Apple Wants To Share Your Location With Others

Farhood sends in this snip from the LA Times: "In an updated version of its privacy policy, the company added a paragraph noting that once users agree, Apple and unspecified 'partners and licensees' may collect and store user location data. When users attempt to download apps or media from the iTunes store, they are prompted to agree to the new terms and conditions. Until they agree, they cannot download anything through the store. The company says the data is anonymous and does not personally identify users. Analysts have shown, however, that large, specific data sets can be used to identify people based on behavior patterns." Mashable and The Consumerist have picked up on this collection and sharing of "precise location data, including the real-time geographic location of your Apple computer or device."

Comments

Beh

[Hognoxious]

s/share/sell/

s/with/to/

Re:Beh

[sonnejw0]

Except you can opt out at http://oo.apple.com/ on your iOS4 Device.

Re:Beh

[koiransuklaa]

That's the opt-out page for targeted iAds. What does it have to do with this story?

Re:Beh

[jo_ham]

The location data collection is part of the iAds framework.

You can also just turn off location services, or control what apps can use it. Whether this will affect what the core OS does is another matter.

Re:Beh

[koiransuklaa]

The TOS definitely talks about these features totally separately: the Opt-out service is described like this "If you do not want to receive ads with this level of relevance on your mobile device, you can opt out...". It doesn't say you won't be tracked...

Re:Beh

[TheSpoom]

And one of their licensees just happens to be the FBI.

Re:Beh

[jo_ham]

That is true, which does raise some legitimate concerns: if I turn off location services entirely, does Apple still track me?

I do not know.

Re:Beh

[mcsqueak]

I always have location services off because I don't often need the GPS... I just turn it on when I need to use it with the Maps app. However, I imagine they can still get a pretty good fix on where you are at by triangulating the cellular signal, or even turning on "location services" silently in the background when they need a better fix on the location (I wouldn't put it past them).

Re:Beh

[node 3]

And you know this because...?

This privacy policy looks pretty much like it's in reference to the fact that the iPhone (and to a lesser extent, Mac OS X/Safari, using geolocation with IP addresses) can report where you are.

So, for example, when you look up your location with the Maps app on the iPhone, Apple, by definition, has to transmit your location to Google. They are just disclosing this explicitly instead of just assuming the pop-up dialog box, as well as just the fact that this has to happen to show your location on a map to begin with, is enough to clue you in.

And, of course, iOS will tell other apps (all must request this, even Apple's own apps) where you are, if they ask. These, the built in Maps app, and iAds, are almost certainly what this is about. It would be strange for Jobs to make such a big deal about privacy and add features to iOS 4 to make sure you know when you're being tracked, just to blatantly spy on you otherwise.

Or maybe not, I don't know. But it's far more rational than thinking that Apple is going to spy on you, and hand your location over to whoever asks/pays (such as the FBI, like the troll above claimed). Hell, the fact that they state the information won't be personally identifiable pretty much negates any value the data would be to an organization like the FBI in the first place.

The funny thing is, it looks like Apple is trying to be completely honest about their privacy policy (unlike how online services tend to be, with all the blundering by Facebook, for example, or the statements from people like Scott McNealy and Eric Schmidt about privacy, etc.), and the honesty is biting them in the ass, whereas instead if they just kept their mouth shut, they could do much worse (i.e., what the tinfoilers here are imagining) and nobody would ever know.

Re:Beh

[TheSpoom]

tl;dr: I was joking. There's a bunch in your post that's inaccurate though, like the idea that this has anything at all to do with individual apps sending data to arbitrary servers, rather that iOS itself sending data to Apple. Read the article again... or don't, since ignorance seems to be bliss for you.

Re:Beh

[Hognoxious]

There's a place where the Starbucks are four blocks apart? Where is it - I'm going to move there!

Isn't this exactly what we lambaste Google for?

[mjwx]

Isn't this exactly what we lambaste Google for?

In an updated version of its privacy policy, the company added a paragraph noting that once users agree, Apple and unspecified 'partners and licensees' may collect and store user location data.

Well not quite, Google does not explicitly state they are planning on selling your data.

When users attempt to download apps or media from the iTunes store, they are prompted to agree to the new terms and conditions. Until they agree, they cannot download anything through the store.

Does anyone still wonder why it is bad to be beholden to a single supply chain?

So Apple does not want you to have freedom or respects your privacy.

Re:Isn't this exactly what we lambaste Google for?

[dmbasso]

Naive. :)

A very good friend once told me: "If you put your balls in their hands, don't complain if they decide to squeeze them". That was almost ten years ago, and he was referring to Microsoft, but see how it fits perfectly with a lot of companies, including Apple.

Re:Isn't this exactly what we lambaste Google for?

[goombah99]

It's not necessarily the same thing that google does.

When you install an app that uses location data then the app almost certainly already knows exactly who you are, no inferences needed. So the question is not if apps are accessing your location data but if apple is downloading it to the mothership and selling this to third parties whose apps you did not purchase. However there that daya may or may not be processed before handing over. For example, if they hand over a string of locations and times you visit (the bagel shop, starbucks, the metro, the work place, the home then that associated sequence probably nails you uniquely. If they instead hand over a historgram of city block vistis that aggregate over all users and don't link the records then this data will be fairly anonymous aside from edge cases (e.g. perhaps they can figure out you are indeed the bridge tender on the brooklyn bridge.) So it depends on what level of correlation they are handing over and if it's to third parties or apps that you installed.

Every time I install a googls chrome plugin I cringe cause it tells me it needs access to my browsing history and bookmarks. But then I relax slightly because at least I'm choosing to install this not have it handed over to third parties. What I worry more about is the google searches themselves. that string of associates goes to google and I suspect they are indeed correlating these.

Re:Isn't this exactly what we lambaste Google for?

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

Yeah... I think I'm going to go ahead and blame apple anyway.

Re:Isn't this exactly what we lambaste Google for?

[bdsesq]

How about a histogram of when you and your SO are NOT at home. A little burglary anyone?

Re:Isn't this exactly what we lambaste Google for?

[HermMunster]

You have to be kidding. Over the past two years they have done nothing but erode trust. It started when they removed DRM from itunes but started inserting customer information into the downloaded files (and they did this without informing the customer). Then there are the slew of things that they have done to cripple their competitors with anti-competitive measures, have dictated what we as the end user should and should not be able to do with the devices we own. They began this by raping us on the price of the original iPhone (while subsidized they were still charging $600). They've continued with their nonsensical rants about the death of the PC, with their persecution of a journalist by seducing REACT to act upon a lost iPhone (that had already been returned) and seizing the journalists records in violation of the the federal shield laws), with their extremely restrictive developer license that doesn't allow the developer to write programs using but the tools they develop and sell (all the while making totally lame excuses for doing so), with their utter bullshit about HTML5 and their public disrespect of Adobe while talking trash about one of their products that drives 75% of the video on the web, about their threats against open source products due to their heavy patent investment in h.264. We can continue this. Stop freaking buying Apple products. There are many good alternatives to everything, especially their desktop computers (which are just cheap PC inside glitzy aluminum shells).

I say to you, get real.

Re:Isn't this exactly what we lambaste Google for?

[shutdown -p now]

That was almost ten years ago, and he was referring to Microsoft, but see how it fits perfectly with a lot of companies

This applies to every single company or individual you're ever doing business with. It's just that there are very few that people even allow to handle their balls to begin with.

Re:Isn't this exactly what we lambaste Google for?

[node 3]

So Apple does not want you to have freedom or respects your privacy.

They don't want you to have freedom? How so? They control one aspect of their phone. I guess Sony and Microsoft don't want me to have freedom? Or my local grocer doesn't, either, right?

Or maybe you don't want Apple to have the freedom to control the quality of their products, or me the freedom to choose a superior product?

As for not respecting your privacy, they:

1. Tell you what they are doing, unlike other sites and services.
2. Let you opt out (not only from iAds, using oo.apple.com, but also in the phone itself, by either turning Location Services off entirely, or on an app-by-app basis, as each app must first ask before it can access your location).
3. Updating iOS to show you exactly when your location is being accessed, and give you a list of apps that accessed it in the past 24 hours, as well as the ability to revoke permission to any app you wish.

It looks to me like they are actually respecting our privacy, while still providing services which can make use of it. It's a lot like the DRM that used to be on music from the iTunes Store. Sure, it was DRM and that's potentially bad, but in order to get music in the first place, they had to have DRM, which they implemented in a way that was pretty much invisible to the user, and respected their ownership of the music as best as possible, while still being DRMed. In a similar fashion, Location Services allows for a lot of the promise of such a service, like being able to map your route or obtain local information, while doing what they can to keep it from tracking their users in a personal and trouble manner.

Re:Isn't this exactly what we lambaste Google for?

[azalin]

What about a muggers interface for this? You could even write an App for "your" (the last owner didn't really need it anyway) IPhone so it tells you the location of other "revenue sources" around you.
Or the stalker App (also runs on your basement desktop pc), or the "more than 5 IPhones per 10m^2, so let's drop something" addon for flying drones, or the ...

sigh.

Re:Isn't this exactly what we lambaste Google for?

[mjwx]

They don't want you to have freedom? How so? They control one aspect of their phone. I guess Sony and Microsoft don't want me to have freedom? Or my local grocer doesn't, either, right?

Explain?

If you buy a Sony TV, does Sony decide who your PayTV provider is and what channels you are permitted to subscibe to? Apple does this on the Iphone.

Does your local grocer prevent you from buying groceries from a different grocer? Apple does this on the Iphone.

Does Microsoft prevent you from installing software from non-MS approved sources on Windows? Apple does this on the Iphone.

Apple does not control one aspect of the Iphone, Apple controls all aspects of the Iphone. Your rant makes no sense.

