To be fair, that isn't always true. Sometimes it is, but in large parts of the country, it is impossible to drive on the roads, and maintain a distance that will allow you to stop if the driver in front of you slams on their breaks. Whenever we drive, we rely on other drivers not doing something unexpected. So, while you are not totally wrong, and there are a lot of bad drivers, it is also not the case that someone hitting another person in front of them is always the person in backs fault. (obviously I am not using the legal term for 'at fault'.)
If police were blindly enforcing the speed limit, then you would be right. When they are targeting particular locations for profit, then you are wrong. I know which they do. Do you?
How about the shenanigans where they say that they are not tracking the location of the phone, but that they are using location data to build a traffic database. To be of any use traffic databases need to be near real time, and they have to be accurate to within about a block. It is useless to know where a phone is "more than one hundred miles away" last week.
#3 "iPhone using a crowd-sourced database of Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data that is generated by tens of millions of iPhones sending the geo-tagged locations of nearby Wi-Fi hotspots and cell towers"
#5 "This data is sent to Apple"
#8 "Apple is now collecting anonymous traffic data to build a crowd-sourced traffic database"
There is no question that Apple is collecting data. They very clearly admit that they do. The question is whether A) They are truly anonymizing it. B) Whether they will always anonymize it, and C) Do they have the right to take data off your phone without permission even if it is Anonymized.
Well, if you don't know how triangulation works, then there will be no convincing you. The fact that "where certain towers and access points were" are two the three ways that a phone knows where it is will be irrelevant to you.
By 'bug' I was refering to a secret remote monitoring device. If that lead to a misunderstanding, I apologize. That doesn't change that Apple has been secretly monitoring users.
Apple says on their own website http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/27location_qa.html that they are collecting data and transmitting it back to Apple even when location services are turned off. The level of cognitive disassociation that it must take to think that they are not collecting data, even when Apple themselves say they are is astounding.
Plus, cell tower locations is your location for anyone that knows how to do math. I presume that Apple has a couple of people on staff that are capable of doing some fairly simple math.
Whether Apple is spying on users via "consolidated.db" or by "consolidated_2.db", or by any other filename is irrelevant. Trying to pretend like there isn't a problem because they might be using a different filename, or data identifier is cognitive disassociation and newspeak.
It's like punching people. At a party you are a problem. In a boxing match you are not. If you punch more often and harder in a boxing match, you just a better boxer. So, no they are no longer trolls.
The lack of culling the file is a red herring. It is the small 'mistake' they use to divert people from the fact that they were secretly bugging their phones. Apple was continuing to collect location data and transmit that data back to Apple even when the user turned off location services. As bad as poor cache culling is, it is a distraction that is being exploited by Apple.
You don't know that Apple isn't tracking their users on a personal basis. Apple is notorious for hand waving and telling you that "We've always been at war with Eastasia". A perfect example is to say they are not recording the location of your phone, but instead are recording the cell towers and wifi points. We all know that it is pretty trivial to calculate a point from that, and in fact is how all GPS supplies a users location. If Apple defines "no personally identifiable information" the way they define "don't log your location", then they are tracking users.
Claiming that they were not secretly tracking users because they admitted it AFTER they got caught does not mean they were not doing it secretly. The EULA excuse is just that. An excuse. It is intentionally writing in a vague manner in a document that they know full well will not be read by the vast majority of people. Just as their admitting that they are still tracking users, and will continue to track users is writing in New-Speak so that users will not know they are being tracked. Just read this forum, and your own post to see how many people know they are being tracked even after the New-Speak press release.
Here is a question. (Presuming you have an iPhone) Do you know that you are being tracked by Apple? If the answer is no, then you have validated my point on how Apple can admit that they are tracking users and still be doing it secretly.
There is nothing that indicates that triangulation cannot be done after the fact. That is just made up. -5
Even if they properly anonymize the data (which is questionable), it is still not OK to sneak data off of the phone owners device without their knowledge. -5
This is not blown out of proportion. Apple is not a company filled with a bunch of bubling idiots. They knew exactly what they were doing, and have stated that they are going to continue. That is not a reasonable response.
If Apple isn't identifying who the data is coming from, then the data is useless because it is wide open to being flooded with fake data the first time Anonymous decides it is angry at Apple. It is amazing how often "Apple is stupid" is used by people to defend Apple. And, yes, it is still my data.
That would be a win-win. There is nothing wrong with a bunch of people with shared interest getting together to explore those interests. If Trolling is their interest, then what's the problem with them doing it in their own space?
If your admin would blow off a little steam by intentionally screwing with users, you should fire them immediately before you get in too deep with them. Today, they may feel that the internet troll is the one who deserves the sabotage. After their next review, it might be the company that they feel needs to be put in their place.
