Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Updates Privacy Policy to Disclose Real-Time Location Tracking of Devices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
opt out
2 iphones 3G here and neither have worked. just says that I am not running IOS4. Glitch?
2 iphones 3G here and neither have worked. just says that I am not running IOS4. Glitch?
I'm opting out and only turning location services on when using maps or other apps that need GPS.
In addition, I'm hoping that the Jailbreak community comes up with a handy dandy little firewall to block sharing any data on your phone... Wouldn't that be awesome if the ad window for iAds just had a giant X in it? LOL
Maybe even a JB ap called "Adblockpro" just like they have for Firefox!
In addition, I'm hoping that the Jailbreak community comes up with a handy dandy little firewall to block sharing any data on your phone... Wouldn't that be awesome if the ad window for iAds just had a giant X in it? LOL
Maybe even a JB ap called "Adblockpro" just like they have for Firefox!
Ok, just quoted a few....
I take it you all LOVE the Win Vista constant queries? There is no way anyone is going to want to input Yes or No to every single thing they do on their phone or other device. It's cell phones, they do this. It's not going to get better, and the other choices (Android, etc) are also doing this, or will be shortly. Welcome to the 21st century.
I take it you all LOVE the Win Vista constant queries? There is no way anyone is going to want to input Yes or No to every single thing they do on their phone or other device. It's cell phones, they do this. It's not going to get better, and the other choices (Android, etc) are also doing this, or will be shortly. Welcome to the 21st century.
Just opted out. No problem here in the Netherlands.
From the site:
You have successfully opted-out.
A few things you should know:
You may still see the same number of ads as before, but they may be less relevant because they will not be based on your interests.
You may still see ads related to the content in an application or based on other non-personal information.
If you use more than one Apple mobile device, you will have to opt-out from each device individually.
This opt-out applies only to Apple advertising services and does not affect interest-based advertising from other advertising networks.
From the site:
You have successfully opted-out.
A few things you should know:
You may still see the same number of ads as before, but they may be less relevant because they will not be based on your interests.
You may still see ads related to the content in an application or based on other non-personal information.
If you use more than one Apple mobile device, you will have to opt-out from each device individually.
This opt-out applies only to Apple advertising services and does not affect interest-based advertising from other advertising networks.
And so you can turn location services on for those applications.
Yes, it is. You can control location services app-by-app, and you can opt out of the iAd data sharing separately.
And this is different from any other app with advertising, how? Whether it's AdMob or Flurry or any other advertising platform, that data is available. There is no opt out for those services, which is why analytic data is restricted for third parties (but just like Google on their own platform, not first parties).
You can turn off location services for iAd by opting out. If anything, that's a net positive for software using iAd, because it means you can leave location services turned ON, while still avoiding the data reporting through the opt out.
Really, this has worked for a long time on Android phones using the same mechanisms, the same data collection, the same advertising partner sharing. And unlike things like Gmail and your cable box, there is an opt out. I really don't see where there's anything new or even remotely interesting about any of this.
The privacy terms were updated to reflect how location services and iAd work. That's it. If you're uncomfortable with the sharing, they're features you don't have to use. If you want to use the features, then sharing with third parties is necessary for them to work.
I don't run Windows, what's your point ?
It should be opt-in, not opt-out.
Why?
That would have a number of negative consequences, including:
1. The phone should ship with some of its features turned off by default, fueling usability complaints.
2. It would place iAd at a disadvantage compared to other advertising platforms on the devices, which are not opt-in.
3. It would place Apple at a disadvantage compared to Android, where data collection is not opt in (and much of it has no opt out).
4. It would achieve no net benefit. People are aware that information is shared with advertisers everywhere there's advertising or analytics: TV, print, web sites, store loyalty cards, search engines, ad-supported software. Anyone who would want to be excluded would know to opt out just as well as not opting in.
Maybe a toggle slider built in to the OS settings application for the opt out would be a good idea instead of a web link. But there's no reason to make this advertising opt in when all others aren't.
Don't care.
Don't care.
Don't care.
1-3: I have no interest in making money for Apple. My desire is to have a device that does what I want, and doesn't spy on me.
Factually false. Most people, as a rule, are not aware of these sorts of things. Look at some polling data.
Location services ask you for every app precisely because reporting your location is a much more significant erosion of privacy than most other things your computer does. It's annoying to have an app ask you, but it's worth it, and Apple obviously agrees. If you are reluctant to part with your location for some given app, Apple does not force you to choose either a) turn off location services throughout the phone, or b) trust the app. Apple gives you option c: reject location services for that specific app, while leaving it in place for all others you've okayed.
The location-based reporting that Apple does for its own purposes should be treated precisely the way location-based services are treated for any other app: ask you first. It's not that hard.
Then TURN OFF THOSE FEATURES.