2. Let you opt out (not only from iAds, using oo.apple.com, but also in the phone itself, by either turning Location Services off entirely, or on an app-by-app basis, as each app must first ask before it can access your location).

Didn't read the article did you. This isn't tied to iAd and includes more then just location services. Further more you cannot install anything from Itunes until you agree to the updated terms and conditions and Apple does not permit you to install from anything other then Itunes.

3. Updating iOS to show you exactly when your location is being accessed, and give you a list of apps that accessed it in the past 24 hours, as well as the ability to revoke permission to any app you wish.

1. But this doesnt tell you who Apple have given the data to.
2. Many programs will refuse to work if not given permission.
3. Apple have the ability to override your settings.

Your reasons also do not make sense, I suppose at least it's consistent.

It looks to me like they are actually respecting our privacy,

By selling your data to third parties. What colour is the sky in your world?

Re:Isn't this exactly what we lambaste Google for?

[node 3]

If you buy a Sony TV, does Sony decide who your PayTV provider is and what channels you are permitted to subscibe to? Apple does this on the Iphone.

PS3.

Does your local grocer prevent you from buying groceries from a different grocer? Apple does this on the Iphone.

The grocer decides what they will offer for sale.

Does Microsoft prevent you from installing software from non-MS approved sources on Windows? Apple does this on the Iphone.

Xbox 360.

Just because Sony has TVs that aren't tied to their services, and MS doesn't lock down Windows like they do the Xbox, that doesn't mean they don't also do that on their other products. Otherwise, I could just as easily respond with, "Does Apple prevent you from installing software from non-Apple approved sources on Mac OS X? MS does this on the xbox!"

As for the grocer, just like with the iPhone, if you don't want the products they offer, you go somewhere else. I'm unaware of anyone who is required to buy an iPhone.

Apple does not control one aspect of the Iphone, Apple controls all aspects of the Iphone. Your rant makes no sense.

Bullshit. They control the store. The claim that Apple "controls all aspects of the Iphone [sic]" makes the term "control" meaningless. If Apple controls everything about the iPhone (for example, they control what music I can listen to? What web pages I can visit?), then so does MS with Windows.

The only thing they control, actually go out of their way to exert control over, is the products they carry in their store. Anything else they control is just normal, like whether it will ship with support for Flash, or whether it's locked to a specific carrier.

1. But this doesnt tell you who Apple have given the data to.

YES IT DOES. The app is listed right there in the preferences. It does it right there when it asks. You're right that the little arrow doesn't say which app is using it, and if you've used a bunch of different location-aware apps and are using a handful at the moment, you may not know for sure which one is accessing your location, but that's not really a problem. If it's a problem for you, just reset location permissions and see which app asks.

2. Many programs will refuse to work if not given permission.

So what? Don't run the app then. This isn't something Apple is doing, it's the app developer. And perhaps you have some examples in mind? Because the only apps that I'm aware of that won't work without your location are those that either logically, or legally, need it. Specifically, mapping apps (and even those will run, they just won't be able to show you where you are) and apps where TV content is streamed (thus requiring you to be in a specific geographic region).

3. Apple have the ability to override your settings.

They don't. I mean, sure, because they wrote the OS, they can write it to override your settings, but there's absolutely no indication whatsoever that they've done so, except for any legal requirements pertaining to E911 regulations (which isn't Apple-specific, all handsets must follow these regulations, and I don't think they actually have to give exact GPS coordinates, just cell-tower info).

It looks to me like they are actually respecting our privacy,

By selling your data to third parties. What colour is the sky in your world?

Citation?

Re:Isn't this exactly what we lambaste Google for?

[mjwx]

PS3.

How does the PS3 decide which stores I am and am not allowed to buy from? Sorry but you fail here.

The grocer decides what they will offer for sale.

But I have the choice to go to a different grocer, or talk to the distributors directly. I'm not beholden to a single distribution source. You fail here also.

Xbox 360.

See PS3. Fail number three for you.

Bullshit. They control the store.

And what runs on the device, and what browser you use, and what mail client you use, and what UI the developers are allowed to use. It's almost like they control everything. I mean it's not like you can't install an alternate browser from the web on an Iphone, no wait... you cant.

This isn't something Apple is doing, it's the app developer.

And when Apple is the developer. Itunes will refuse to let you install applications if you dont agree to Apple's terms and conditions. So it really is Apple's doing.

Citation?

Citation, taken from the summary

To provide location-based services on Apple products, Apple and our partners and licensees may collect, use, and share precise location data, including the real-time geographic location of your Apple computer or device. This location data is collected anonymously in a form that does not personally identify you and is used by Apple and our partners and licensees to provide and improve location-based products and services. For example, we may share geographic location with application providers when you opt in to their location services.

Some location-based services offered by Apple, such as the MobileMe "Find My iPhone" feature, require your personal information for the feature to work.

. So what colour is the sky in your world.

At least they tell you..

[onion2k]

What the update means is that they've relaxed the application vetting so apps that use the geolocation API aren't scrutinised as much as they used to be. Apple are telling users that apps can, and will, collect and store your location data, and that they're not going to stop them even if there's no reason for the app to be doing it. The app will still ask you if you want to share your location as it always has done.

Who tells you that might be happening if you have an Android phone? Or if you install a browser that enables the geolocation services of HTML 5 on your PC (eg http://html5demos.com/geo )? No one. They don't have to. They can't really, because there isn't a "gatekeeper" controlling it all.

Re:At least they tell you..

[MrHanky]

It's different from Google like this: Quoting Cory Doctorow: "This is different from Android, in that Google does not gather your information unless you opt in, and if you do opt in, you can opt out later.

"By contrast, Apple gathers your information without asking you to opt in, and does not present you with the option of opting out.

"What's more, Apple is presenting these new terms retrospectively. People who bought iPads and iPods on the understanding that they could be used without having their location information gathered and shared now find that they *must* allow this information to be gathered and shared (I suppose you could try not updating iTunes, but then you would also have to not upgrade your OS -- OS upgrades come with iTunes upgrades -- and be prepared to be locked out of the app store, and since Apple's use of DRM prevents third parties from putting apps on your devices, you're fundamentally abandoning any hope of loading any code, even third-party code, onto your iPad and iPod)."

Of course, he may or may not be correct.

Re:At least they tell you..

[mrsurb]

Read the parent that you're responding to! His point is that Apple is applying these terms to people AFTER they have bought the phone. It's an automatic opt-in unless you want to go to a lot of effort to sit outside Apple's walled garden, at which point you lose a big proportion of the value of the phone that you have already paid for.

For new customers, sure it's opt-in/opt-out, buy Apple or not. But if you do, don't be surprised at the next swift one that Apple pulls.

Re:At least they tell you..

[robmv]

When installing an Android application, the system warns you about the privileges you are granting, one of them is fine (GPS) and coarse (network based) location information so you can refuse to install it. There are a lot of applications I do not install for that same reason, applications that based on their functionality do not need my location

Re:At least they tell you..

[silanea]

Which part of "retroactive" needs to be explained to you? They change the license not just for new customers but also for existing users, effectively rendering their devices useless as far as many advertised features are concerned unless they agree to the new terms.

Re:At least they tell you..

[AHuxley]

Apple is doing a Sony, kowtow to new "options".

Re:At least they tell you..

[Deus.1.01]

Whether you agree to be put under slavery or not its still a pretty shitty gig that you should avoid by any standard.

*before someone have to ask; no I don't think buying Apple products is on the same level as voluntary slavery.

Re:At least they tell you..

[MrHanky]

Certainly. But people really need to be made aware that they should not buy from Apple if they don't want to be spied on. Don't you agree?

Of course you don't: if you did, you wouldn't cough up that bullshit pseudoargument of "don't buy it if you don't like it" (i.e.: "stop complaining, as no one forces you to buy it").

Re:At least they tell you..

[MrHanky]

"Opting out applies only to Apple advertising services and does not affect" the collection and dissemination of location data.

Re:At least they tell you..

[Xest]

"Who tells you that might be happening if you have an Android phone? Or if you install a browser that enables the geolocation services of HTML 5 on your PC (eg http://html5demos.com/geo )? No one. They don't have to."

Wrong. Each time you install an Android app, before accepting installation you've given a run down of what permissions the app requires, this includes things like internet access, or making phone calls, but also includes things like judging your rough location using cell masts etc., or judging your fine grained location using GPS. Regarding Google services doing geolocation, that's an option you'll get first time you turn your phone on and can easily change in the menus later if you choose if it has the Google apps pre-installed. I'm not sure why you think they can't stop it on Android, because Android has a marketplace too and all but the most technical users who know the risks anyway use this path for installing apps.

As for IP based geolocation on a PC, frankly I could care less. Even if I'm not using a VPN or something the best they can do is judge my location to be in an area large enough to contain a population of 20 million people. Apart from telling my country that's largely useless information, and that's all it's really used for as it's all that it can be used for, certainly it's not really enough to track you as an individual over and above what your IP already allows.

Re:At least they tell you..

[kangsterizer]

You're missing the point dear fanboy nr 9283476573,5 (yeah you're a half person, at least these numbers say so! sry!)

The point is that this policy _did not exist when you bought the phone_, you are then FORCED to accept the new policy if you want to be able to get more apps, or just updates the ones you own. Oh yeah, you can also sell the phone for a lesser value than you paid for it, and likely you're subsidized so you're going to have to pay a new one full price like $500 or $600 (while your subscription to AT&T still makes you pay money for the first iPhone of course!).

Basically, owned by Apple (yet again).

Got it yet?

Re:At least they tell you..

[wzzzzrd]

I tried the link (and chromium warned me, opted out again after trying)...But seriously, how the hell does this work? My location was EXACT, and I'm not using a mobile device or anything, just a DSL and an ordinary router...Does anyone know?