That one got me for the longest time. I actually put myself on a self imposed ban from even using that word for a while. That is why I say that it is a bad idea to complain to much about spelling and grammar. We all make mistakes, and on the odd occasion that I have decided to have a spelling/grammer debate with the Nazi of the day, it always ends with them making spelling and grammer mistakes. If enough words are written, even the best spellers and grammer...ers(?) will make mistakes.
You do realize that is New-Speak, right? If I track the spot 3 feet directly north of you, I AM tracking your location. Previously, it was reported that no location data was being sent to Apple. Now we are supposed to not worry about the data they are collecting, and have said they will continue to collect. Look at the words being used. Clearly Apple is collecting data from your phone, or they could not send a 'subset" of their "crowd sourced" database to you. In response to the question, they tell you what data they are sending in response. They don't talk about what data they are collecting.
Google never said that collection of WiFi hotspots was accidental. That would be a totally absurd lie. They were openly collecting data that was designed from the get go to be publicly accessable. If you find Google Street maps to be evil (as some obviously do), then that would be where the complaint lies. The "accident" part of their excuse was concerning how much data they were collecting when they hit an open WiFi hotspot.
The point of collection the WiFi hotspot data is that WiFi hotspots generally don't change. So if you can see 5 WiFi mac addresses at a specific location identified by your GPS, a week later you can determine with a pretty high level of confidence that if you can see the same 5 WiFi hotsposts, that you are at the same location without having to turn on the GPS radio.
It also makes things like identifying locations possible when in doors. How often do stores in a mall change their WiFi routers? Not often. By learning their mac addresses (no need to enter their network), your phone can figure out where in the mall you are, and give you navigation to the specific store you want.
Law enforcement can do anything with it that they can do with GPS data. They can determine where you were at specific times. Interestingly enough, while law enforcement can get phone records from the phone company with a warrant, they cannot get location data determined via WiFi mac addresses without getting access to the phone itself. Unless of course, your phone is transmitting that data back to the phone manufacturer.
Slashdot Mirror
That is a really sad commentary on the state of the USA.
To be fair, that isn't always true. Sometimes it is, but in large parts of the country, it is impossible to drive on the roads, and maintain a distance that will allow you to stop if the driver in front of you slams on their breaks. Whenever we drive, we rely on other drivers not doing something unexpected. So, while you are not totally wrong, and there are a lot of bad drivers, it is also not the case that someone hitting another person in front of them is always the person in backs fault. (obviously I am not using the legal term for 'at fault'.)
There is plenty of real crime. The problem is that real crime is a cost to enforce. Traffic is a revenue stream.
If police were blindly enforcing the speed limit, then you would be right. When they are targeting particular locations for profit, then you are wrong. I know which they do. Do you?
How about the shenanigans where they say that they are not tracking the location of the phone, but that they are using location data to build a traffic database. To be of any use traffic databases need to be near real time, and they have to be accurate to within about a block. It is useless to know where a phone is "more than one hundred miles away" last week.
From Apples web site: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/27location_qa.html
#3 "iPhone using a crowd-sourced database of Wi-Fi hotspot and cell tower data that is generated by tens of millions of iPhones sending the geo-tagged locations of nearby Wi-Fi hotspots and cell towers"
#5 "This data is sent to Apple"
#8 "Apple is now collecting anonymous traffic data to build a crowd-sourced traffic database"
There is no question that Apple is collecting data. They very clearly admit that they do. The question is whether A) They are truly anonymizing it. B) Whether they will always anonymize it, and C) Do they have the right to take data off your phone without permission even if it is Anonymized.
Really? Exactly what data are they sending back to Apple then?
Exactly my point.
Well, if you don't know how triangulation works, then there will be no convincing you. The fact that "where certain towers and access points were" are two the three ways that a phone knows where it is will be irrelevant to you.
The data that Apple admits to collecting here: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/27location_qa.html
By 'bug' I was refering to a secret remote monitoring device. If that lead to a misunderstanding, I apologize. That doesn't change that Apple has been secretly monitoring users.
Apple says on their own website http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/04/27location_qa.html that they are collecting data and transmitting it back to Apple even when location services are turned off. The level of cognitive disassociation that it must take to think that they are not collecting data, even when Apple themselves say they are is astounding.
Plus, cell tower locations is your location for anyone that knows how to do math. I presume that Apple has a couple of people on staff that are capable of doing some fairly simple math.
Whether Apple is spying on users via "consolidated.db" or by "consolidated_2.db", or by any other filename is irrelevant. Trying to pretend like there isn't a problem because they might be using a different filename, or data identifier is cognitive disassociation and newspeak.
