Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Your Apps Know Where You Were Last Night, and They're Not Keeping It Secret (nytimes.com)

Posted by msmash on from the closer-look dept.

Dozens of companies use smartphone locations to help advertisers and even hedge funds. They say it's anonymous, but the data shows how personal it is. From a report: The millions of dots on the map trace highways, side streets and bike trails -- each one following the path of an anonymous cellphone user. One path tracks someone from a home outside Newark to a nearby Planned Parenthood, remaining there for more than an hour. Another represents a person who travels with the mayor of New York during the day and returns to Long Island at night. [...] An app on the device gathered her location information, which was then sold without her knowledge. It recorded her whereabouts as often as every two seconds, according to a database of more than a million phones in the New York area that was reviewed by The New York Times.

At least 75 companies receive anonymous, precise location data from apps whose users enable location services to get local news and weather or other information, The Times found. Several of those businesses claim to track up to 200 million mobile devices in the United States -- about half those in use last year. The database reviewed by The Times -- a sample of information gathered in 2017 and held by one company -- reveals people's travels in startling detail, accurate to within a few yards and in some cases updated more than 14,000 times a day.

98 comments

  1. I have an iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and not worried cuz Apple has my back.

    1. Re: I have an iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yeah?

    2. Re:I have an iPhone by yuvcifjt · · Score: 3, Informative

      I was basically going to say something similar but add that iOS only allows an app access to location service "while using the app", otherwise, permission is refused by default.

      Apple are pathological about battery usage, and quite rightly also take privacy far more seriously than most other companies, thus the reason iOS allowed you control over apps well before Android starting implementing similar controls - minus Google services that is, because, you know, Google is All Knowing.

    3. Re: I have an iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the poster of "Oh yeah?" above, it's all well and good that iOS gives the user control over apps' usage of Location Data. But I don't trust Apple with my Location Data. Who's to say they are not collecting it and working with it nefariously themselves and simply superficiating authentic control over it not being gathered? Frankly there is just too much bad going on within these big companies for me to trust any of it.

    4. Re: I have an iPhone by anegg · · Score: 1

      But I don't trust Apple with my Location Data. Who's to say they are not collecting it and working with it nefariously themselves and simply superficiating authentic control over it not being gathered? Frankly there is just too much bad going on within these big companies for me to trust any of it.

      If you don't trust Apple, who of all of the corporations at least appears to be trying to respect privacy, you can choose to not use a smartphone, or to have one that you only turn on when you want to make a call or access the Internet. If you need to be accessible by phone no matter where you are, you can choose to have a simple cellular phone that doesn't run apps, assuming that you trust that the cellular telephone company's tracking of your location by cell phone tower location isn't violating your privacy.

      What appears to be impossible, without at least some level of trust, is to both enjoy the always-on connected feeling of having a smartphone AND the "only me and the people around me know where I am" feeling that used to be natural (unless you were a heinous criminal being tracked at great expense by law enforcement or a cheating spouse being tracked by a private detective hired by your better half). Welcome to the new age. At least the government hasn't mandated that everyone wear a tracking device at all times for "public safety reasons" (yet).

    5. Re:I have an iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. Apps respecting the OS flag. Hardcore.

      Then we masterfully differentiate with a blog post from macworld.com

      >>third party apps are not permitted by contract to use [Apple's] Advertising Identifier

      No shit, Sherlock. They use their own, oh loyal disciples. This is little more than another "Do Not Track" checkbox. Do you really think this will stymie Amazon? Do you really think metric groups aren't using their own fingerprints and UUIDs and substitutes to geolocate when the OS doesn't give it to them on a silver platter, hooray!

      Or sure, go on thinking that Amazon is twirling their mustaches and saying "Drat, thwarted again by Apple!". I'm not your supervisor.

      2000's: Your OS pissing contest doesn't matter because you do everything in a goddamn website anyway.
      2010's: Your phone OS pissing contest doesn't matter because you do everything in a goddamn app anyway.

    6. Re: I have an iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Oh yeah?" here again.

      Hey, I'm with you. There are choices. And choices have consequences, of course.

