Oh NOES!
Apple's partners:
CIA
FBI
KGB
MI-9
MOSSAD
NSA
NBA
WNBA
LMNOP
TBS
ELO
NKOTB
You forgot NAMBLA.
Oh NOES!
Apple's partners:
CIA
FBI
KGB
MI-9
MOSSAD
NSA
NBA
WNBA
LMNOP
TBS
ELO
NKOTB
Just turn off Location Services when you're at home or your mistress's apartment. End of story.So they know that my iPhone is at my house but they can't personally ID me?.......not that reassuring....![]()
That's what the "Find My iPhone" functionality does. It still requires you to opt-in by configuring the device and enabling the service. Also, Apple is not a law enforcement organization. It's up to you do decide what to do with the search results (e.g., notifying your local authorities).I don't really mind, I think they should use the data productively and recover our Lost/Stolen iPhones when requested.
Not a good idea:Just turn off Location Services when you're at home or your mistress's apartment. End of story.
Apparently, I'm not running iOS4.![]()
What are you talking about?
About 98% of Google's revenue comes from ad sales, specifically a highly proprietary system known as Google AdWords. Apple is actually very good at requiring you to opt in regarding location-based apps. Google's privacy policy regarding location services reads about the same as Apple's. Remember, you can opt out of giving data to either company by simply refusing to use their products and services.
If you don't like it, go back to your Sony Walkman, mix tapes, and deadtrees notepad.
do people scrutinize google's policies as in-depth as everyone is scrutinizing apple's policies?
i can't imagine that apple is the first one to come up with this kind of privacy policy. but it appears there is a huge uproar when a company actually admits the type of information-digging that they do.
I love this place.
If this were a similar article about Google, you'd have hundreds of people saying f*** Google, I'll never use their services again! Now that it's Apple, it's all, who cares if they know that you're going for coffee! I trust Apple completely!
Then you can't have a cell phone at all, because they all are required to provide location data via the E911 service, and even without that, any active cellular phone can be approximately located to less than a typical city block simply by polling the towers.
It's not like cellular triangulation couldn't already place you within a few meters, with or without your consent. It's the nature of the technology.
Conspiracy theorists UNITE!
I'm not too worried about whether or not companies know where I am; I have nothing to hide, nor do I do anything (too) illegal.
Don't get me wrong, I definitely don't support it, I'm just accepting the inevitable, because it's only a matter of time before it's 10x worse than advertising agaencies tracking you. lol
Presumably cellular triangulation technology doesn't apply to wi-fi access while location services do?It's not like cellular triangulation couldn't already place you within a few meters, with or without your consent. It's the nature of the technology.
It's natural - if I am in Brooklyn and hungry, I am not going to want to see an ad for a Pizza shop in L.A.. Similarly, if I am the pizza shop in L.A., I don't want to pay for an ad that is going to target people in NYC, who will not fly to LA even if they want a pizza.
As long as we trust that the data won't be analyzed after the fact specifically to try and identify us as individuals, I am OK with this. I trust Apple not to do this, or to allow it to happen, although such things are already possible using phone logs, etc. This isn't that big of a change in what we already do / know.
Except none of that is the case. Location information is used for location-based services. Disable the services, either systemwide or on a per-app basis, and problem solved.The new terms appear to give Apple the right to collect and provide data to whomever they want, for whatever reason, for as long as they want, whether or not we know about it, without giving us a right to refuse and without telling us what data will be/were shared. Do people really not see what is wrong with this?
Of course there's a reason. The information made available, and the advertisers taking advantage of it, vary by location and vary over time. No other advertising platform tells you who's getting what data. Google's certainly doesn't. Why should there be a different expectation here?Certainly you can see there is middle ground, right? There is absolutely no reason Apple couldn't clearly define who gets access to what data, and/or give users more of a say in the matter.
No, that doesn't surprise me at all. My point was that that ship sailed. Any device that communicates can give away its location or other data for analytics. If you want to take advantage of location services, then you have to be able to get location information; if you don't like the privacy implications of that, turn it off.Perhaps unbelievably to you, I actually do not like that 911 tracking is involuntary.
But you're not. Location-based services don't work if your location isn't given to third parties. It can't work any other way. If you don't like that, no one's "committing" you to use it.But I certainly do not want to be involuntarily committed to such surveillance.
Well, that's life. Convenience and risk of abuse always go hand in hand. They're not getting any personally identifying information out of the disclosures, so I fail to see how it affects insurance decisions.I like the idea of adverts that aren't porn etc.. but at the same time I don't like the idea that people can misuse the information to map out my daily life then make decisions regarding insurance etc based on it.