My Location the Next Google Privacy Controversy?

theodp writes "While Google boasts one of its Privacy Principles is making the collection of personal information transparent, even techies are left guessing about what's going on behind the scenes of certain products. The American Dictator points out that Google's Wi-Fi collection efforts don't stop with its Street View cars, offering up this explanation of Google's My Location: 'When you allow Google to "know your location," what you are really agreeing to is to send to Google's computers your Wi-Fi environment — not only the name of the Wi-Fi hotspot you are logged into, but also the names and signal strengths of every Wi-Fi hotspot around you. In other words, the same things that those Google Street View cars were sucking up as they drove by your house.' So, will changes in privacy attitude prompt changes in Latitude?"

Comments

Not unusual

[Miros]

This method of radio-location is not special or unusual in any way. If anything, it is rather common and not even innovative on google's part. Several firms have exited for _years_ which focus on location based services as determined by nearby hotspots. Also, Latitude is littered with warnings about the nature of the service, and the fact that your location information will be sent back to Google. Of course, this is even less interesting when you consider the fact that your cell phone carrier already knows all of this information all the time and always has, which nobody makes any fuss about whatsoever.

That information is all being broadcast.

[John Hasler]

That makes it public. Google is merely asking you to forward some public information to them. You may, if you wish, decline.

Re:That information is all being broadcast.

[gad_zuki!]

Not to mention the summary is a troll. What google did wrong with its earlier program was actually capture unencrypted packets. These location services (google is not the only one) simply create a database of wifi names and correlate them to GPS. I don't see the problem here. If you dont want me to write down your hotspot's ssid then I suggest you stop broadcasting it.

Re:That information is all being broadcast.

[NevarMore]

Not quite. While the SSID's are public information, the signal strength relative to me isn't. That's something you have to be me to know or at least be standing next to me. I hardly call that public information.

It's broadcast, it's measurable by just about anyone, you don't have to be on private property or in a private building to detect it. I'd say that information is public.

Re:That information is all being broadcast.

[Anonymous Coward]

Eh, I honestly don't know about that. It's happening in public, but does that make it public in a narrow sense?

Imagine you're chatting with a friend while you're walking down the street. Is it OK if anybody records your conversation (perhaps even without your knowledge and/or approval), stores it indefinitely, and does - well - basically anything they want with it? Is it OK if it's being sold or otherwise passed on? Is it OK if private companies do this? Your employer? The government?

I'm not sure where the line should be drawn, but "it's happening in public, therefore anything and everything is automatically fair game" strikes me as overly simplistic.

Re:It's astonishing how people don't understand ra

[Anonymous Coward]

How many people have scanners these days?
How many people have the Internet?

Now do you understand why there might be concern about putting the dispatches in a central location on the Internet?

There are a lot of idiots out there, and they can really waste your time. That really is the biggest pitfall of open information, imo.