      I remember that old natural feeling. Heck, I don't even feel locally connected to where I live. There can be so much separation between the place and surrounding environment within which one's body resides, to be real plain about it, and the life one is living, so to speak. Basically "well I'm holed up at home, and I don't identify with the physical world around me" Maybe that's old hat. Probably has prominently been like that in adult lives for a decade or two.

      Who knows, I'm just speculating.

      Having smartphones is great. Technology is great. I just think we need all the dirty little secrets to come out, because the tech itself is obviously not bad (unless one doesn't understand that robots we build can't take over the world unless we program them to... Shout out to my old fat fuck of a boarding-house-mate Big Mike, you daft old prick).

      If you ask me, it's okay that the agencies who run cell towers and all sorts of other transmission stations are able to look at and analyze the data passing through said stations. There is a lot to learn from such enormous amounts of organized data. The problem is that what is learned by these agencies (I'm looking at you, Google Facebook Apple etc etc etc and you deep state dark money fucking cunts) is being used AGAINST us, "us" being humanity at large.

      Trust me man, I'd LOVE to know what they know about people. We could all use to see larger patterns, to learn from. It's inevitable, as we go along and invent and improve technology, we're going to be able to know just about everything about everything all the time. But the organizations that are up to no good... They need to fucking clean up their act... We really need much wider public control of EVERYTHING...

    7. Re: I have an iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matte whether you trust Apple or Samsung or whomever, Until the cell phone companies are prohibitted from monitizing you location data, they'll still be the premier source of data about you.

  2. Said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most apps are complete shit whose sole purpose is to track you, show you ads, and sell the information about you.

    If I install an app (very rare these days), if it asks for my contacts and my location information, I uninstall it.

    If people would understand how much of their privacy they're giving up to asshole marketers, they'd be uninstalling this shit and realizing that most apps provide nothing that a web page can't give you.

    I have very few apps on my phone, and have pretty much decided that most mobile apps are something I can live without.

    I simply refuse to use location services, because the majority of that isn't going to benefit me, it's going to benefit some asshole ad company.

    Fuck that, fuck apps, and fuck ad companies.

    1. Re:Said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If people paid for apps instead of wanting them for free, developers wouldn't be forced to fill them with ads.

    2. Re:Said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's a win-win, because most apps (99.999%) aren't worth paying for.

    3. Re:Said it before ... by yuvcifjt · · Score: 2

      The fact that Google is one of the most popular brands among consumers,
      and the fact that millions upon millions (perhaps billion(?)) people are on Facebook shows you how little people care to know, and care about privacy!

      Despite all the noise about Facebook freely sharing user data with third-parties,
      and despite all the noise about Google providing a backdoors to three-letter agencies.

      It's a sad state of affairs!

    4. Re:Said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Developers wouldn't be forced to fill the apps with adds.

      But they still would. Burning the candle at both ends means twice as much money!

      Even if they didn't show ads, they would still track you and sell all that data.

    5. Re:Said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I couldn't agree more. I turn my phone off once I get home and don't turn it on again until I leave the house again - which could be 2 or 3
      days hence. I also don't turn on location services or have ANY apps enabled - none. I make calls, read texts, and take pics with my phone -
      that's it. But then, I'm 72 yo, value my privacy, and assuredly don't want my phone buzzing and beeping constantly.

    6. Re:Said it before ... by blahplusplus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Most apps are complete shit whose sole purpose is to track you, show you ads, and sell the information about you.

      If I install an app (very rare these days), if it asks for my contacts and my location information, I uninstall it.

      The problem is every big company does this, think about PC games in the 90's vs now, when valve inserted the patch to take control of and steal half-life and CS and 2004. The reality is the internet has put an end to "the market" aka the private power model of western civilization is at odds with privacy and civil rights because the informed members of the public cannot protect themselves from these attacks, these companies control the infrastructure of society. What are you going to do when billion dollar mega corporation releases the new GTA online and because the game is targetted at kids, and those kids are computer illiterate, are going to buy a bugged piece of software that they don't own which is run from servers in Rockstars office? It's much too late young padawan.

