Do you feel the same way about your closet space? How about your underware? Or your car? Surely you do not use it all the time. Do you leave it on the curb with the keys on the visor and an inviting sign? It's not like you need to hoard the vehicle when you're sleeping.
Pay attention now, that's a different set of data. On one hand we have the "consolidated.db" file which Apple now has stated is a sub-set of the full database of network access points they have. On the other hand we have data of new network access points (or updated data of old ones) that is collected by the phone and sent anonymously to Apple.
Why would Apple send themselves a file that they sent you in the first place?
Moreover, they are not sending this data back silently. A year ago they explained in detail which data the phone sends, under what circumstances it sends it, and how to stop it from sending it. Notice that updating the local "consolidated.db" file when Locations Services was off is identified as a bug, while sending collected data anonymously is in fact disabled when you turn off Locations Services.
The difference is that, unlike to the others that you mentioned, Apple's business model does not require mining consumer behavioural data. Facebook, Google, and others have no choice but to do so, since they have little other means, if any, of collecting revenue.
This means that, while profiting from such data collection may seem obvious and the most natural step for most companies, Apple does not necessarily share the same incentives.
Fine, it's legal, but it is creepy, just as finding some stranger in front of your house staring at you. You may be fine with Google being creepy this way, but some of us are not.
No, if you think about it, the reason the phone is collecting it is so that it can use it to find cell towers and other access points nearby without having to figure them out every time.
Fine, so they got MAC addresses and SSIDs and tied them to the current geolocation of the StreetView car, with additional information to determine the precise location of the node.
How is this acceptable to the myriad people who expected privacy from setting the secure bit on their routers?
firstly, that there is no evidence or indication that this data is being transmitted to Apple;
secondly, that there is all indication that the data being "collected" is actually a cache of access points to aide the device in connecting to networks, and all other wireless devices employ similar techniques;
thirdly, that Apple has not given me any indication of trying to exploit my personal information for gain, and in fact have defended their right not to share this information with advertisers, developers, and other external parties;
and fourthly, that since they are primarily a hardware company making a shedload of money doing so, they do not have the same incentives or (needs) as others to build data mining, brokering, and selling into their business model.
No. Read the EULA. You gave them permission to transmit location data to provide location services. That means that if you open tha maps application and attempt to look up places near you, your phone needs to transmit the exact location. Moreover, if the service is provided bt a third party, then that location data needs to be transmitted to them, or else they won't be able to fulfill the your request.
It does not mean that they will share your precise location with just anybody, at any time, for whatever reason--only in response to your requests for location-based services.
But I understand, "Apple tracks your location when you ask them to tell you where you are" does not have the same sinister ring.
I tried that, and they complied by blurring a single image. If I advance the map by a few feet and turn to look at my house it is still visible from many other angles. That is not satisfactory, especially when I did not consent to it.
Are you dense? The Wi-Fi standard allows for the encryption of payload, while the headers are always sent in the clear, regardless of whether users secured their networks or not.
Most people were not aware of this, and rightfully thought that setting their networks to be "secure" was enough to provide privacy. These people had a very reasonable expectation of privacy.
Google took advantage of this fact and logged SSID's, MAC and IP addresses of every wireless network it encountered, regardless of security status. It then used this information to map the precise location of each transmitter. Moreover, this information is used to detect the location of any user who happens to come from such networks, and all done without the consent or even knowledge of most users.
Are you kidding me? The metric system is centered on a base-10 computation model, so all units are just powers of 10 of each other, with very few exceptions. One exception that I know of is time measurements, which are based on 60.
Temperature has its own scale too, but it is still based on powers of 10. Furthermore, it is directly related to the physical changes of state of a metric unit of water. This is a more natural scale, since everybody can intuitively recognize that boiling water is hot and frozen water is cold, and that both are diametrically opposite.
As far as I know, humans normally have 10 fingers, which is why our numeric system is based on powers of 10 also. Hence, the metric system should be easier to use for the general populous.
>> Actually, I didn't realize until reading your post that you could click on the corrected word to dismiss autocorrect - I though you had to click the X, which often leads to clicking the area to the _right_ of the autocorrect on very small screens (like my phone) which inserts the *insert expletive here* corrected word anyway.
Wait, you don't have to click the X? Damn! I didn't know that either.
I would like a place I could call my own Have a conversation on the telephone Wake up every day that would be a start I would not complain of my wounded heart
No. A memory leak is when you click on a button, the hourglass shows up, and after waiting like an idiot for a few minutes, it just fizzles away and nothing happens, because the computer forgot what you asked it to do.
When your computer keeps forgetting stuff like that, it may eventually end up doing something completely stupid or even questionable, and then you end up with an "Illegal Operation" error. Those are scary!
You'd be surprised to know that Safari disables third-party cookies by default, with the presumption that they are used mostly by advertisers. This is irrespective of the legitimate uses of third-party cookies, however few they may be.
I can clearly imagine Apple enabling the "Do Not Track" feature by default, seeing that there is no other context for it than to protect the user from tracking by advertisers.