Re:At least they tell you..

[xaxa]

People are sort-of forced to use the phone, since they probably have an expensive monthly contract, and the summary says you can't add more apps/music until you agree to the new agreement -- that's a main feature of the phone.

Though, if I owned an iPhone I'd consider taking it back to the store if I was required to accept this new agreement. Fortunately, this country has reasonable laws that could probably help here -- though IANAL. (Those laws being the ones that prevent a company having a one-sided "agreement", or changing an agreement, etc)

Re:At least they tell you..

[xaxa]

The HTML5 site gave my location as Bank Station (City of London), which is 15km away. (I'm in London though).

Another site gave my location as Crawley, West Sussex, England (~50km from where I am).

This one comes very close: it says I'm about 5km away from where I really am.

I assume various companies have gathered databases of IP locations, but some are better than others. I'm guessing my ISP (or their ISP, or whatever) is based in Crawley, and that a company with a nearby IP is based in the City, and another 5km away.

Re:At least they tell you..

[tpgp]

Who tells you that might be happening if you have an Android phone?

The Android Operating system tells you on installation.

Or if you install a browser that enables the geolocation services of HTML 5 on your PC?

Well, that browser is also an application - and android tells you on installation that it can access (amongst others), the following permission: "Your Location: coarse (network based) location, fine (GPS) location."

No one. They don't have to. They can't really, because there isn't a "gatekeeper" controlling it all.

Don't believe everything the iPhone fanboys tell you. The above statement is totally incorrect.

Re:At least they tell you..

[msauve]

This is how Opera explains it when asking whether to enable the service:

How does geolocation work? How well does it work?

It depends on the device, and its way of connecting to the Internet.

If the device is a desktop computer, without any wireless connections, the IP address is used to determine the device's location, and the measurement is rather crude.

To determine the location of a laptop or other wireless device, Opera may in addition send the following data from nearby Wi-Fi access points:
MAC address (uniquely identifies the hardware)
signal strength (tells how far away it is)

A database of known Wi-Fi access points, together with measured signal strength, makes it possible to give rather precise location information. The success of this method depends largely on the concentration of known access points.

If the device is connected to a mobile telephone network, location data may include cell IDS of the cell towers closest to you, and their signal strength. If the device is GPS-enabled, the location may be obtained via GPS.

Any or all of the above methods may be used to determine the device's location, if the device has sufficient connectivity. In what follows, we refer to this data as the "location data".

Opera make use of Google's geolocation service. For DSL, they can easily find the location of your local central office, and DSL itself then constrains you to a particular radius. If you're connected to the DSL router via WiFi, there's your final answer. If not, maybe you have WiFi enabled, and your computer is sensing a neighbors, even if not connected.

Re:At least they tell you..

[MrHanky]

No, your pseudoargument is bullshit because it states something reasonable ("you don't have to buy it") while arguing something which is not ("so quit whining").

Re:At least they tell you..

[MrHanky]

Wrong. You have to agree to the new terms if you want to update you iGadget.

Re:At least they tell you..

[Xest]

The link in question works using a browser feature that uploads information about you such as your IP, access points near you, and that sort of thing. This is why Google was farming access point data when they did street view.

So in the case of even these most intrusive things, the GP I was responding to is wrong regarding warnings, because your browser warns you. My comments were really targetted towards general IP geolocation that doesn't depend on browser uploads.

Personally I'd just keep browser based geolocation disabled, and it is by default in Firefox and I believe other browsers just like things such as password storage are.

Re:At least they tell you..

[Sir_Lewk]

The problem here is you are using a phrase ("Nobody is forcing people to use this phone") that is commonly employed by apple fanatics to assert that the only people who have a right to complain about apple are those people that have bought the right to do so (by buying an apple product, why the hell would I do that if I don't like them?) and that people should simply not purchase their products instead of complaining. The reasoning is of course flawed, nobody expects M$-flamers on slashdot to purchase and use windows before complaining on slashdot about it.

Do I feel sorry for people that bought iphones and this is happening to? Of course not, they brought it on themselves. Is this still a morally reprehensible action by Apple, and does it deserve my full and unreserved criticism? Absolutely.

As for new laws? I agree that we don't need new ones. There are probably plenty on the books already that would make retroactively changing terms of use legally questionable. All that we need is for these laws to be properly interpreted and applied.

Re:At least they tell you..

[Threni]

> Who tells you that might be happening if you have an Android phone?

The installer tells you exactly what the app may want to do, regarding your location, contact details etc. What more do you want?

> No one. They don't have to. They can't really, because there isn't a "gatekeeper" controlling it all.

Fanboiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii............

Re:At least they tell you..

[Hadlock]

Righto, however technically the troll is correct as well. The downside to not opting in is that you are now stuck with a phone and possibly outdated apps and OS that you can't update until you pay/agree to their NSA "time and space tracking" ransom.

Re:At least they tell you..

[Lupu]

People who bought iPads and iPods on the understanding that they could be used without having their location information gathered and shared now find that they *must* allow this information to be gathered and shared (I suppose you could try not updating iTunes, but then you would also have to not upgrade your OS -- OS upgrades come with iTunes upgrades -- and be prepared to be locked out of the app store, and since Apple's use of DRM prevents third parties from putting apps on your devices, you're fundamentally abandoning any hope of loading any code, even third-party code, onto your iPad and iPod).

Sounds like a class action lawsuit waiting to happen.

Re:At least they tell you..

[koiransuklaa]

Your browser implements the geolocation api. It could be doing various things to do that: e.g. it might send your router (AP) MAC address to a google server that sends back a location that google has harvested with their street view cars...

Re:At least they tell you..

[Quantumstate]

When I visit that website in my browser (firefox) I get a little bar at the top asking if I want to share my location with the website. So I vet the sites myself on a case by case basis rather than having Apple decide for me. I am under the impression that Android has a similar permissions system when you install an app.

Re:At least they tell you..

[Xest]

Perhaps this method could be automated for a more accurate geolocation service?

Re:At least they tell you..

[dwinks616]

Every application on Android that uses GPS or Coarse location data explicitly tells you it does when you install it, and if upgraded, it also tells you that it pulls location data if it still uses it, or if the upgrade added that feature. Nothing on the Android store can use GPS data without you knowing.

Re:At least they tell you..

[mlts]

Also, if you have a rooted phone, you can install DroidWall, so by default unless you go in and allow Android to let an app communicate via 3G or Wi-Fi, it won't be able to communicate out. This is good for those apps that ask for full network rights without any need for them.

Re:At least they tell you..

[Dishevel]

I don't give a shit what Apple dose to their customers. I am not an Apple customer. I do not allow my children to be Apple customers. If you want to be one, Fine. I think that those who do set themselves up for this crap are Either A: Ok with it. B: Ignorant of it. or C: Can't refuse the shiny white plastic. Either way I don't give a shit about them.

Re:At least they tell you..

[silanea]

[...] if you don't want to have these things don't use it. Nobody is forcing people to use this phone [...] Who cares if it's retroactive? It's a service and service and privacy agreements get updated *all the time*. You pay for that service. [...]

Reading comprehension fail. Let me try again: People who already own an iPhone are forced to accept terms that were not part of the original deal in order to continue to receive software updates - which, as far as I can tell, is a prerequisite for receiving support when issues arise - or to purchase new apps. Altering a contract unilaterally after the parties involved agreed on it is subject to legal restrictions. Apple can try, but I would not be surprised to read about them getting handed their balls in court over this on /. in a few weeks, and rightly so.

If AT&T tomorrow doubled its rates I would probably dump AT&T and sell my phone. [...]

1. Those contracts usually have a minimum duration.
2. You would be very unlikely to recover your expenses on the phone and instead end up selling it at a loss.

Also I disagree with your "rendering their devices useless" point. C'mon - not using location based services doesn't render the phone useless.

Learn to fucking read, and do not stop reading after the first handful of words that you can put into a meaningful connexion but continue until you reach the end of the text. "Location based services" most likely encompasses navigation services, which is a oh-not-so insignificant feature on a phone that comes with a fucking map feature as factory default .

I usually try not to resort to insults, but His Jobsiness' boot lickers are unbearable. How dare I criticise the Empire that can do now wrong? It is a free market after all. Sorry, that is more bullshit than the whole of Texas can muster. Apple lures people with features and then alters and disables them on a whim after it received the cash, with practically no way of recourse for its customers. People do not simply buy a phone, they buy a whole closed ecosystem. They invest in apps, music, e-books and so on. So they cannot simply put their device on eBay, they would lose access to a good deal of other things they paid for and cannot recover (at least not without breaking laws).

Re:At least they tell you..

[Pollardito]

I think you're missing what they're really doing. In the past if an app included location-specific advertising there used to be a pop-up asking you if the app could use your location. Now that they've told all the other ad networks that they can't do location-specific advertising but bundled this same feature into iAd, they've added this text to the Terms of Service so that iAd can deliver location-specific advertising without asking your permission (because you gave it to them when you hit OK on the ToS). It was obvious that they were going to do this, and it's incredibly slimy.

Re:At least they tell you..

[wfolta]

If "At least they tell you..." is correct, you CAN opt out at any time by not allowing an app to access your location. You can refuse the first time. You can go to the new settings area and turn it off on a per-app basis, and it will show you which apps have requested your location in the last 24 hours.

Perhaps Apple intends to go beyond this, but if not, you have absolute control and can tell exactly what apps are asking and how often. Not bad.

Re:At least they tell you..

[farble1670]

Who tells you that might be happening if you have an Android phone?

wrong.

on android, and app must explicitly declare the services it needs to access in its manifest, and those permission are shown to to the user before they install the app. that includes permission to obtain the user's location.