      Or now that microsoft has released "windows 10" as a service? We would need portal technology or ideological changes, because the only way you could modify the behavior of these companies is if you were physically two blocks away from their offices so theres a genuine fear from the customers storming your offices. You have no power in this relationship, the balance of power is all in favor of those who own the producive capacities of society because technology has overwhelmed any ability to hold them accountable, they can just run roughshod over the indebted masses with impunity.

      The milton friedmanite idea we are "free to choose" is naive, the human mind did not evolve to perceive reality (see religion) nor make rational decisions in a high tech free market capitalist society.

    7. Re:Said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you can't get paid for your app maybe your app sucks.

      People pay for apps all the time.

    8. Re:Said it before ... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The fact that Google is one of the most popular brands among consumers,
      and the fact that millions upon millions (perhaps billion(?)) people are on Facebook shows you how little people care to know, and care about privacy!

      Despite all the noise about Facebook freely sharing user data with third-parties,
      and despite all the noise about Google providing a backdoors to three-letter agencies.

      It's a sad state of affairs!

      I think most people don't know about the privacy issues- and many that do feel like they "have to be on facebook to stay relevant" (ridiculous belief, but one shared by many). Honestly, you can say it is the user's fault, and in large part it is (but really, do even relatively informed people know how often data is shared about them and who is sharing data about them?)

      I bet each and everyone of us has had data about us shared WITHOUT us knowing.

      A lot of businesses in the IT sector would hate this, but I would propose making it illegal to sell data on a individual WITHOUT them giving explicit consent EACH TIME. So, just having a EULA saying "we're going to sell your data and you give consent" is not enough. If Facebook want to sell information to Wells Fargo- they have to get your permission first.

      I think we could cut back on 90% of privacy violations with such a ruling.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    9. Re:Said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would a developer who is in it for the money want to rely solely on the increase in phone users (requires only 1 purchase per Google or Apple account these days regardless of how many times someone switches devices in the same ecosystem) when there's a sales model that allows a user of the app to be a constant source of income? Option 2 is bolstered by automatic/easy installing from a cloud backup when you switch devices.

      Other options not likely to work unless you're microsoft and not a PC:
      The ecosystems could instill a maximum number of installs before requiring repurchase, the developer could release a version for each OS and require that version for the OS, the ecosystem could enforce repurchase when the account moves from one OS version to the next, etc...

    10. Re:Said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I couldn't agree more. I turn my phone off once I get home and don't turn it on again until I leave the house again - which could be 2 or 3
      days hence. I also don't turn on location services or have ANY apps enabled - none. I make calls, read texts, and take pics with my phone -
      that's it. But then, I'm 72 yo, value my privacy, and assuredly don't want my phone buzzing and beeping constantly.

      Well, how about leaving your phone ALWAYS on the same spot, acting like a land line [and sometimes sent into a random ride on wife's car?]. On-again, off-again in a Faraday box? On top of that, accessing random sites and services at random times?

      *And I almost forgot to say that the person it is supposed to be owned by does not exist.

      I win.

      CAP: classy

    11. Re:Said it before ... by Falos · · Score: 2

      >> If people paid for cable channels instead of wanting them for free, studios wouldn't be forced to fill them with ads.
      You thought it was quid quo pro but it was me, Profit!

      Now put down the kool aid; they will screw the consumer exactly as far as they safely can.

    12. Re:Said it before ... by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      I think we could cut back on 90% of privacy violations with such a ruling.

      For a very specific definition of a privacy violation.
      From my experience, the vast majority of privacy violation are the result of individual actions, usually from people close to you. For example someone may publish a picture of you without your consent, revenge porn is an extreme example but even good friends can do it to you. They can send stuff to the wrong person(s), use public means of communication, get infected with all kinds of malware, etc...
      It also won't help with security related issues. Ashley Madison didn't sell anyone's data, pirates did it for them. Properly securing personal data is more important than privacy policies, because you can forget about it once the data is in the hands of criminals. Obviously not storing data in the first place is even better but it is not always possible.
      And finally, a lot of actors don't actually sell your data, they use it to send you targeted ads without letting advertisers know about you.

    13. Re:Said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Counterpoint: No they don't

    14. Re:Said it before ... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      And finally, a lot of actors don't actually sell your data, they use it to send you targeted ads without letting advertisers know about you.

