Slashdot Mirror
Senator Al Franken Takes On Oculus Over VR Data Mining (engadget.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Oculus says in its privacy policy it will track information about your location, physical movements, and how you're using the Oculus Rift headset. Senator Al Franken, a consumer advocate who has made a point of pushing back against invasive privacy policies like Uber's, wrote a letter to Oculus CEO Brendan Iribe, pushing for more information about how, exactly, Oculus is using all of the data it collects. "I believe Americans have a fundamental right to privacy," Franken wrote. "And that right includes an individual's access to information about what data are being collected about them, how the data are being treated, and with whom the data are being shared." Oculus has not yet commented on the letter. As a result from Franken's letter, Oculus may offer a more detailed privacy policy, like what HTC has done for its Vive headset. Though, it's worth mentioning Oculus isn't collecting much more information than most technology companies. The biggest concern stems around what kind of information Facebook is collecting when the headset is not being used -- there's no off button, so it's always sitting in a semi-ready state.
Just remove the bloody power source. Amazon's Bluetooth adapter for my stereo was the same (as is the HDMI Fire Stick). Just pop the wall wart out and no more problem.
Like that Revolv thing that those who already did the purchase thought they own, only to be shut down by Google/Nest --- we need to know if this VR device, once sold, is owned by the users, or, can it be shut down (or somehow rendered useless) by Facebook?
That's rich, this is the same Al Franken that voted to extend the Patriot Act, and is on record defending the NSA's Stazi practices. This is also the same guy that worships groups like the RIAA and MPAA and has supported SOPA/PIPA legislation.
Franken is a hack, I don't believe for a second he gives a shit about privacy rights, so there must be another reason he's going after the Rift/Facebook
Yes, everyone has a right to privacy. And I fail to see the problem, it's not like we have government mandated Oculus Rifts that we have to wear all the time and can't take off. We have the choice to NOT get that shit and tell them where to stick it.
I don't really see the need for politics to get involved. If anything, it should be required to say that they will do so before you buy it... wait, that's what's already happening, that's what started the whole shit.
Don't get me wrong, I'm as much pro-privacy as they come, but this isn't a government agency spying on your without you having any choice but begging for some lube before you get it up the ass, this is a private company offering a product that you can quite easily refuse to buy.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Mr Franken's question will need to be repeated every month. And that still doesn't necessarily stop the bad behaviour.
The point of the policy is it's a disclaimer of "You give us permission to take anything we see fit". That means the data gathered and uses of and distribution of change with time.
I think Mr Zuckerberg is intentionally trying to trigger new laws that set defined limits.
"...what kind of information Facebook is collecting when the headset is not being used..."
Well yo will have to ask them about that but I do know what is possible, http://www.wired.com/2014/08/g...
You know that's *all* the data, right?
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
#Franken2020
Imagine how awesome POV porn would be with one of these things. Unfortunately, I'll never know because somehow the people that make it think it's ok to watch me use it.
Hey man haters gotta freak out about something when a cool as fuck product comes out, other wise they probably would end up making it mandatory haha.
..'like what HTC has done for its Vive headset'... try using the word similar. Really, enough is enough with the txt.grammar.
Data mining is an infringement upon citizen's liberty. Time to amend the constitution.
Wouldn't it be swell if you couldn't buy a normal monitor anymore? If all monitors were "smart" requiring Internet connectivity, call home to their respective manufacturer periodically uploading samples of displayed image to "improve" quality of product, assist with "troubleshooting" and proactive "diagnostics". Information so critical to continuously supporting and improving the product.
For your safety your smart monitor wouldn't install without an Internet connection, monitor vendor reserves the right to change terms or discontinue your use of monitor "service" at any time. If we change terms you will be given 30 days advanced notice to agree with new terms or lose all access to your monitor service.
Examples of changes we may make include requiring you to pay a small one time or monthly fee, offering direct advertising to your monitor at no cost to you and mirroring your display to our partners. You agree to provide us with a non revocable royalty free license to use any content associated with our monitor service.
Mandatory?
More like dead on arrival.
Please tell me he posted that as his Facebook update from his Android tablet via the ISP that was retaining all the metadata about his connection while sitting at a coffee house with a local government CCTV camera pointed at him.
Are smartphones mandatory? No they aren't. But if you don't have a smartphone you might have issues to get friends if you are younger than a certain age, because most of the communication happens over smartphones/smartphone apps.
Is the pebble watch mandatory by the government? No, it isn't. But if you don't wear it, you won't get insured by some employers. So simply don't take the job, right?
Then this is where the law makers should get active and outlaw requiring certain technology for insurance or employment, or enforce privacy protection for youths.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
This is the first time I've ever seen someone say "perhaps you should ignore the functioning of your Government" on Slashdot (without some sort of mocking/sarcastic tone). I'm pleased to see that it has been modded to oblivion.
If you don't like the TOS, then don't buy the gadget! Geez, is that so hard?
Every surveillance camera on the street or in a local mall "can collect information about how you move and how you're shaped", and the people behind those cameras don't just market to you, they can often throw you in jail.
A VR headset like Oculus needs to do this as part of its operations. If you don't like it, then don't buy the gadget. Even better, just stay in your basement and pick up basket weaving as a hobby.
There, FTFY
This "social only over apps" issue will continue to affect this generation as it gets older. It has nothing to do with youths, just with the availability of technology and youths adapting to new things far more easily.
I didn't vote for Frankin when he first got in, but since he has been in I've only once been disappointed in what he is doing there.
Are smartphones mandatory? No they aren't. But if you don't have a smartphone you might have issues to get friends if you are younger than a certain age, because most of the communication happens over smartphones/smartphone apps.
Then your prospective "friends" don't much care about the doom-and-gloom pontificating of these privacy violations. You see it as a big deal, sure, but why? I have an oculus at my house, now if they can get this information from it what is the scenario you offer that would convince me to get rid of it?
To be honest, my data aren't *this* important for me. The main reason why I prefer open source is control. I don't like software that does what its manufacturer told it, and not what I tell it to do.
Think of a chat app. What if I want to use it via a desktop application? Should I be required to wait for the manufacturer to write a browser version of it that can be used on the desktop?
Yes, I admit, I'm not the kind of guy who changes and recompiles some piece of open source software just to scratch some itch. But open source software is almost always designed to be mainly controlled by the user, not the manufacturer. Also I like the community much better.
To get back to the topic, I waited to buy a smartphone until I was sure there was an open source ROM available. Similar will probably be true for the oculus rift: there will probably be a VR headset with less spyware and more ability to control it in a few years. I have the patience to wait until then to get a VR headset, if I ever want a VR headset (currently I don't).
Well that doesn't answer the question and you seem to be complaining about a problem that doesn't exist (or at least one that you don't have or understand).
To get back to the topic, I waited to buy a smartphone until I was sure there was an open source ROM available.
Even putting aside the fact that you more than likely did not audit the code of that open source "ROM" you still have the closed software and circuitry that makes up the communications hardware of the device as well as the carrier network you are using. Presenting an "open source ROM" as the solution to the problem in question is either ignorant or malicious. People should absolutely not be encouraged to think that an "open source ROM" will do much at all to alleviate privacy concerns.