Re:At least they tell you..

[silanea]

In theory I do not give a flying fuck about Apple, either. My household is i*-free. The problem is that too many other companies look at what Apple does and follow its example. Mobile devices have come a long way towards an open and consumer-friendly ecosystem, but actions such as this drag us all right back down the hill.

Re:At least they tell you..

[IDtheTarget]

And my friends think I'm crazy for giving up my iPhone for an Android device...

Re:At least they tell you..

[Mongoose Disciple]

His point is that Apple is applying these terms to people AFTER they have bought the phone.

Frankly, I'm a little disappointed in the nerd factor of slashdot that no one has yet invoked The Empire Strikes Back with respect to this point.

Re:At least they tell you..

[Xest]

Ah, one of those people.

The type who tries to look smart by pointing out that the term "I could care less" makes no sense when taken out face value, but unfortunately fail to realise it's a term commonly used in a sarcastic tone in some parts of the world such as Britain, with the implication of the sarcasm being that they couldn't care less.

It's a perfectly valid term when you understand the context, but I realise that if you live somewhere where people don't tend to use that term it might appear to be a mere failure to correctly use the English language, it's not. Hopefully this will put your mind to rest when you see it in future and the grammar nazi in you can now sleep well at night!

Re:At least they tell you..

[Yakasha]

Who tells you that might be happening if you have an Android phone?

The Android Operating system tells you on installation.

Most of the time.

Or if you install a browser that enables the geolocation services of HTML 5 on your PC?

Well, that browser is also an application - and android tells you on installation that it can access (amongst others), the following permission: "Your Location: coarse (network based) location, fine (GPS) location."

Maybe. Not always. See, you have to read the privacy statement to find the part that says (this is a direct quote, emphasis mine) "Certain of our products and services allow you to opt-out of certain information gathering and sharing or to opt-out of certain products, services, or features".
Ya, see, you also need to check your carrier's privacy policy. Google doesn't care what they do with your personally identifiable information. They state that also in their policy.

No one. They don't have to. They can't really, because there isn't a "gatekeeper" controlling it all.

Don't believe everything the iPhone fanboys tell you. The above statement is totally incorrect.

Apple acts as the "gatekeeper" for all iPhone apps. Who is the Android equivalent? Google? The App creator? Your wireless carrier?

So, Google's policy is: gather personally identifiable information on you, MAYBE let you opt-out, and no single privacy policy dictating what can be done with your information. Ya, I can totally understand why you prefer Google's policy.

Re:At least they tell you..

[exomondo]

Is Apple planning on giving refunds to anyone who owns a iDevice which was bought before the change in terms?

That really needs to be mandatory in these sorts of situations, same as with Sony's removal of the OtherOS functionality in the PS3. These 'policy changes' are becoming increasingly common in the industry now.

Re:At least they tell you..

[tpgp]

The Android Operating system tells you on installation.

Most of the time.

Most of the time? Can you give a concrete example of an instance where you are not told on installation that the application can read your location?

Re:At least they tell you..

[Yakasha]

The Android Operating system tells you on installation.

Most of the time.

Most of the time? Can you give a concrete example of an instance where you are not told on installation that the application can read your location?

Don't need to. We're talking about what the respective privacy policies allow.

• Google's policy specifically state you can opt-out on certain applications. That means some don't give you the choice.
• There is nobody stopping anybody from having an app grab without asking. It has to happen before anybody will notice and complain.
• Google's entire business model revolves around knowing what you do. Why would you think their apps would all be included in that certain list?

Re:At least they tell you..

[tpgp]

Don't need to. We're talking about what the respective privacy policies allow.

No, you do need to. The OP asserted that android apps didn't need to tell you if they were using the location API.

I said they do. You said only most apps need to tell you. This is patently untrue.

All android applications tell you on installation if they use the location API. If you have any evidence to the contrary, spit it out. Otherwise, STFU.

Re:At least they tell you..

[Yakasha]

All android applications tell you on installation if they use the location API.

You believe they do.

If you have any evidence to the contrary, spit it out. Otherwise, STFU.

I already did. Google's published privacy policy. Check it out. It very distinctly uses the word certain, as in "certain applications provide you the option to opt-out."

They say such, no doubt, because they don't control the apps and don't want to be held liable when an app doesn't ask.

The OP claimed there was no "gatekeeper" informing you when an app wants your location data.
You claimed that statement was "completely untrue."

Yet you still have not mentioned who that gatekeeper is, since Google's own policy states that only sometimes do you have the option of blocking the data gathering.

Again, Google's policy agrees with me. What evidence do you have that EVERY app asks?

Re:At least they tell you..

[tpgp]

Yet you still have not mentioned who that gatekeeper is,

Wow, you just don't get it do you? The gatekeeper is not a who, but an it - it is the operating system's own security model that enforces it,

I already did. Google's published privacy policy. Check it out

Link pls.

Re:At least they tell you..

[Yakasha]

Yet you still have not mentioned who that gatekeeper is,

Wow, you just don't get it do you? The gatekeeper is not a who, but an it - it is the operating system's own security model that enforces it,

... Standing next to an open gate waving to people as they walk by is hardly acting as a gatekeeper.

Link pls.

So, you're arguing the policy with me without even having the ability to find it?

No, I'm done.

Re:At least they tell you..

[tpgp]

So, you're arguing the policy with me

No, I don't really care about the privacy policy, the one & only point I am arguing is that android apps must ask the user at installation if they want to use the location API.

No, I'm done.

Hahaha, the mating cry of the slashdot noob unable to find a link to backup their statements.

Re:At least they tell you..

[Yakasha]

Ok. You haven't figured out how to copy and paste that quote I gave you into google to find it?

Ok. Think what you like idiot.

Re:At least they tell you..

[PastaLover]

In firefox (Chrome will be the same):

If you consent, Firefox gathers information about nearby wireless access points and your computer’s IP address. Then Firefox sends this information to the default geolocation service provider, Google Location Services, to get an estimate of your location. That location estimate is then shared with the requesting website.

There's tons of ways they could have gathered that information. Most coarse is knowing which ISP your address block belongs to and seeing where that ISP is located. If your desktop computer has a wireless interface and your neighbours are running a wireless network, that might be why as well (this is why google maps wireless networks, after all). For me, it is only accurate to the city level.

Not an Apple issue

[Yvanhoe]

Any cell phone provider has the power to do exactly this. This is despicable, that Apple or anyone else does, but this is the kind of thing we have to expect from the current carriers and the current, almost inexistent, framework of laws protecting privacy.

Re:Not an Apple issue

[SupremoMan]

Yes but if a cell phone carrier tried to do this, they would lose plenty of consumers to the competing carriers.

Re:Not an Apple issue

[Yvanhoe]

How do you know they are not already doing this ?

Re:Not an Apple issue

[martijnd]

Sorry, what is new about this?

European GSM operators routinely sell customer locations to third parties. Real-Time traffic jam warnings used by car navigation software makes extensive use of this.

The mobile phone data is also much more accurate than Apple's application layer reporting -- as the mobile phone is always broadcasting its location.

And no, it still doesn't make me feel warm and fuzzy about apple.

Re:Not an Apple issue

[Sir_Lewk]

Cellular providers MAY be doing this. Apple IS doing this.

I wonder which one I am going to express more concern about...

Re:Not an Apple issue

[Cro Magnon]

Unless all the competing carriers were also doing it.

Who would trust Apple with

[DarkEntity]

this degree of Latitude?

Re:Who would trust Apple with

[smitty777]

That's funny - we should coordinate these type o' graphic comments

do the moral thing, iPhone developers

[FuckingNickName]

Do the right thing: for every app you write, upload user location data every 15 minutes for three months. After that quarter, publish the movements of your users to a site with an innocuous name like, say, www.findoutwhethermyiphoneusingpartnerisacheatingbastard.com. Even if you didn't upload other identifying data, it would be very easy to filter on individuals by listing a few places you know they visit. Indeed, I'm sure any intelligence service worth its secret budget tracks people who may be carrying unregistered mobiles by simply searching a database of movements for records showing presence at (1) fairly precise locations at any sighted times; (2) the most expected typical locations around other times.

Re:do the moral thing, iPhone developers

[AHuxley]

A cool idea, turn ad tracking and profit making back on the multinational. Expose the system to the world with easy to understand images in a press pack.
Someone is paying for the data, show what Apple is selling.
Adamo Bove, head of security at Telecom Italia did show what could be done with the tracking in the case of the CIA rendition team in Italy (2006).

Re:do the moral thing, iPhone developers

[jo_ham]

"This app wants to use your location. Allow?"

* taps "Don't allow"

Problem solved.

Re:do the moral thing, iPhone developers

[FuckingNickName]

If I ask to borrow your lawnmower, I probably mean that I want to use it right now rather than every 15 minutes for the next three months. Which does Apple allow?

Re:do the moral thing, iPhone developers

[jo_ham]

You *probably* mean that, but what assurance do I have that you'll give it back?

To be fair, both requests are vague, and now Apple's has a further clause that it did not have before that you have to dig in the small print to find.

You can just say "no" though.

The next iOS EULA

[Exitar]

I've heard it will introduce Ius primae noctis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_de_seigneur

The worrying part will be reading how Apple fanbois will be very proud of having Jobs "test ride" their brides.

Re:The next iOS EULA

[fredc97]

Actually they forgot to mention in the EULA:

For current users of iPhone 3G Apple may:

Force you to wait for several hours while iTunes displays that it is backing up your data even though it won't be able to restore anything later (also named the /dev/null clause).