      Honestly, although I always turn this option off. I don't have as much of problem with this. The problem I have with this is that it means they're storing that information which means someone hacking could steal it.

      I have a problem with companies SHARING or SELLING data. You know (or should know) that if you work with a company that they could (and will) store data on you. But, you should have control over any third party that might receive the data from them. I don't think it should be legal for them to share data WITHOUT getting expressed permission for each and every data share.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    15. Re:Said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No matter how many times you tell people, it's gonna be difficult for them to actually appreciate the gravity of this.

      The real eye opener for me came when i installed Blokada, which basically shows you that literally almost every screen tap sends something home. I recommend that anybody curious tries it (even if only for a couple minutes) and sees for their self. Grab the version off the f-droid repo, not the crippled version on the Play store.

    16. Re:Said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >when valve inserted the patch to take control of and steal half-life and CS and 2004

      Are you really alleging that they stole not only their own game, but the whole year of 2004?

    17. Re:Said it before ... by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      >when valve inserted the patch to take control of and steal half-life and CS and 2004

      Are you really alleging that they stole not only their own game, but the whole year of 2004?

      You don't seem to get that these games were sold as products, not services. AKA it was a breach of contract, and you're one of those idiots who beleive IP law is not totally corrupt. If you buy a piece of software you should own it. You come off as seriously uneducated about how your world actually works and how corrupt the world is.

    18. Re:Said it before ... by grasshoppa · · Score: 1

      I think most people don't know about the privacy issues- and many that do feel like they "have to be on facebook to stay relevant" (ridiculous belief, but one shared by many).

      Not "stay relevant" perhaps, but rather "up to date" with their family and other long distance relationships. Sure, you and I probably don't fall into that demographic, but I'd bet that a majority of facebook users do.

      I know my family and non-tech friends have FB for that precise reason; it's a way to maintain social connections that they otherwise wouldn't have.

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    19. Re: Said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Adobe built an empire off of people buying their apps. You are wrong.

    20. Re:Said it before ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. I basically never install any apps.
      I have a few useful utility apps that let me do work a lot quicker, including floating browsers, notes, media players and such. None of them with ads, backdoors or otherwise.
      If a site doesn't work in a web-browser, it's never used.

      App-only services can get fucked. Apps are the worst thing to happen to computing. THE WORST.
      Worse than ActiveX, worse than Java, worse than Flash, worse than IE in general, even worse than Windows 10.
      It is the single most damaging thing in tech. That even includes vapes. A lot of these ads are food-related. Shit food. The kind of food that usually permanently cripples you from work by 30 due to being so unhealthy. Vaping almost looks healthy next to bad diet. (it isn't)
      Apps are just right behind bad diet in terms of damage to society. So much so that even drug (ab)use is a mere blip in the grand scheme of things.

      I don't even mind ads in general, even online ads as long as they are simple, preferably text.
      What I do mind is tracking spyware shit ads. Majority of the time these ad services are well off target in terms of identifying you. The demographics models used by so many are absolutely fucked beyond belief.
      They might work for dumb retards (the sorts that have these apps), but for anyone with even the slightest bit of intelligence these models completely and utterly fail in spectacular fashion.
      The world would be a much more expensive place if it weren't for advertising. Word of mouth only gets you so far. (technically a form of advertising, but excluded for obvious reasons)
      But these stalking advertisers need to go away. They should be made outright illegal in all honesty. They've done nothing for society. Well, nothing objectively good.

  3. An example by bluegutang · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I recently visited a retirement home, for a community event which was held there. Nobody knew me there, and I didn't talk to or identify myself to anyone, I just listened. Shortly afterwards, I started seeing ads for the retirement home in my Android phone browser. I can only conclude that Google is sharing my GPS location with advertisers...

    1. Re:An example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you disabled the tracking from your google account settings?

    2. Re:An example by 110010001000 · · Score: 1, Informative

      Uh, what? Google has been doing this for at least 15 years. Location based advertising.

