something so poor.

Many of those are only known by Facebook if you explicitly fill out the information - and while I hate to be cynical, if folks who use Facebook at this point in time don't realize that this data is collected then shame on them.

Facebook is consistently under a giant lens and receives critiques with every step it takes. Instead of actually taking some rational side to the argument, Om simply scaremongers.

Nexus has over a dozen force-installed apps (mostly the Play suite these days, but that keeps growing all the time -- a dedicated Magazine store, WTF?)

> I don't see how an informed consumer can't avoid this.

"Informed consumers" make up (at a guess) less than 5% of the overall smartphone market, for some value of being informed about online privacy.

Privacy advocates should raise hell about the potential issues of a facebook-image smartphone now if there's any chance of increasing awareness of the issues outside of "privacy enthusiast" circles.

> "Informed consumers" make up (at a guess) less than 5% of the overall smartphone market, for some value of being informed about online privacy.

This 'Online Privacy' I've seen thrown around is such a general term that encapsulates both explicit and anonymous data. Facebook isn't outing people or sharing your phone number with anyone who asks for it. Much of what they do with the data is provide contextual ads or information to a user that helps improve their lives as well.

Until people realize this separation, there is too much of a witch hunt in the name of 'online privacy.'

> I don't see how an informed consumer can't avoid this.

So it's fine because less than 10% of all people can avoid it?

Take a step out of your tech-bubble for a moment (or maybe a bit longer, it's really educational).

A side-related example. Most people that aren't really into tech, as well as most people outside the age range of, say, 14-40, are completely unable to avoid accidentally installing browser toolbars. These are not dumb people. They know what toolbars are, how they get on their system, and what to look out for. Still, it happens. Because, oops. But they are unable to get rid of them, because even if they knew where to look, they wouldn't know which of the installed programs would be safe to remove.

That's just an example, because it's just something in particular I see all the time, right now. Shit that happens to otherwise really clever and smart people. And it's even worse when I see it happen to more vulnerable parts of the population.

This is the sort of thing that inspires whitehat hackers to do what they do. I recall that RSnake of the discontinued ha.ckers.org weblog, spoke about how this motivated him in the fight against XSS and other browser-based attacks, even if it was "just" about really silly misleading "social engineering trick" type of attacks that a smart (tech-smart) person would never fall for, but your mother or grandmother might!

So yeah, good for you. But really, this discussion isn't about you, do you really think the people in this thread are getting upset because they fear they themselves cannot avoid this? No, this bothers me because my mom is on Facebook and uses it on her mobile phone, my less-technical friends are on Facebook, the children that I teach and their definitely-not-technical parents are on Facebook!

I see your point.

I guess I failed to go into the fact my various purchasing practices were just how I was raised. My father, mother and grandmother would do the same thing as I would. Of course, you're still right in a larger sense: that doesn't help those that weren't raised by my parents.

This is a perfect opportunity for consumer advocate groups to step in and inform people. I don't see how each of us being critical of such a move does anything to help those that would otherwise not have the education about potential privacy issues. I do what I can when friends and family ask me for purchasing advice and I take it very seriously. I keep myself informed in a way that others may not.

I don't want to say I'm changing the world, but really, technology is going to progress, this Launcher is extremely unique and could see quite a few copy cats going the same route (most likely without the support of a major hardware manufacturer) - this is an extremely good potential teaching moment for those that would otherwise not know. I'm just doing what I can to help those that ask for it.

We can't trust the sales people because frankly, they seem less informed than even the average consumer - they just want to sell you the latest phone and renew that 2-year contract. But there are quite a few organizations out there that could probably use more support and increase the proper awareness.

I'm just always of the school that the responsibility is ultimately on the individual, so anything to help that individual make the best and most educated decision is something I think will always lead towards the best results.

> So yeah, good for you. But really, this discussion isn't about you, do you really think the people in this thread are getting upset because they fear they themselves cannot avoid this? No, this bothers me because my mom is on Facebook and uses it on her mobile phone, my less-technical friends are on Facebook, the children that I teach and their definitely-not-technical parents are on Facebook!

Not sure why you need to take this sort of tone, and I also don't see what's inherently wrong with people using Facebook in the first place. If people want quicker access to an App they use all the time in a pretty slick looking interface then then let them consume. Do your part and answer any potential questions they may have and perhaps even interject some technical opinion (without going over the line into lecturing, of course) to help raise their awareness.

FB was already pre-installed and non-removable on many Anroid devices (including first-party Google devices!), so that's not a big change.