Wipe all your precious photos (the memory clause)

Not give a d*mn about 3G iPhones users because they were too cheap to buy a 3GS the day it came out (the Scrooge clause)

Not allow you to restore settings per application because that would be way too useful (the early upgrader clause)

Re:The next iOS EULA

[Rude Turnip]

I think they would be jealous of their brides.

Re:The next iOS EULA

[Yakasha]

I've heard it will introduce Ius primae noctis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_de_seigneur

The worrying part will be reading how Apple fanbois will be very proud of having Jobs "test ride" their brides.

Better than the Google fanboys. They're still wondering how their gfs got pregnant.

Re:Big deal

[Anonymous Coward]

"Until they agree, they cannot download anything through the store."

Lrn2read.

Won't be long before it is not

[Shivetya]

and you find yourself not able to get updates of any sort. Since the "i" devices are so intertwined with iTunes it pretty much guarantees you will have to keep current eventually. Having an opt out on what is nearly mandatory software isn't much an opt out is it.

Re:Won't be long before it is not

[broknstrngz]

I still see no problem. Users who are dumb enough to keep buying from Apple once that happens do deserve to be tracked. Tracked and shephered. I'm a Mac user. I write software for a living and I like to fiddle with audio engineering in my spare time. OSX makes both quite enjoyable. But I'd give this all up in a heartbeat if I felt Apple was screwing me.

Maybe I don't need the new gen iPhone

[Cobratek]

Hrmm ... I'm thinking that I won't need the new iPhone after all - perhaps I'll jailbreak my 3G.

I've been seeing the "this application wants to use your location" popup more often lately.

Not a big fan.

Re:Maybe I don't need the new gen iPhone

[duguk]

I'm not baiting you here but why do you care about an anonymous account of your location?

I'd love to know how you think any phone can be anonymous.

I guess if you managed to get it on PAYG, without giving any contact details away to your mobile phone company, without giving any details to iTunes, and without storing any numbers or addresses on your phone at all... Then I guess you might be anonymous. Oh, unless you sign into a website which shares info with Apple, of course.

It's not always about being anonymous. Sometimes it's just not trusting a company with every single detail about what you do, in real-time.

Bugger all you can do about those Terms and Conditions now though! You've bought it - I'd love to see someone (and hopefully they will) try and return it due to an unfair/unagreed change in contract.

Re:What level of anonymity?

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Given that every iPhone has at least one unique ID burned into it(a serial number of its own, plus whatever IMEIs and whatnot being a GSM device implies), I'm guessing that it is a "anonymized identifier that can uniquely identify a user(but only Apple, or AT&T, or their extra special iAD friends, or anybody who knows something about drawing inferences from location data can link to his name/real-life place of residence/shopping habits/place of employment)...

Redownload

[mwvdlee]

Can you still re-download apps you purchased under an old agreement without signing the new agreement?

Re:Redownload

[intheshelter]

As one poster pointed out, follow the link to the article, which links to the privacy policy, which links to the Opt Out page to get out of this.

While I agree that forcing you to opt-in is BS, people are making a lot out of this considering it's easy to opt out and it's right in the privacy policy.

Finally a tool for locating 'cheap' iPads

[slincolne]

There have been many attempts by people to track down stocks of iPads in shops - now Apple is building a database of what iPads are where.

Considering the other attractive, valuable goods their owners may also have the value of this data to criminals will be quite high.

Of course it is safe (you can trust Apple) and their servers are secure (nobody ever hacked a Mac) and their partners can be trusted (AT&T are a good company).

:-)

Re:Finally a tool for locating 'cheap' iPads

[mlts]

Actually, on a serious note, this is what I'm concerned about. By itself, Apple doesn't care one whit about what I am doing. However, there are companies and people who would love to have real time location data:

1: A DA is looking to run a query of anyone who is in a park after dark. She gets the iLocation data, finds a number of people's phones were in the area, then arrests them all for criminal trespass up to two years (statute of limitations) after the fact. This evidence easily persuades a jury to convict, because it is "high tech" and "precise" like DNA evidence.

2: Another county wants more speeding ticket revenue. They compare deltas of locations, then send citations to people who were on roadways, months if not years after the fact.

3: A principal wants to clamp down on people leaving campus for lunch. At the end of the school year, he grabs records, finds who has left grounds via their geolocation information, and suspends them from school during finals, so they can't graduate.

4: Someone had a retro rave. The local PD then a week later get the iLocation information and send arrest warrants on that a week later.

5: An insurance company decides that anyone who goes to a fart lighting contest is uninsurable. They get all the geolocation information of anyone in the area and cancel their policies.

6: Another insurance company gets the geolocation information of every protester at a rally. They are immediately dropped and blacklisted from auto, home, and health policies.

7: A company wants to make a blacklist of all "business hostile" people. They capture geo-location info of people at rallies and protests, then make a list of people who are banned for life. Large shops start subscribing to this list. Outcome: Protest at a march, and find yourself unable to buy groceries, buy gas, or buy any of the staples needed.

8: A foreign country wants to find out who hates them and retaliate. So they get geolocation data of who showed up at what rallies. Then in any business they own, they do mass firings of those people and order their business partners to do the same.

9: A hostile foreign country wants to find out certain gathering spots that have little security. They correlate the information from phones that security personnel have versus civilians. Then they launch a strike against soft targets repeatedly.

10: Elbonia's army is pissing Latveria's intel officers off. Latverian intel gets location info of all Elbonia army family members. Then launches repeated strikes against them. Result: Elbonia's morale to continue the war is decimated.

Re:slashdot broken today

[AHuxley]

lol "It's even better than reading an Apple press release"

Re:What level of anonymity?

[mjwx]

I'm guessing that it is a "anonymized identifier that can uniquely identify a user

You think too much (solly, I'm still in SE Asia).

This is overbuilt and fraught with legal woes. All they need to do is link each account to a "randomised" primary key, that way they can still stay it's anonymised ("not personally identifiable" I believe is the catch phrase) whilst allowing Apple and it's partners to know who they should target. With this they can make sure all Iphone owners in Leeds are directed towards the nearest weahterspoons rather then a decent pub, meanwhile Apple are protected because they are just a bunch of unidentifiable numbers.

Anybody care to comment on...

[L4t3r4lu5]

Firstly, will this bring about any (if present) early termination clause in contracts as a "significant change in terms?"

Secondly, as this is Hobson's Choice (Accept or lose access to the App Store) will it fall foul of unfair terms in consumer contract legislation?

Re:Anybody care to comment on...

[penguinbrat]

Firstly, will this bring about any (if present) early termination clause in contracts as a "significant change in terms?"

Would it be even possible to break the contract with AT&T, if you no longer agree with the new terms of Apple? I only have the iPod, although from what I understand it would make this fancy smart phone practically pointless with out all the apps..

Re:Anybody care to comment on...

[PitaBred]

Only if the PS3 also does. I'm guessing since it benefits a corporation and not the citizens, it's going to be fine.

There is a simple fix

[blake1]

Settings > General > Location Services

Now you can choose which apps are able to access your location information, or disable this feature altogether. Was that really so hard?

Re:There is a simple fix

[kangsterizer]

Except that's only for apps you download/run. It's nice but.. ... your phone is still sending regular "anonymized" data to Apple (and only Apple, which then sells it to 3rd parties) according to TFA.

Re:There is a simple fix

[blake1]

That's purely speculative. Also one would assume that setting Location Services to 'off' will infact turn off location services.

Re:There is a simple fix

[intheshelter]

As long as we're looking at TFA, click on the link to the privacy policy and then click on the link to OPT OUT.

A bit annoying, yes, but problem solved nonetheless.

Re:Apple will backpeddle on this

[AHuxley]

They will Google out of it with the word 'mistake'?

WTF?

[Anonymous Coward]

Call me naive, but I trust Apple. I've been using Mobile Me since late 2004. I just migrated away from the Palm phone after three years; I now have an iPhone as my primary phone. My calendar, my contacts, etc. are in the Apple cloud. And guess what? They've never done ANYTHING to erode my trust in them. In the age of telecom companies trying to cap mobile data plans, and place arbitrary restrictions on IP-delivered media content, Apple is busy trying to roll out fiber and generally make the Internet better. I believe that not only do they live by their "think different" mantra, but that they realize the days of the free Internet may be numbered. They're doing their best to save the Internet as we know it. Granted, they have something to gain. But other companies' failure to evolve leaves the door wide open for a company which we should trust far more than AT&T, Time Warner, etc. to preserve the landscape that slashdotters are so eager to protect. The tag is correct, it's a witch hunt. Apple admitted their mistake, we move on.

deja vu ! Spooky!

Re:WTF?

[rxan]

You just destroyed my hope in the Internet.

Re:WTF?

[Dishevel]

No. He just destroyed my hope in humanity.

Just opt out...

[aardwolf64]

That's about iAd, coming out July 1. According to the agreement (which practically no one reads), you can opt out by visiting this website with your iOS device:

http://oo.apple.com/

Re:Just opt out...

[L4t3r4lu5]

Oooh! Is it an opt-out cookie?

That makes it so much better.

Re:Apple will backpeddle on this

[erroneus]

No, they will say something in "corporate speak" that translates to "We are very sorry, but we didn't think anyone would actually notice this."

Hmmm, another copy/paste troll.

[mjwx]

Whilst I expected fanboys to come rushing to the defence of Apple, I also expected something a little more original then a copy/paste troll.

As the warning says when I accidentally double post, "try to be more original".

Re:Hmmm, another copy/paste troll.

[delvsional]

I thought that post sounded a little off. I mean, what mistake did they admit to? oh, and: Apple has a Mantra?

Re:Hmmm, another copy/paste troll.

[Yakasha]

Whilst I expected fanboys to come rushing to the defence of Apple, I also expected something a little more original then a copy/paste troll.