It's like punching people. At a party you are a problem. In a boxing match you are not. If you punch more often and harder in a boxing match, you just a better boxer. So, no they are no longer trolls.
The lack of culling the file is a red herring. It is the small 'mistake' they use to divert people from the fact that they were secretly bugging their phones. Apple was continuing to collect location data and transmit that data back to Apple even when the user turned off location services. As bad as poor cache culling is, it is a distraction that is being exploited by Apple.
You don't know that Apple isn't tracking their users on a personal basis. Apple is notorious for hand waving and telling you that "We've always been at war with Eastasia". A perfect example is to say they are not recording the location of your phone, but instead are recording the cell towers and wifi points. We all know that it is pretty trivial to calculate a point from that, and in fact is how all GPS supplies a users location. If Apple defines "no personally identifiable information" the way they define "don't log your location", then they are tracking users.
Claiming that they were not secretly tracking users because they admitted it AFTER they got caught does not mean they were not doing it secretly. The EULA excuse is just that. An excuse. It is intentionally writing in a vague manner in a document that they know full well will not be read by the vast majority of people. Just as their admitting that they are still tracking users, and will continue to track users is writing in New-Speak so that users will not know they are being tracked. Just read this forum, and your own post to see how many people know they are being tracked even after the New-Speak press release.
Here is a question. (Presuming you have an iPhone) Do you know that you are being tracked by Apple? If the answer is no, then you have validated my point on how Apple can admit that they are tracking users and still be doing it secretly.
There is nothing that indicates that triangulation cannot be done after the fact. That is just made up. -5
Even if they properly anonymize the data (which is questionable), it is still not OK to sneak data off of the phone owners device without their knowledge. -5
This is not blown out of proportion. Apple is not a company filled with a bunch of bubling idiots. They knew exactly what they were doing, and have stated that they are going to continue. That is not a reasonable response.
It doesn't say your location if you can't do math. Those of us who can do math can pinpoint your location from that data pretty easily.
If Apple isn't identifying who the data is coming from, then the data is useless because it is wide open to being flooded with fake data the first time Anonymous decides it is angry at Apple. It is amazing how often "Apple is stupid" is used by people to defend Apple. And, yes, it is still my data.
I must be slow today because it took three posts deep, and an Anonymous coward for me to get the joke. Which made it that much funnier when it did.
That would be a win-win. There is nothing wrong with a bunch of people with shared interest getting together to explore those interests. If Trolling is their interest, then what's the problem with them doing it in their own space?
If your admin would blow off a little steam by intentionally screwing with users, you should fire them immediately before you get in too deep with them. Today, they may feel that the internet troll is the one who deserves the sabotage. After their next review, it might be the company that they feel needs to be put in their place.
Hanlon's Razor is self referencing.
That one got me for the longest time. I actually put myself on a self imposed ban from even using that word for a while. That is why I say that it is a bad idea to complain to much about spelling and grammar. We all make mistakes, and on the odd occasion that I have decided to have a spelling/grammer debate with the Nazi of the day, it always ends with them making spelling and grammer mistakes. If enough words are written, even the best spellers and grammer...ers(?) will make mistakes.
You do realize that is New-Speak, right? If I track the spot 3 feet directly north of you, I AM tracking your location. Previously, it was reported that no location data was being sent to Apple. Now we are supposed to not worry about the data they are collecting, and have said they will continue to collect. Look at the words being used. Clearly Apple is collecting data from your phone, or they could not send a 'subset" of their "crowd sourced" database to you. In response to the question, they tell you what data they are sending in response. They don't talk about what data they are collecting.
Google never said that collection of WiFi hotspots was accidental. That would be a totally absurd lie. They were openly collecting data that was designed from the get go to be publicly accessable. If you find Google Street maps to be evil (as some obviously do), then that would be where the complaint lies. The "accident" part of their excuse was concerning how much data they were collecting when they hit an open WiFi hotspot.
The point of collection the WiFi hotspot data is that WiFi hotspots generally don't change. So if you can see 5 WiFi mac addresses at a specific location identified by your GPS, a week later you can determine with a pretty high level of confidence that if you can see the same 5 WiFi hotsposts, that you are at the same location without having to turn on the GPS radio.
It also makes things like identifying locations possible when in doors. How often do stores in a mall change their WiFi routers? Not often. By learning their mac addresses (no need to enter their network), your phone can figure out where in the mall you are, and give you navigation to the specific store you want.
Law enforcement can do anything with it that they can do with GPS data. They can determine where you were at specific times. Interestingly enough, while law enforcement can get phone records from the phone company with a warrant, they cannot get location data determined via WiFi mac addresses without getting access to the phone itself. Unless of course, your phone is transmitting that data back to the phone manufacturer.
You mean the response that they are tracking users, and plan to continue to do so in the future?