Actually, Chrome supports "Don't be (too) evil": It uses a "super cookie" to persist opt-out cookies. That allows subtle tracking (since the user has to actively opt out of sites, implying that he visited them) without actually tracking you, as you suggested.
Safari, Mozilla, and IE9 support a blanket "do not track me" header, that gives away no information about your browsing, other than the fact that you do not want to be tracked.
IE 9 and Safari both support disabling third-party cookies. Safari does it by default; I'm not sure about IE 9.
The "Do Not Track" option mentioned in the article is an additional header that depends on advertisers honouring it. However, if supported, this mechanism works as a global "opt out" system, where the user does not have to take any action per site.
Google, on the other hand, is trying to promote a mechanism that collects all "Opt-Out" cookies and persists them in a sort of "super cookie." In essence, this mechanism allows advertisers to know which users visited a site and actively opted out of tracking, as opposed to the blanket application of the other method. It is thus a subtler kind of profiling and exploitation, without actual tracking.
In Jobs' defense, he saw the personal computer in the same light as a toaster: an appliance for the masses, which the user need not know nor care how it works.
The iMac fulfills this role beautifully. Users buy them, take them home, and just turn them on to use them.
Regular people do not upgrade their toasters. They use them until they break, then buy a new one, plug it in, and make toast.
That's great! Do they still play the 80's commercial jingle classics over the PA for ambience? I love those, and they complement the elegant dining experience at Taco Bell.
Have you ever heard of a library? How about an encyclopaedia? References existed before the Internet and Wikipedia, you know.
The number of constitutional amendments does not change all that often. The fact that there have been only 27 in about 200 years is testament to this, and that's not even counting that the first ten were included with the original. The last amendment was ratified in 1992, so researching the U.S. Constitution in 1999 would not have been that hard. Heck, any encyclopaedia with updated tomes (like the ones kept in public libraries) would have suffice. Even text books would have been updated in the intervening seven years.
And in the rare occurrence that you couldn't get any evidence as to the current state of the Constitution, it would have been rather easy to prove your professor's claim wrong; seeing that there haven't been 25 amendments since 1971.
The Internet and instant access are not at all part of this argument.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you feel the same way about your closet space? How about your underware? Or your car? Surely you do not use it all the time. Do you leave it on the curb with the keys on the visor and an inviting sign? It's not like you need to hoard the vehicle when you're sleeping.
-dZ.
Actually, it is even easier than that. Just call: // foo = current timestamp
c1.f(foo);
I agree that naming things could be improved.
-dZ.
Pay attention now, that's a different set of data. On one hand we have the "consolidated.db" file which Apple now has stated is a sub-set of the full database of network access points they have. On the other hand we have data of new network access points (or updated data of old ones) that is collected by the phone and sent anonymously to Apple.
Why would Apple send themselves a file that they sent you in the first place?
Moreover, they are not sending this data back silently. A year ago they explained in detail which data the phone sends, under what circumstances it sends it, and how to stop it from sending it. Notice that updating the local "consolidated.db" file when Locations Services was off is identified as a bug, while sending collected data anonymously is in fact disabled when you turn off Locations Services.
-dZ.
The difference is that, unlike to the others that you mentioned, Apple's business model does not require mining consumer behavioural data. Facebook, Google, and others have no choice but to do so, since they have little other means, if any, of collecting revenue.
This means that, while profiting from such data collection may seem obvious and the most natural step for most companies, Apple does not necessarily share the same incentives.
-dZ.
Fine, it's legal, but it is creepy, just as finding some stranger in front of your house staring at you. You may be fine with Google being creepy this way, but some of us are not.
-dZ.
No, if you think about it, the reason the phone is collecting it is so that it can use it to find cell towers and other access points nearby without having to figure them out every time.
-dZ.
Fine, so they got MAC addresses and SSIDs and tied them to the current geolocation of the StreetView car, with additional information to determine the precise location of the node.
How is this acceptable to the myriad people who expected privacy from setting the secure bit on their routers?
-dZ.
Actually, my rationale is:
firstly, that there is no evidence or indication that this data is being transmitted to Apple;
secondly, that there is all indication that the data being "collected" is actually a cache of access points to aide the device in connecting to networks, and all other wireless devices employ similar techniques;
thirdly, that Apple has not given me any indication of trying to exploit my personal information for gain, and in fact have defended their right not to share this information with advertisers, developers, and other external parties;
and fourthly, that since they are primarily a hardware company making a shedload of money doing so, they do not have the same incentives or (needs) as others to build data mining, brokering, and selling into their business model.
dZ.
No. Read the EULA. You gave them permission to transmit location data to provide location services. That means that if you open tha maps application and attempt to look up places near you, your phone needs to transmit the exact location. Moreover, if the service is provided bt a third party, then that location data needs to be transmitted to them, or else they won't be able to fulfill the your request.
It does not mean that they will share your precise location with just anybody, at any time, for whatever reason--only in response to your requests for location-based services.
But I understand, "Apple tracks your location when you ask them to tell you where you are" does not have the same sinister ring.
dZ.
There is no indication that the data in the cache database is being transmitted to Apple.
dZ.