What I find "amazing" is that the people moderating have no idea the post is a copy/paste.

So, the exact same argument used to defend Google: +5 insightful.

Defend Apple, -1 Troll...

Huh. Who are the fanboys?

Re:Hmmm, another copy/paste troll.

[mjwx]

What I find "amazing" is that the people moderating have no idea the post is a copy/paste.

So, the exact same argument used to defend Google: +5 insightful.

Defend Apple, -1 Troll...

Context is relevent. The Google and Apple issues are only marginally related. Google collected informatoin that is as visible as the front of your house and got slapped for it. Apple has changed the terms and conditions without consultation after the sale.

Huh. Who are the fanboys?

By the fact that you either want a Google defence modded down or an bad Apple defence modded up I suggest the fanboy is as close as the nearest mirror.

Re:Hmmm, another copy/paste troll.

[Yakasha]

Context is relevent. The Google and Apple issues are only marginally related. Google collected informatoin

Without permission (personal or legal) or warning.

that is as visible as the front of your house and got slapped for it.

Its as visible as the inside of my mailbox. Also illegal to read, copy, and store.

Apple has changed the terms and conditions without consultation after the sale.

Which is the same thing every other company does, including Google, but is magically only a problem when Apple does it.

The fact that their policy still protects you more than Google's is just a little bonus right?

By the fact that you either want a Google defence modded down or an bad Apple defence modded up I suggest the fanboy is as close as the nearest mirror.

No, wanting the same argument used in similar situations where the only significant difference is the company being defended to be modded the same does not make me a fanboy.

It merely shows I have the ability to recognize Apple is not as bad as people here think, and Google is not as special.

Story posted today seems to back my belief... http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/06/23/1429249/Fifth-of-Android-Apps-Expose-Private-Data

Apple at least provides an opt-out, does not collect personally identifiable information, and ensures your privacy is protected by a single policy. The only problem with their policy is the fact that they changed it after the fact... which is irritating, but nothing surprising or special.

And before you say Google provides opt-out, read their policy very carefully. There are certain points you need to pay attention to.

Re:Hmmm, another copy/paste troll.

[mjwx]

Its as visible as the inside of my mailbox. Also illegal to read, copy, and store.

Wrong.

I can not see inside your mailbox unless I open it. If you have a wifi network broadcasting I can see it without going onto your property and looking inside anything.

Do you understand how consumer wireless networks work?

And before you say Google provides opt-out, read their policy very carefully. There are certain points you need to pay attention to.

Care to cite them. Apple expressly said it intends to sell your data (share with third parties) and the opt out is not a simple procedure nor is it 100% opt out.

Re:Hmmm, another copy/paste troll.

[mjwx]

Story posted today seems to back my belief... http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/06/23/1429249/Fifth-of-Android-Apps-Expose-Private-Data

That story is a sales pitch for anti-malware and uses the fact that applications explicitly ask for permission to make phone calls and SMS's when installing. See here. This is how the local security on Android works, you expressly give permission to access API's on install.

Did you bother to read the article or even the summary? You seemed to take the inflammatory headline and run with it without actually verifying if it is true. But then again, you're doing this on your "beleif" so actual fact does not matter.

Re:Hmmm, another copy/paste troll.

[Yakasha]

If you have a wifi network broadcasting I can see it without going onto your property and looking inside anything.

So, you didn't look inside the frame, see the recipient MAC and know that it wasn't addressed to you?
You actively came to my house for the express purpose of listening to MY wireless network, that you KNEW was mine, that you brought special equipment for the sole purpose of listening to MY network, looked at my network, saw that none of the traffic besides the general broadcast messages were meant for you, saved them, and still try to claim ... what? It wasn't your fault? You accidentally setup a packet sniffer to record my network traffic?

I don't have to lock my car for it to be illegal or immoral for you to take it.

Do you understand how consumer wireless networks work?

Yes, do you understand how morality works?

Apple expressly said it intends to sell your data

Really? Where? cite the word "sell" please.

(share with third parties)

Ah, see now that is what I read. Sounds to me like they're going to share their (non-personally identifiable btw, unlike Google), data with partners such as advertisers and, god forbid, applications on your phone.

Oh, and one last thing.

Care to cite them.

Sure (emphasis mine, header bolding theirs):

Your choices

• Certain of our products and services allow you to opt-out of certain information gathering and sharing or to opt-out of certain products, services, or features.

And that is directly from http://www.google.com/mobile/android/privacy.html

Why use the modifier "certain", if you mean "all"?

Re:Hmmm, another copy/paste troll.

[Yakasha]

See here. This is how the local security on Android works

That is how it was intended to work. Not how it actually does work.

Did you bother to read the article or even the summary? You seemed to take the inflammatory headline and run with it without actually verifying if it is true.

I did read it. I apparently read more than you because I got down to this link:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-10162929-83.html

Which is the EXACT point the OP made! There is no Gatekeeper for Google Apps. Their policy states that certain apps ask for permission because some, like this one, didn't.

But then again, you're doing this on your "beleif" so actual fact does not matter.

I provided the links to back my points.
Found that "expressly stated going to sell your data" Apple quote yet? Or, is it... your belief?

Re:Hmmm, another copy/paste troll.

[Yakasha]

Lol wrong thread for the last part. Thats what I get for trying to set 2 ppl straight at the same time.

Steve has Altered the Deal...

[16K Ram Pack]

... pray he does not alter it further.

Re:Apple will backpeddle on this

[mjwx]

Just as Apple has done many things associated with iPhone and the like and later backpeddled, later when all this has blown over it will be re-introduced

There, fixed that for you.

I think Apple has well and truly planned for any potential backlash. They'll backpedal and say "look we care about your privacy" and two months later Apple will be selling your data to the highest bidder.

No opt-out??? Try https://oo.apple.com/

[Savage-Rabbit]

Don't buy the phone if this bothers you. That's the opt-out.

You can either go here: https://oo.apple.com/ on your iPhone, iPod or iPad and op out. The support page is typically vague and talked about disabling cookies "and other technologies in mobile advertising services" which can cover just about anything. Mind you the opt-out page showed an error (HAHA!) when I tried it with my iPhone 3GS so I'll stick with the old-fashioned solution which is to turn off location services completely. IMHO location services soak up battery life and they aren't so useful that I have to keep them switched on all the time. As far as I'm concerned the only thing location services are useful for is Google maps and that little compass app. When I need to use either I use the master switch to activate location services and de-activate them when I'm done. I could care less if my photos are geo-tagged or whether my "tweets" or FaceBook posts announce to the world where the #$#%$& I posted from. And that's assuming somebody ever manages to convince me to use Twitter or FaceBook which is highly unlikely. Even if you keep location services switched on, in iOS 4 you can now manage in detail which apps get to access them although there is presumably no way to cut off Apples tracking service.

Re:No opt-out??? Try https://oo.apple.com/

[duguk]

You can either go here: https://oo.apple.com/ on your iPhone, iPod or iPad and op out.

Thats for opting out of iAds. You've already agreed to the Terms to allow them to see/store/share your location. Disabling iAds, or even disabling the location option in your iPhone doesn't nullify that part of the contract, and probably doesn't stop them getting your location either. If the police can easily do it, I bet the manufacturers can - and you've agreed to let them.

Don't believe me? Its right there on the page: "Opting out applies only to Apple advertising services and does not affect ... the collection and dissemination of location data."

Re:No opt-out??? Try https://oo.apple.com/

[duguk]

AFAIK shutting down the location services means shutting down or disabling the GPS hardware so you are either suggesting that the GPS hardware can't be disabled or that Apple is remotely activating the GPS system in iPhones whose owners have shut it off in order to track the owner.

The iPhone has both GPS and AGPS. You'd only completely disable location tracking by turning off the cell reception too. That would make it pointless as a phone! As I mentioned, this is the same method police use to pin-point mobile phone locations. Accuracy varies.

If you leave location services on and disable access by app you may not be able to stop Apple from tracking you which I pointed out. You are quoting me completely out of context.

I didn't quote you out of context, I quoted the whole of the first paragraph of your comment. Perhaps you should've structured your comment differently if it's unclear.

Don't believe me? Its right there on the page: "Opting out applies only to Apple advertising services and does not affect ... the collection and dissemination of location data."

Which one? It does not say that on the support page I linked to so you must be talking about the opt-out page???. I never got far enough to successfully opt out, the page shows an error message claiming I don't have iOS 4 installed which is funny because I installed it yesterday (hence the big fat: HAHA!).

Good to see Apple's upgrading systems are successful then. Is a shame you didn't manage to see this. I haven't personally seen it myself, (I'd never buy Apple products) - but others have mentioned it here. If it doesn't have it explicitly on that page - specifically that "opting out of iAds stops us checking your location" - then the Terms you've agreed to are still valid. Opting out doesn't even imply that you're opting out of sending location services to Apple, so I'm not sure where you've got this idea that opting out of iAds will magically stop Apple from being (legally) able to know your iPhones' position. You've agreed to it, good luck stopping them from selling it on.

Google

[helix2301]

This is like google maps on the blackberry and windows mobile you can actually track where people go. I am glad to see there is a way to turn this feature off.

Re:Google

[shutdown -p now]

Yeah, but Latitude is opt-in, not "forced-in" with an optional opt-out tucked away.

One pod

[Atreide]

Hail to Lord Steve who did remarquable Jobs :

"One Apple to rule them all, One Apple to find them,
One Apple to bring them all and in the darkness bind (blind ?) them."

Or as Hamlett might have said, something is rotten in the board of Apple.

Free Market BS

[Comboman]

I understand being upset but I was responding to opt-in and opt-out, and it's pretty simple - your dollars are your vote for you and how serious you are. The last thing I want to see is a bunch of people up in arms saying we need laws to prevent this. I call BS on that.