No, most people don't care about such things. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. People would blindly opt in even when notified, as is obvious from all the club cards and the success of ad-supported services and software.
Provide some polling data that shows otherwise.
It's not hard; it's just pointless. Shipping products with advertised functionality disabled is more of a headache affecting far more customers than setting up a system to benefit a small minority (who are already aware of the settings) that further comes with an attendant competitive disadvantage compared to other products.
Honestly, if you're buying a product with location services, that data is going to be collected and shared when you use those services. If you don't know that going in, you're incapable of making an informed decision either way. There is no good reason to inconvenience the vast majority of your users for the sake of a tiny and vocal minority. The people saying it should be opt in are the same people who know how to turn it off; and the people they claim to be protecting are the same people who are going to say "yes, just work, phone!" when prompted without giving it a second thought.
Having each app ask on first launch is based on the fact that some unexpected applications might ask for the information. That is not true of the OS--when you're using built-in location services, you know it.
I'm still unclear on your position: people are expecting Apple to be collecting their location information to sell to advertisers and use for whatever purposes of their own, and will be annoyed to not have that "feature" automatically working? And those people are going to object if, when they boot up for the first time, Apple were to say -- like a million other services do when you give them your private info -- "Apple would like to use your location information for advertising and other purposes. Is that okay with you?" No one is objecting to location services, and that's why turning it all off is dumb. We're just asking Apple to ask our permission before recording and selling our location info -- just like any decent company does when you give it your email address, and just like Apple forces every other app on the platform to do. Why is that pointless?
lets all sink together
It may be your idea of the 21st century but its not mine.
Yes lets all drown together in the inevitability of being treated as guinea pigs and do nothing. I do not have android I have Apple so I am concerned about Apple, if and when I have Android I will be concerned with that.
Reminds me of other situations in history when people did nothing. I can remember a few.
It may be your idea of the 21st century but its not mine.
Yes lets all drown together in the inevitability of being treated as guinea pigs and do nothing. I do not have android I have Apple so I am concerned about Apple, if and when I have Android I will be concerned with that.
Reminds me of other situations in history when people did nothing. I can remember a few.
Yes. That's what location services are. Use them, and that data is made available to third parties. They may use that for targeted advertising (which, like with Google on the web and on Android, you can choose to opt out of). The whole point of location services is to provide your location to someone else, whether that's a local GPS app, an advertiser, or a photo sharing website, or any combination.
It's redundant and imposes unnecessary disadvantages compared to third-party services, none of which are opt in. If you're using location services to begin with, you are necessarily wanting that functionality.
When you say "yes" to Google Maps, you're already giving it permission not just for the maps but for its advertising based on your searches and location. They come hand in hand. The same is true of any location service. There is therefore no point in having functionality disabled out of the box--when you type something into Google Maps, saying it should ask you "do you want to send this information?" is nothing but a frustration. Of course you do; that's why you typed it in.
No, that's not what you're asking. You're comparing it to personal information, which is invalid, and you're talking about location prompts from apps, which only exist because location services is turned on in the first place. Turn it off and those prompts go away.
Location services don't work without third party access to your location information. You go to Android and it works the same way. Google collects the data and shares it with third parties. You can disable individual app access or you can turn it off systemwide. You're not given an opt in to advertising within the apps if you're using something other than iAd, and you're not given an opt in for data collection on Android or webOS or Blackberry OS for location services. Why should the same functionality on iOS work differently than it does everywhere else? It's a feature of the phone that you can turn off if you don't want, but it works out of the box like all other advertised features.
The act of using the services on is the approval, since they don't work otherwise. No one is sharing personal information and Apple is certainly not charting new waters in data collection. iAd doesn't do anything that other advertising services on other platforms don't do.
Location services are provided by an app that I bought and it should not be allowed to collect and keep my data, much less sell it on to god knows who.
Why do you assume that having a gps is reason enough to abuse peoples privacy.
Exactly this. You make an excellent point which I actually quite agree with - you did pay in full for a product, and you sure as hell do have that right. That's why there's an off switch for it. It's naive and simplistic of people to think that Apple is big brother and is watching you. The pizza was an exaggerated analogy.
Why should people like me, who might want to use the location services for certain tasks, have to accept something like iAd targeting? That to me doesn't sound right. Flawed logic.
In fact; I want to be able to block all ad networks on my cellphone – just like I do on all my computers – because I have to pay for the data that is being pushed onto my cell phone.
Note: Bocking domains can be done with a jailbroken iPhone, but this will have to change since it, being /etc/hosts, is part of the Open Source Code used by iOSx and thus we should get this right, or claim it!
That's just not how the world works. The reality is that any app that offers location services may choose to use advertising as well. There's absolutely nothing new about that. Your job, as always, is to weigh the benefits against the costs and decide whether or not to use a given product or service.