    3. Re:An example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't even have to share it with advertisers. They are selling ad space, once you meet the criteria someone is buying into they push you the add. I am not saying they aren't selling people's locations too, but lets not forget how much they make on selling advertising. A good part of the reason is that for the people buying it they offer precision targeting. Google knows you were there, so they serve you up the "relevant" ad.

      Privacy laws in the US suck.

    4. Re: An example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never download apps. I certainly never give them access to my location and even so who cares, really? Are you imagining people go anywhere other than where you imagine they might go?

    5. Re: An example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes
      But
      Every time you open Google maps it captures your gps location and sends out to Google even if gps is disabled

    6. Re: An example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go through the pre installed apps on your phone. Look for the ones that can turn in the network etc.
      They can report on you.

    7. Re:An example by olsmeister · · Score: 2

      I find it interesting you immediately attribute this to Google. Your phone may have connected to the retirement home WiFi network automatically, and advertisers may have noted your IP address change to the same as all the retirees who also share that network. No large leaps of logic for them to make that connection, and no need for Google to be involved with it.

    8. Re: An example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This happened to me, too.

      I replaced my Apple phone with a pixel 2, and a month later I started getting adds on YouTube for antipsychotic medication. They made a pretty big leap there.

      It was clear because I got 60 ads in two days, before I turned off personalized adds on google's platform.

      As a side note: those ads are really offensive! Even if I psychotic, they frame a narrative indicating the ill person is at fault.

      After about a month I returned the pixel and got an iPhone because I just could not get used to the interface.

      Nine months later I stumbled on google's location data. Sure enough, my shrink's office was listed as a place I frequent.

    9. Re:An example by doconnor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As their most valuable asset, Google has a policy of not selling your personal information. Like you said, Google used the information to match you with the criteria the advertiser is looking for.

    10. Re:An example by omnichad · · Score: 1

      If you've ever given access to WiFi settings or Bluetooth to an app, those can correlate locations without any additional location data. The MAC address of a nearby WiFi access point is possibly in a database. Any app besides Google could share that info with an advertising network. That's not to say that Google isn't using it for their own network by default.

    11. Re:An example by Dorianny · · Score: 2
      To turn off "personalized ads" while logged in to your google account. This will disable them across all devices and browsers logged in to account

      in Android; Settings, scroll down and tap on the Google option. Select Ads. Enable the “Opt out of Ads Personalization” option

      To turn them off when not logged in Chrome or using Firefox, IE, etc

      Google Adsettings

      NOTE: These do not turn off Google tracking

    12. Re:An example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have an iPhone and in my opinion, Verizon does a lot of sharing with ad companies (I only have Google maps installed, nothing else, and it is usually not running 95% of the time) -- In my opinion, I will eventually see ads related to places I've been or related to voice conversations, in Facebook, on my home PC (both machines use the same wifi router)

    13. Re:An example by registrations_suck · · Score: 1

      Or...you know...don't get a Google account. It isn't required to get some value out of their apps.

    14. Re: An example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That doesn't disable location tracking. That only disables the DISPLAY of location info to you and the provision of location info to some apps. Google tracks your location at all times.

    15. Re:An example by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

      That's good advice, but not foolproof. I have Google AdSettings set to Opt out of Ads Personalization; however, they still personalize it. If I google something, I still get ads for that product for weeks afterwards.

      Heck, if my wife does a search for something I get ads shown up on my completely separate device with a completely separate account for the things that SHE is looking for. For example, I'm pretty sure I'm getting a Tile for xmas (don't really want one, so I have to feign surprise and excitement on xmas morning now). How do I know? My phone (which she never uses) browser shows a bunch of ads for Tile. Google has obviously figured out me and my wife live together and shows me ads for things that she has searched for. I think it links us because my e-mail is the recovery address for her e-mail.

      (I won't use Chrome for looking up xmas presents for her- I use an anonymous browser to shop and go through a VPN).

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    16. Re:An example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe google is trying to tell you that SHE wants a Tile for Xmas..

    17. Re: An example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is why I don't use Google maps - or any other tile-based system. Openstreetmap has better maps, and you install them on the phone so you can navigate without being online. Nice for seeing what you fly over too - the gps can be used in flight mode. It is amazing how surprised some people can be, when they see that. So used to "Google maps which needs to be online". Also useful when navigating in the great outdoors, avoids spending the battery on maintaining connection to faraway cell towers.