And I call BS on your free market democracy ("your dollars are your vote"). You're right about one thing though; we don't need new laws to prevent this. We need the old laws that allow companies to lock down devices that their customers own (DMCA, etc) removed so that we have a real Free market.

Somebody tell me again ...

[elronxenu]

... why, in order to buy music, I have to agree to let Apple sell my location to unknown businesses? What exactly is it about the music transaction that has anything at all to do with my location and some other company that have no relationship with?

It's like going to the shop to buy an ice-cream and coming back to find some squatter living in your house.

Re:Somebody tell me again ...

[R3d M3rcury]

Actually, I'll come up with an answer for this.

Suppose a particular band plays a concert in the Des Moines, IA. Let's also say that the record label is doing some marketing for the band in Cincinnati, OH. During this same time, the band sells 32% more music. Was it the marketing or the concerts that helped the band sell more music?

Currently, a music store will report sales of CDs to the labels--there's usually some sort of agreement there. So if the band plays a concert in Des Moines and record stores in Des Moines start selling lots of CDs of the band's music, you have some evidence that the concert helped sell CDs. In an iTunes world, unfortunately, you don't have that same data. The bump in sales could be due to the concert in Des Moines, the fact that their slick new video got mentioned on Slashdot, or the rumor that the band's drummer is dating Taylor Swift.

So, yeah, information like this can be useful.

Re:Somebody tell me again ...

[elronxenu]

So, yeah, information like this can be useful.

Not to me.

private bits

[goombah99]

IU was just thinking that you could even quantitate the degree of information being handed over and it's likelihood it identifies you. Some measure like the entropy or the mutual information of the data set correlation might quantify the uniquness. That is how many bits in uncertainty would there be on a user ID. Companies could even Publish this in their privacy statements. e.g. apple might say they rank a 11 privacy bits, meaning that the average user is idenitifed to only one pool of 2048 individuals.

Re:slashdot broken today

[bipedalhominid]

Dude, some of us have to read this at work. I mean even though I am the one who would run the "what ya been up to on the web" report. Damn, makes me feel stupid to keep reading this slashdot site when literal crap like this gets through. Can we have a little moderation around here?

Re:What level of anonymity?

[Culture20]

This is overbuilt and fraught with legal woes. All they need to do is link each account to a "randomised" primary key, that way they can still stay it's anonymised ("not personally identifiable" I believe is the catch phrase) whilst allowing Apple and it's partners to know who they should target. With this they can make sure all Iphone owners in Leeds are directed towards the nearest weahterspoons rather then a decent pub, meanwhile Apple are protected because they are just a bunch of unidentifiable numbers.

Until one of those partners happens to be Facebook, Google, Twitter, Myspace, Microsoft, etc. Once they can link up one or two "randomized" location histories with times and IPs that certain users log in from, BAM! those users are tied to a "randomized" primary key.

Re:Too bad this is slashdot

[whisper_jeff]

http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1693596&cid=32651210

And, interestingly enough, that post was made before yours. Perhaps you'd like to read slashdot more thoroughly - while there may be the haters and fanbois and Steve-is-the-Dark-Side jokes, there's also informative and interesting posts to be found.

so Apple sees me...

[archangel9]

at the house...

at the office...

at the pub...

this invades my privacy how? Complete strangers see me with my pint, so why shouldn't Apple send me Guinness ads? If they send coupons, I'll thank them.

Re:so Apple sees me...

[dotfile]

There's a big difference, I think you might agree, between "complete strangers see me with my pint" and "a man in a suit follows me everywhere, noting the exact time, date and location wherever I go. He's always there, there 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, following me. He also keeps records of every phone call i make, every song I listen to, every message I send and every web page I visit."

One of these, you see, is normal human social behavior. The other is more than a little creepy, and something most of us would never put up with. But, if you give your permission I guess you're OK with it as long as you get a beer coupon.

Re:so Apple sees me...

[boristdog]

After all, if you aren't doing anything wrong, why would you care if someone is watching you?
It just proves that Apple owners are the most honest, clean (no porn!), decent people in the world.

Re:so Apple sees me...

[archangel9]

But, if you give your permission I guess you're OK with it as long as you get a beer coupon.

Paranoia and Guilt are for the guilty. I'm fully aware I'm being watched. Part of my job of being a systems admin is being a watcher, so I'm fine with it. I'm not ignorant of those facts, I'm simply indifferent to them.

That, and I like beer.

Re:so Apple sees me...

[dotfile]

Ah, the old "If you aren't doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about" argument. So, then, you're OK with video surveillance of you in your home as well? I mean, if you have nothign to feel guilty about, where DO you draw the line? Indifference and apathy are the best friends of tyranny.

Re:so Apple sees me...

[archangel9]

Ah, the old "where do you draw the line" comeback! Laws protect me inside my property lines. If I don't pull the blinds at night, yes, people can take pictures of my naked arse in the moonlight, as long as they're outside my fence. Feel free to drop by and gawk, if you're not stalking me already.

Re:so Apple sees me...

[mcgrew]

at the house... with your mistress

at the office... doing it with your secretary

at the pub... buying reefer

Re:so Apple sees me...

[dotfile]

It's not me, nor people like me, stalking you. It's the advertisers, the data aggregators, and whoever is willing to pay for or steal the information. I personally don't give a rat's ass what you do nor where you go to do it, but you can bet a lot of people far more annoying and potentially dangerous than I do care and will pay for the information you so blithely give up. So... enjoy yourself, just make sure you stay on the yellow line.

Re:so Apple sees me...

[archangel9]

I get no more spam/ads/offers than anyone. Possibly less, because anti-spam anti-ad measures are so easy to implement. Remind me again how they're harming me. Oh, wait. They're not.

You seem to wear many hats, but mostly tinfoil and ass. What's amazing is that you claim not to care, yet go out of your way to attempt to make an example of me. Bother someone else with your paranoid antics. Begone with you, for I have beer coupons to cash in.

you missed the car analogy

[archangel9]

It's like going to the shop to buy an ice-cream and coming back to find some squatter living in your house.

no, it's like parking your car and coming back to find a strange couple making out in the back seat.

Re:you missed the car analogy

[archangel9]

if by "doofus in a turtleneck" you mean "Salma Hayek in her birthday suit", I'm comfortable with that.

Re:you missed the car analogy

[elronxenu]

It's like parking my car and coming back to find friends of the ice-cream vendor making out in the back seat and they want me to drive them somewhere.

Thank you, Apple

[mcgrew]

One more reason to keep my money in my pocket. Otherwise when another carrier besides the hated AT&T gets iPhones, I'd have been tempted to buy one. Not now. Apple makes some cool shit, but until they start respecting their customers I'll never be one.

Re:Too bad this is slashdot

[L4t3r4lu5]

Hey, guess what! These are comments on the story. If you want information on what's really happening regarding the original article, you should probably hit the Apple website, or check out some of the links posted in the story.

You already know what you need to do, and it's the antithesis of being here: RTFA

So disable location services for applications...

[mario_grgic]

iOS 4 has actually improved this a bit. You now can turn off location services for individual applications (as opposed to on/off for everything).

If an application requests access to your current location it gets added to the "Location Services" control panel and your answer is remembered. Here you can also change access permissions for all apps that previously requested access to your location.

If you allowed some app access to your location, but change your mind, you can disable access again. Before applications used to ask you each time you launched them. Now they don't nag you any more each time, which is definitely an improvement.

Of course if you allow an application to access your current location, then don't be surprised if that information gets used arbitrarily including selling it to other interested parties.

Re:Link bait again

[intheshelter]

Damn you and your voice of harsh reality!! Everyone was getting ready for a good Apple hate and you ruined it!

Thanks for the link. Just opted out.

Re:What level of anonymity?

[mjwx]

Until one of those partners happens to be Facebook, Google, Twitter, Myspace, Microsoft, etc. Once they can link up one or two "randomized" location histories with times and IPs that certain users log in from, BAM! those users are tied to a "randomized" primary key.

The quotes were meant to indicate sarcasm. I know it's pretty hard to do over the intertubes.

Of course this is what will happen and what I was eluding to (you did put it a but better though). Tying a user to a randomly selected primary key simply gets the "personally identifiable" part out of the way. Companies who sell their clients/users/customers information to the highest bidder should be stripped of all of their trademarks, patents and IP regardless of if it's "personally identifiable".

Re:Doesn't matter.

[intheshelter]

Actually the Apple fans will realize that the privacy policy link to in the article has a clear way to OPT OUT of this. The Apple haters will continue to post ignorant diatribes.

Privacy violations?

[GodfatherofSoul]

There's an app for that

But the system opts in everything else

[SuperKendall]

"Opting out applies only to Apple advertising services and does not affect" the collection and dissemination of location data.

The collection and dissemination outside of advertising (iAds) would mean that the application would have to use location services - which prompts you if it's OK to share your location, and can be disabled at any time for any app.

So it's still opt in, because you have to agree to provide location when you run the app.

Re:But the system opts in everything else

[prockcore]

and can be disabled at any time for any app

Not the App store.

Jobs the hypocrite?

[HockeyPuck]

Hypocrite: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.

Apple wants to share your location with the world, yet Steve Jobs doesn't even put license plates on his car for undisclosed (privacy?) reasons.

This is why I use Google

[sjonke]

Google uses secretive drive by shooting tactics for stealing information from everyone and recording locations, even people who don't use their services, and I think that's a lot cooler. I mean, who shows up first in a gangsta rap video? Apple or Google? Hmm... OK, maybe Apple.

Re:This is why I use Google

[shutdown -p now]

Google is routinely grilled over privacy violations (I think it became par for the course ever since Street View mapping started?), including here on Slashdot. For Apple, though, it's a new thing.