You have that choice. If you read the article, you can disable location services completely.
dZ.
I tried that, and they complied by blurring a single image. If I advance the map by a few feet and turn to look at my house it is still visible from many other angles. That is not satisfactory, especially when I did not consent to it.
dZ.
Are you dense? The Wi-Fi standard allows for the encryption of payload, while the headers are always sent in the clear, regardless of whether users secured their networks or not.
Most people were not aware of this, and rightfully thought that setting their networks to be "secure" was enough to provide privacy. These people had a very reasonable expectation of privacy.
Google took advantage of this fact and logged SSID's, MAC and IP addresses of every wireless network it encountered, regardless of security status. It then used this information to map the precise location of each transmitter. Moreover, this information is used to detect the location of any user who happens to come from such networks, and all done without the consent or even knowledge of most users.
-dZ.
Hum, which lawsuit are you talking about? The one against Samsung is regarding utility patents, and design patents and trade dress.
dZ.
Are you kidding me? The metric system is centered on a base-10 computation model, so all units are just powers of 10 of each other, with very few exceptions. One exception that I know of is time measurements, which are based on 60.
Temperature has its own scale too, but it is still based on powers of 10. Furthermore, it is directly related to the physical changes of state of a metric unit of water. This is a more natural scale, since everybody can intuitively recognize that boiling water is hot and frozen water is cold, and that both are diametrically opposite.
As far as I know, humans normally have 10 fingers, which is why our numeric system is based on powers of 10 also. Hence, the metric system should be easier to use for the general populous.
-dZ.
>> Actually, I didn't realize until reading your post that you could click on the corrected word to dismiss autocorrect - I though you had to click the X, which often leads to clicking the area to the _right_ of the autocorrect on very small screens (like my phone) which inserts the *insert expletive here* corrected word anyway.
Wait, you don't have to click the X? Damn! I didn't know that either.
Thanks!
-dZ.
I would like a place I could call my own
Have a conversation on the telephone
Wake up every day that would be a start
I would not complain of my wounded heart
No. A memory leak is when you click on a button, the hourglass shows up, and after waiting like an idiot for a few minutes, it just fizzles away and nothing happens, because the computer forgot what you asked it to do.
When your computer keeps forgetting stuff like that, it may eventually end up doing something completely stupid or even questionable, and then you end up with an "Illegal Operation" error. Those are scary!
-dZ.
You'd be surprised to know that Safari disables third-party cookies by default, with the presumption that they are used mostly by advertisers. This is irrespective of the legitimate uses of third-party cookies, however few they may be.
I can clearly imagine Apple enabling the "Do Not Track" feature by default, seeing that there is no other context for it than to protect the user from tracking by advertisers.
-dZ.
Actually, Chrome supports "Don't be (too) evil": It uses a "super cookie" to persist opt-out cookies. That allows subtle tracking (since the user has to actively opt out of sites, implying that he visited them) without actually tracking you, as you suggested.
Safari, Mozilla, and IE9 support a blanket "do not track me" header, that gives away no information about your browsing, other than the fact that you do not want to be tracked.
-dZ.
IE 9 and Safari both support disabling third-party cookies. Safari does it by default; I'm not sure about IE 9.
The "Do Not Track" option mentioned in the article is an additional header that depends on advertisers honouring it. However, if supported, this mechanism works as a global "opt out" system, where the user does not have to take any action per site.
Google, on the other hand, is trying to promote a mechanism that collects all "Opt-Out" cookies and persists them in a sort of "super cookie." In essence, this mechanism allows advertisers to know which users visited a site and actively opted out of tracking, as opposed to the blanket application of the other method. It is thus a subtler kind of profiling and exploitation, without actual tracking.
-dZ.
In Jobs' defense, he saw the personal computer in the same light as a toaster: an appliance for the masses, which the user need not know nor care how it works.
The iMac fulfills this role beautifully. Users buy them, take them home, and just turn them on to use them.
Regular people do not upgrade their toasters. They use them until they break, then buy a new one, plug it in, and make toast.
-dZ.
That's great! Do they still play the 80's commercial jingle classics over the PA for ambience? I love those, and they complement the elegant dining experience at Taco Bell.
dZ.
Have you ever heard of a library? How about an encyclopaedia? References existed before the Internet and Wikipedia, you know.
The number of constitutional amendments does not change all that often. The fact that there have been only 27 in about 200 years is testament to this, and that's not even counting that the first ten were included with the original. The last amendment was ratified in 1992, so researching the U.S. Constitution in 1999 would not have been that hard. Heck, any encyclopaedia with updated tomes (like the ones kept in public libraries) would have suffice. Even text books would have been updated in the intervening seven years.
And in the rare occurrence that you couldn't get any evidence as to the current state of the Constitution, it would have been rather easy to prove your professor's claim wrong; seeing that there haven't been 25 amendments since 1971.
The Internet and instant access are not at all part of this argument.
-dZ.
Wouldn't it have been simpler to just, you know, look up the constitution and verify the claims of each against it instead of arguing for 3 days?
In my opinion, education and independent thinking failed you both.
-dZ.