    18. Re: An example by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      She could have mastered the art of misdirection; proceed with your display of surprise ( or mock excitement--your choice) when you get a TIE for Christmas

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    19. Re:An example by sacrilicious · · Score: 1

      I recently visited a retirement home, for a community event which was held there. Nobody knew me there, and I didn't talk to or identify myself to anyone, I just listened. Shortly afterwards, I started seeing ads for the retirement home in my Android phone browser. I can only conclude that Google is sharing my GPS location with advertisers...

      Possible. A few other possibilities: (1) Google is sharing NON-gps location (as derived from wifi network access, or inferred from emails), or (2) your carrier is sharing your cell-tower-derived location with advertisers.

      --
      - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
  4. Hard to prove by sjbe · · Score: 1

    I recently visited a retirement home, for a community event which was held there. Nobody knew me there, and I didn't talk to or identify myself to anyone, I just listened. Shortly afterwards, I started seeing ads for the retirement home in my Android phone browser. I can only conclude that Google is sharing my GPS location with advertisers...

    That's certainly a reasonable conclusion. On the other hand you don't have the evidence to rule out coincidence. It could be a case of post hoc ergo propter hoc since we humans are wired to see patterns to the point we see them even when they don't actually exist. Don't get me wrong, I think you are likely correct but it's not a certainty.

    1. Re:Hard to prove by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Google doesn't need to share your GPS location in order to serve you the proper ad, they just need to know your location. They can serve you that ad without sharing that location to anyone.

    2. Re:Hard to prove by alvinrod · · Score: 2

      Then next logical step would be to experimentally test this. Get a group of random people with Android phones and have them record the ads that they see on their phones over some span of time. Then have them spend an afternoon visiting a retirement home. Repeat the process of recording what ads they receive. If everyone is suddenly getting retirement home ads, it's a good indication that your location data is being sold.

    3. Re:Hard to prove by 110010001000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wait, what? How do you guys not know how this works? Location based advertising has been around for years. How do you possibly not know that one of the biggest ad agencies on the planet (Google) DOESN'T do this?

    4. Re:Hard to prove by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not convinced he's totally correct. If these were google ads he was seeing, then I would absolutely believe google was using the location it knows about to choose to show him that ad. But in that case, google is not giving the user data to the companies doing the advertising.

      On the other hand, if these are NOT google ads, then I'm nearly certain it was just coincidence (or he has some other non-google app on his phone that IS selling that data). Google is generally very protective of their individual user data. That's their money maker...and they don't give that up for sale.

    5. Re:Hard to prove by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " On the other hand you don't have the evidence to rule out coincidence."

      WE HAVE FUCKING NEWS REPORTS ON TV about this shit even when the goddamned location services are turned off.

      Get your head out of your ass.

    6. Re:Hard to prove by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't really bother me. I don't remember the last time I even saw an ad.

    7. Re:Hard to prove by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 2

      Google doesn't need to share your GPS location in order to serve you the proper ad, they just need to know your location. They can serve you that ad without sharing that location to anyone.

      I think that that is acceptable. It's when they share information about me, presumably anonymous or not, that it violates privacy. And it's not like we as consumers have a choice. If you buy a smartphone (which some will say is essential to a lot of jobs nowadays) you choose between Apple and Google; both of whom willingly share your data with lots of other people. Most of which come with apps like Facebook preinstalled as bloatware which tracks your information and sells it even if you don't use the app (you should be able to disable it though).

      You have to go to a lot of work to protect your data, and even then, are you really?

      It's got to the point where you can't protect your privacy easily and function in modern society. It has gone beyond consumer regulated- we're at the point where we need some sort of government regulation on who can share data and sell your information.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    8. Re:Hard to prove by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure you can take an explination like yours and give it credit --- but thats also like questioning global warming. Idiotic and only the gullable would say its a viable explination (and yes, lots are gullable with what phone computers do).

      But I have dozens of accounts of friends with similarily creepy shit.