Not that I object to it as such... I really don't see this level of privacy as valuable, and, given the amount of use of Google services on my side under real name, address, phone etc, I'd imagine they have a very comprehensive profile. Heck, I even use Latitude on my phone.

The only thing that I find objectionable about this Apple policy is that it's opt-out rather than opt-in.

Re:This is why I use Google

[sjonke]

In the case of Google's drive-by-shooting approach to privacy violations (recording data from wireless networks as they drive by), you can't stop using their vans since you weren't using them in the first place. In the case of Google scanning your email and using it to target ads at you, I don't recall ever being provided an option to disable that. I'm not sure that it's even possible. You agree, by using Gmail, to allow them to scan your email and use the content for their own purposes. I use gmail. It doesn't bother me, at least not until we find out that they are using it for nefarious purposes. I'll feel the same way about this GPS issue. It's worth noting, though, that apps *have* to request your permission before being given access to the GPS location and such. I don't believe that that is changing. What you are agreeing to is that if you give an app permission to use the GPS, then you accept that they may record that information and use it for their own purposes. So if you're using an app and you can't figure out what it wants GPS info for, you just deny it. I've done so on many an occasion.

user location data

[barkway]

Does this have anything to do with the story I heard recently of the iPad having some security hole with respect to usage of AT&T network for wireless access?

Re:What level of anonymity?

[stanlyb]

It will really very interesting to know if Steve Jobs has iPhone or iPad or iWHATEVER thingie!!!!!!

A question for a lawyer.

[danmart1]

Does something like this constitute a "bait and switch?" I realize that they aren't actually removing any features, but they are changing the terms of service in a way that could disable key features of their product if the user doesn't want to give up their privacy.

computer engineering ethics

[whoisutility]

it's so sad when Apple decides to be unethical. This particularly reminds me of Motorola's Razr phone, which was quite popular until people discovered that you couldn't turn the GPS off.

Good idea

[k2r]

If it's implemented with user controls.

To me that sounds like a good idea. I'd like Apple to provide an enhanced push-like API, where other services can register to my location data.
By this, actions that have to be triggered by changes in my location can be offloaded to a server and do not have to run on my iPhone / iPad.
So if I really want to have my IM status and whatever additional services to know my location, it can be done without draining too much battery.

And according to Ars Technica...

[indros13]

You can opt out for each specific App: http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2010/06/ars-reviews-ios-4-whats-new-and-notable.ars/7

I think you forgot one thing...

[Imazalil]

Wow. You left out the part where the entire Apple campus had their way with your mom. They are just another corporation. It's fine if you don't like Apple, many people don't, and they choose not to buy their products. Is that so hard?

I know you're replying to a troll post, but really come on.

Oh and please, Flash 10.1 is might actually be 'all that' but it's taken Adobe how many years to make a usable version of flash for mobile phones? Yeah. Lets face it until now Flash on mobile has been a joke, and frankly Adobe deserved to be called on it. I mean, Apple build an entire mobile phone operating system, so has Google, Microsoft put out Vista, and Win7, heck even blackberries have gotten sorta usable (I keed, I keed) in the same span of time that it's take Adobe to do some optimizations of an existing product.

Re:I think you forgot one thing...

[HermMunster]

First, my mom has passed.

Couldn't disagree with you more. What I wrote is well documented recent history. Not many people would agree with you on the flash bit. If Apple has problems with it, then it is like Adobe said, there must be something wrong in the OS that contributes. Flash supports 75% of the video on the web.

And, as far as the journalist goes, no jury in the world would convict him as a thief, and no DA would charge him with theft, due to how bailor/bailee works in the state. He didn't steal it. He was a bailee and hence he could do what he wanted with it. Theft also implies that an item was taken with malice with the intent to permanently deny the owner possession. Good luck getting that past a jury.

Re:I think you forgot one thing...

[Duradin]

So he just loaned it out for a payment of a few thousand dollars and then was going to right back to the bar and return it. I've got this nice bridge for sale. Only used by a little old lady who never drives over 35 mph and she only used it to go to church on Sunday.

Re:I think you forgot one thing...

[Imazalil]

Sorry to hear about your mom, no offense meant beyond web forum hyperbole.

Yes, all the things you wrote are documented/real events but the tone that you described them in are a bit on the harsh side. IMHO anyway.

Flash: Like I said, Flash 10.1 looks like it may run well on mobile devices. And once that is proven, and there are some worthwhile uses of it, and it's secure, then yeah Apple should consider putting it on their phone.

How many devices run full on Flash (no flash lite) right now? (Quiet you two N900 fans in the back), yeah I don't see it on Android, or on WinMo (could be wrong, it's been so long), or WebOS, or Blackberries. There is a reason barely anyone is using at the moment, it's an ugly ugly beast. 10.1 will most likely be usable, but like I said, it's take a good 4 years (being generous from when smart phones really took off among the non-geek) to get something usable from Adobe. Adobe isn't exactly the Virgin Mary in this whole thing either.

Apple can charge what they want for their phone, and yes, that meant they could charge $600 for the thing when it first launched. People were more then happy enough to buy it at that price. I though that was crazy, hence I didn't buy one. No turtle-neck ninja's running around putting guns to people's heads making them buy it.

Nonsensical ramblings on PC death; isn't it happening though? You've got your smart phone on the go, smarter and smarter TVs for watching content (Google TV, for example), Consoles for playing games, etc. More and more specialized devices are coming out and being embraced by consumers. So far the PC is the central hub for most of this (a point Apple has made repeatedly), but eventually the PC could just become a server in a closet somewhere to store all the data, if not going completely central and storing content in 'the cloud'. Sure apple is happy to sell you gadgets like the iPad, but so is everyone else.

The Journalist thing. I'll try to avoid the obvious jokes about Gizmodo being real journalist. But the fact is that the guy who found the phone made money from his find, knowing pretty well what exactly he had in his hands. It would be one thing if he had posted the photos and everything, but instead he was offered a bunch of money from Gizmodo for it, and sold it. Would it fly if a 'real' news journalist had to pay a source for information? Gizmodo being juvenile through the entire thing didn't help either. If there was no case, the police would have told Apple lawyers to kiss their ass.

Restricted developer tools. I don't like it either, but Apple does have some valid points about API access and taking advantage of iPhone specific calls. Apple got badly burned with this exact kind of thing by none other than Adobe. When Apple switched to Intel, their own programming tools just required a check box to make things PowerPC and Intel compatible (grossly simplifying here I know), but those programs build with other tools had to wait for the maker of those tools to come out with the option of doing so. For Apple this meant that Adobe programs weren't Intel-native for a good year after the big switch. Sure, Adobe marks it up to their development cycle and all that, but they knew well enough ahead of time, but didn't or couldn't make the change. And on the topic of Adobe, have a look at the garbage user interface they have been trying to cook up with Creative Suite? Looks and works like shit on both windows and os x, this is exactly what Apple is trying to prevent.

Next, I don't think the open source movement will crash and burn because of a video codec. Apple has invested a lot in h264, and like any other corporation wants to see it adopted, and they have everything in place to support it from day one. I'll grant you it's contradictory of them to go on about open standards - html5 and all - and then push for this, so there. So, you get a point, but really this isn't 'a threat against open source' it's a threat against an open source video codec, big big difference.

It doesn't help that you

Re:I think you forgot one thing...

[zeroshade]

Just one nitpick

but really this isn't 'a threat against open source' it's a threat against an open source video codec, big big difference.

It's actually a threat against ANY open source video codec. If the MPEG LA manages to successfully sue Theora and/or WebM for patent infringement, then that will pretty much cement their claim that it is impossible to create a codec that is unencumbered by patents. This would be bad for any open source attempt at web video. Therefore h264 is a threat to much more than just "an open source video codec".

No that's not good enough.

[CountBrass]

I shouldn't have to cripple my applications to avoid this, I should have the option to turn just this new 'feature' off whilst allowing my apps to continue to work properly. And yes I should be surprised - outraged even - that applications will collect my data to be "used arbitrarily including selling it to other interested parties". I should be able to disable that.

Re:Too bad this is slashdot

[mcgrew]

What that means is, that 80% of all postings are Apple-haters telling themselves and the world how bad apple is and 20% are fanboys in denial.

In this case, it appears that the "apple haters" are right. Apple is clearly doing evil; and doing it to YOU. Count yourself among the 20%, since you think whenever someone says anything bad about apple, they're apple haters.

interested if I can stop this in any way

From what I can tell, you can't. You're being victimized, fool. Wake up. Apple is just like every other corporation -- in business to make money for their stockholders, any way they can.

Re:brave new world

[dangitman]

what next ?

Well, a post that isn't nonsensical gibberish might be nice.

Re:Link bait again

[imthesponge]

So I have two choices:

1. Have Apple record my location 24/7 and sell that data
2. Disable GPS completely

Anonymous except for your addess.

[danwesnor]

The fact that my phone stays in the exact same location for 10 hours each night is a pretty good clue for someone trying to identify me from location data.

Question????

[SuperKendall]

Not the App store.

The App Store does not need your location, nor does it do anything with it.

I thought you were done with me?

[tpgp]

Ok. You haven't figured out how to copy and paste that quote I gave you into google to find it?

Of course I did that - but the page I found, did not contradict my argument that Android apps have to ask to use the location API at install time. In fact the page I found said:

# Certain applications or features of your G1 device may cause other information to be sent to Google but in a fashion that cannot be identified with you personally.
# Your device may send us location information (for example, Cell ID or GPS information) that is not associated with your Account.

Ok. Think what you like idiot.

Wow - you're unable to argue coherently, unable to link to material backing your argument, say you're done with me (but you're going to reply again & again) - but I'm the idiot?