Recent Android versions include the ability to disable built-in applications. I've got an S3, and I've successfully disabled all of the bundled stuff I don't want as well as most of TouchWiz. There are some Samsung services I can't disable, but they're bits that are non-UI or are hot-swapable and that would break the phone if disabled but not replaced. The stock keyboard and the TouchWiz launcher fall into this category, neither of which I see unless I go out of my way to re-enable them.

My phone didn't come with Facebook installed, although it did have a link in the accounts section to install the application.

If you really care, root your phone and then you can get rid of anything with Titanium Backup. Or you can do what I do and just install CyanogenMod on it. (Both are admittedly too much effort for the general public but not much for many people here.)

Exactly, I don't see this any more privacy invasive than Google Now.

It really boils down to how much you trust the company/app.

Yeah, google know your home and where your workplace is but doesn't publish it to everyone. Facebook did that with a lot of information. Plus it may change how things behave without you agreement (think of @facebook.com emails)

Google also use that data to provide a service (automatically call the navigation app to came back home at night or just give you a reminder on places you go every week). I doon't think facebook will give any kind of service other than keep my friens updated about whatever I do and wherever I go and this is frightening (not the fact that a big company has this data but the fact that everyone will know it)

Facebook doesn't publish that information for me.

It's PAINFULLY EASY to mark that information private, and to go into the Platform settings and make sure your friends "cannot bring your information with them into apps and websites".

It's two screens and takes about thirty seconds for you to control your Facebook and how much data leaves it.

Seriously guys, don't blame Facebook for your incompetence with their privacy settings.

A few years ago it was easy to blame Facebook for their privacy settings. They would make a privacy change and override your previous settings. Then the federal government stepped in and forced them to honor your explicitly chosen settings.

Why would you trust any company of that size?

Why would you trust a smaller company, that lacks the talent and funds to audit its staff and partners or secure its databases?

I agree. Besides, most people who use Facebook are those "I have nothing to hide" types.

So? I still care about major parts of a society being that recklessly dumb. I live on this planet, it's my problem, too. I cannot afford to live in a "democracy" full of people who are so easily influenced and/or blackmailed. Their votes count as much as mine, so this is a bug.

How do you blackmail someone who has nothing to hide?

Even people with nothing to hide can suffer the effects of making a mistake:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57565408-71/teacher-faces-...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1354515/Teacher-sack...

By making them suddenly realize that they do, in fact, have things they would rather keep private.

>>As far as I can tell this is just another third party launcher with the same privacy implications as any app that has GPS permissions.

No, it doesn't. I was, till recently, using Nova Launcher and its permissions would pale in comparison with Facebook Messenger's permissions. Mind it, I am not mentioning the full fledged Facebook app here but just the messenger. I am just uninstalling it, to hell with those in my friend list who have virtually ditched all other communication media.(never looked at it's permissions before today)

Why, when WhatsApp and all other apps might be doing it(not mentioning any G app)? Track record. Facebook is a history-sheeter when it comes to privacy and the pledge to keep repeating their act is their business model. Otherwise Google already has everything I do.

>>You have access to a few things you don't on iOS but it's not "whatever you want"

Though it's technically true, the whatever you want part; but the part "have access to a few things you don't on iOS" is such an understatement that it leans towards being a bs.

What's the privacy difference between G+ and FB?

FB is utterly careless with your data

For all we know, the difference between google and facebook here is simply maturity of the company, and as facebook matures, it's very possible that they'll recant their privacy evilness, to the extent that they can.

Here's what I mean by that last part: the facebook site/service are all about poking holes in your own privacy (in a controlled manner); it's just that currently, you might be carefully letting out bits of information, but facebook is off to the side hawking all of it to all comers, trying to be profitable.

But yeah I agree, at its current stage of gestation as a company, facebook doesn't give a rat's ass about the privacy of your data.

>>For all we know, the difference between google and facebook here is simply maturity of the company

Facebook is not some new company struggling to find its way in the world. It's huge.

Nor is it new. Google was started in 1998; Facebook in 2004. So Google is 15 and Facebook is 9.

Is that such a big difference? Has Google ever behaved the way Facebook has?

Facebook has faced multiple privacy scandals. It has not said, "whoops, that was an oversight, we'll ensure it never happens again." It has said "meh," and waited for people to get over it.

This is not about maturity, this is about philosophy and character. Facebook's business model is about harvesting and exploiting your data. They are doing that deliberately, and they're more likely to go out of business than to change.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com