      Helathy teenager visits grandma on a weekend, weird, their getting a poll for "Meals on Wheels"

      These companies are scraping and sharing shit on a level you would not believe. PERIOD. NO QUESTION.

  5. And my apps judge me harshly by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 3, Funny

    I was in my home and in bed by 9. My apps are disappoint.

    1. Re:And my apps judge me harshly by 110010001000 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Perhaps you would like to buy a new pillow? Go to mypillow.com now for 20% off!

    2. Re:And my apps judge me harshly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking the same thing. My apps will know I go to work, go home, sometimes go to my kids school. My address (via the city/county property website), my work (I work at a public university, and my kids' school (also public) are all publicly available information if anyone really cared.

    3. Re: And my apps judge me harshly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if you don't care that these apps know where you go, if there is anything private in your life that you dont want made public you are motivated to stand against this.

      Otherwise, by divide and conquer nobody will have any expectation of privacy.

    4. Re:And my apps judge me harshly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on who else was in that bed ...

    5. Re:And my apps judge me harshly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My apps are disappoint. ...as is your English.

    6. Re: And my apps judge me harshly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never expected privacy in the first place.

      My biggest problem with all of this is how downright terrible these services are. All this effort and ads still suck,

    7. Re:And my apps judge me harshly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you lonely? Feeling low chum?
      Meet hot singles in your area!
      Click here for your very own, personal discount of 50%! One night only!
      Visit banglocal.xyz

  6. Simple Solution by itguy01 · · Score: 0

    Simple Solution: Turn off location services for select apps or all apps. If you have an iPhone, it will alert you when an app has been using your location for an extended time in case you've forgotten that you blindly tapped "accept" on the permission screen. I'm always going into the settings on my phone and checking what's using my location. Some apps ask for "all the time" permission or "only while using" choose wisely or just turn it off.

    --
    ~I bet you were looking down here for an awesome siggy like everyone else..sorry to disappoint~
    1. Re: Simple Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A few people have monitored what devices are doing while the user is actively using the device and while it is idle. They found that in some cases the device was sending back data anyway. Don't be too sure that you are in control of that OS. Do you have root? Can you uninstall any program? Are you sure that you are in control of your device?

  7. Think back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Remember when GPS chips started showing up in cell phones to "improve" our safety with 911 calls? There were a lot of privacy advocates that said it will undermine privacy and anonymity. Surprise! We were right. Now the FCC is mandating all cell phones beginning in 2019 to be privacy adverse. Better start leaving that addictive toy at home if you don't want Big Brother to watch over your shoulder. And pull the fuse on your Big Brother features on that new car too.

    1. Re: Think back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Old_man_yells_at_cloud.jpg

    2. Re:Think back by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Location services don't usually even use GPS due to battery concerns. And location services APIs are not used for placing 911 calls. This could happen just as easily without a GPS chip.

    3. Re:Think back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bingo it is all about wi-fi , one of the reasons apple changed wi-fi icon action not long ago. disable till next day or not even that....

    4. Re: Think back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Old_man_yells_at_cloud.jpg

      Warning: Invalid File name

    5. Re:Think back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bah. The GPS in my smartphone is only on when I wants it on. (I.e. when I use one of my two navigation apps.) When first installing android, it asked about location sharing. So I said no. Default no. And anything which asked about location later, got "no".

      If anything turns the GPS on I see the little icon on the status bar, but it never happens unexpectedly.

      Also, I don't use google maps, so my location does not leak to some "tile server". I bring my maps with me. GPS privacy isn't hard.

  8. Thanks, Google! Evil will be evil! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Time for some serious privacy laws.

  9. This is all by choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you go to install an app, you are told if it tracks your location. No one tries to hide the fact.
    You get to choose whether or not to install apps that do this.

    1. Re:This is all by choice by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      When you go to install an app, you are told if it tracks your location. No one tries to hide the fact.
      You get to choose whether or not to install apps that do this.

      Yeah, and when you say don't share location information- it still does, just not with GPS. It uses for example Wifi signals in range to guess where you are.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:This is all by choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what about apps that are automatically installed, you insensitive clod!

    3. Re:This is all by choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I bought a phone last year, I made sure to root it and uninstall the Facebook app before connecting it to any network.