Google Maps from the beginning has tailored advertisements based on your searches. Google ads in all other contexts do, too. Targeted advertisements are given to you unless you opt out on Google web sites and on Android. iAd provides the same service. If you disable targeted advertisements, that information won't be shared. It's fairly simple.
There's no private information here. The fact that a person was standing at the corner of Columbus and Kearney at a certain date and time isn't private information. Where's the busload of people with the "IP addresses aren't personally identifying" banners? IP addresses provide pretty detailed location information, but as they say, it doesn't identify a person by itself.
You don't. That's why there's an opt out option.
If you don't want targeted ads, you can opt out with Apple and you can opt out with Google. Other ad networks may or may not let you opt out. If you don't want certain people having access to your location data, you can turn off location services for those apps. If you don't want anyone having access, you can shut the whole thing down systemwide.
IP addresses dont identify a person? Thats a joke right? Every PC has a unique and identifiable print, match that with the IP and name, bingo, you have everything. Same with your mobile except its worse the PC stays at home the mobile is carried along with you. Much bigger intrusion.
With regards to Iad. I understand that your comparing Apple with other manufacturers but as I said before I don’t have android and probably never will although I love the software and the phones I cant get over the fact that its Google. Google at home and Google on my mobile is a bit too much!
I don’t allow apps to use my locations services, its like someone arriving at your front door and letting them in without knowing who they are or what they want.
I can understand that if you provide a free advertisement based app and the person that downloaded it accepts that’s its free because its sponsored then its up to the individual. However even if you do accept advertisement I do not understand how that translates to you accepting that your data is collected, kept and sold.
No, it's not a joke. An IP address can be matched with public data to identify a location. It can be matched with ISP records to reasonably identify a machine, which can then be matched to an account. But as is pointed out whenever anyone is sued based on an IP address, that is not personally-identifying or even device-identifying, because the lookup stops at the router, and even if it went straight to a computer, it can't identify the user. For the same reason, saying that "a" device (no unique information is provided to third parties here) is at a certain location at a certain time is in no way private information.
Advertising using your IP address for location data is common and has no opt out.
And that is of course your right. I don't allow most applications to use my location, either.
And I don't understand what you don't understand about it. That's how advertising works. Anonymous data is collected, stored, and sold. It's called analytics, and every advertising medium has them, even print ads and billboards. Those analytics also include location data, and usually you can't opt out at all.
Google and iAd, however, give you the option to opt out of targeted advertising, which gives you less customized advertising. You still get ads, but you get less relevant ads. It's opt out rather than opt in because Google starting with Gmail, as well as other advertisiers, have found that people prefer more relevant ads because they're less intrusive and more useful for users, and the higher click-through rate also makes them more profitable. It's a win-win arrangement, unless you think advertisers should only be able to supply advertising to aggregate pools. But setting a default option to serve a tiny minority (that regardless of the default setting, would know to check it) makes no sense, particularly with regard to location data, because an IP address alone provides fairly specific location data anyway and your IP address is always public.
iAds free the apps?
I was thinking about this earlier today as I was shopping for an iOS4 alarm-clock app.
Essentially under the app-store model, we are being "paid" with free apps, and there is frequently a corresponding paid-app that is ad-free.
I have paid for an app that didn't offer much more value simply because I valued it so highly, but often stick to the free-apps because I don't "poo gold." (Or I've been flushing it away if I do.)
When I do use the free-apps, I find it easier to ignore ads that are not targeted toward me. I'm just saying that the more money that is put into iAds, the more in-your-face the ads will become. There will likely be a corresponding paid-version that is ad-free, but I hope that their prices do not climb to parallel the price of advertising.
Can anyone think of apps that you paid for but still feature advertisements? What about on the iPad?
M@
PS I still think that a killer-app is one of the best get-rich-quick schemes there is today--provided you can put together the programming and/or programmers to get the job done and apple approves it. At the same time, I recognize that individual developers should seek to maximize their short-term/personal profits.
I was thinking about this earlier today as I was shopping for an iOS4 alarm-clock app.
Essentially under the app-store model, we are being "paid" with free apps, and there is frequently a corresponding paid-app that is ad-free.
I have paid for an app that didn't offer much more value simply because I valued it so highly, but often stick to the free-apps because I don't "poo gold." (Or I've been flushing it away if I do.)
When I do use the free-apps, I find it easier to ignore ads that are not targeted toward me. I'm just saying that the more money that is put into iAds, the more in-your-face the ads will become. There will likely be a corresponding paid-version that is ad-free, but I hope that their prices do not climb to parallel the price of advertising.
Can anyone think of apps that you paid for but still feature advertisements? What about on the iPad?
M@
PS I still think that a killer-app is one of the best get-rich-quick schemes there is today--provided you can put together the programming and/or programmers to get the job done and apple approves it. At the same time, I recognize that individual developers should seek to maximize their short-term/personal profits.