    4. Re:This is all by choice by Falos · · Score: 0

      Remember when the mathfags at 4chan narrowed the location of a flagpole by studying the flight paths/times of a couple of planes that flew by? Ad groups will pay their teams to write celestial-navigation code if they have to.

      They. Will. Find. A. Way.

    5. Re:This is all by choice by Falos · · Score: 1

      Postscript:
      My post is not prescribing a defeatist stance. Rather, shotgun your defenses irrespective to known methods. Throw wrenches at the machines you see, then throw everything else for the ones you don't. Surveillance (benign or not) is not a binary condition; the goalpost is control, not extinction.

    6. Re:This is all by choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and when you say don't share location information- it still does, just not with GPS. It uses for example Wifi signals in range to guess where you are.

      Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case on Android.

      But no one forces you to use it.

  10. From The New York Times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey all, let’s have that little discussion about how old big media is just a bunch of AP copies again, while we wait for the next What Someone Tweeted about Bitcoin blog piece to be submitted.

  11. Also talking on the phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was speaking to someone about shoulder surgery on my cell phone. Same day I saw ads for shoulder surgery and even a book suggested on an commerce site.

    I did not use my laptop or phone to search at all for it. I can only conclude voice recognition software picked it up on my phone.

  12. Google is CONTRIBUTING requiring Location on for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Google is contributing to the problem by requiring location services be turned on for a lot of bluetooth and Wifi Functions.

    Google refused to explain this. It's only use is for evil otherwise the user could control the location more granularity.

  13. Just the beginning... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Read: Light of Other Days - Arthur C. Clarke & Stephen Baxter.

    Central premise: What happens to society when there are no secrets, no privacy, and even history becomes transparent for inspection by anyone?
    We are starting down the road on the first two.

    Fred In IT

  14. Re:Google is CONTRIBUTING requiring Location on fo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For the same reason they where hoovering up wifi ap's via their Street View cars ,location without gps

  15. Odd one out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The closest things I see to targeted ads on my phone are the occasional popup from Yelp telling me about some restaurant 25 miles away that I have no intention of eating at. Otherwise, I never actually see any targeted ads on my phone.

  16. Political Interference by Maelwryth · · Score: 1

    I am surprised there aren't more comments on how this ties to political interference. Location matched with some basic demographics would be enough to target specific groups within our countries and things have gotten a lot more granular than that.

    In the end it doesn't actually matter if Google or Facebook or iOS share the dataset if they are still sharing the ability to use it.

    --
    I reserve the write to mangle english.
  17. Ok... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... so she wasn't a whore ? Looks like a nerd ?

    What a poor story...

    Pick a whoreish slut next time and that I'll get the internet going LOL.

    SLUTTTSS

    WHORRRRESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

  18. But I left my cell home by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    How would my apps know where I was?

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  19. Re:Google is CONTRIBUTING requiring Location on fo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep. Part of their insidious business plan. For all you stupid fucks who work for that hellish company, fuck you! Just die. You are spending your days making this world a worse place. Please wear Google shirts when you walk outside so people know who to mutilate.

  20. Only Navigation Apps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your Apps Know Where You Were Last Night, and They're Not Keeping It Secret

    No, not really. I use iOS and *only* my navigation apps are allowed to access location data and *only* when app is being used.

    YMMV on Android.

  21. Re:Google is CONTRIBUTING requiring Location on fo by Kyr+Arvin · · Score: 1

    Google is contributing to the problem by requiring location services be turned on for a lot of bluetooth and Wifi Functions.

    I normally have location services turned off, and nothing on my phone has ever asked for them to be on besides Google Maps. Bluetooth and Wifi work just fine without them.

  22. can't say it enough by sad_ · · Score: 1

    people just don't care.
    we are the minority of people who care about all these privacy violations.

    i hardly have any apps on my phone, just because i can't trust 99.99999% of them, but the rest of the world is happy to install whatever stupid app they find in the store (or even outside the store, found on shady websites).
    complain about privacy? never!
    but they do complain about battery life (go figure), well guess why your battery life suck.

    --
    On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.