18 ms·

It's amazing to me how many comments here excuse Google's behavior by offering the impractical "solution" of just not using a smartphone (a false dilemma) when

• baxtr 9y ago
  True. The big difference between Apple and google is that Apple sells you pricey hardware, that just works. In the case of google they sell you. Thus, but Business Model alone you should not trust google if you care about privacy. It doesn’t make sense for them to stop collecting data points about you.
  • dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Apple and google is that Apple sells you pricey hardware, that just works Well, pricey hardware, at least. > In the case of google they sell you No, they aren't in the slave trade; they sell ad placement, not people.
    • zitterbewegung 9y ago
      They sell ad placement by observing all of your behaviors and figuring out what you want to do. (Refining the other statement ).
    • evanlivingston 9y ago
      During the height of slavery it was widely accepted, culturally and legally, that slaves wern't people. Slavers sold implements of labor, not people.
    • victor106 9y ago
      About Price: the google Pixel phones are not much cheaper than an iPhone. The last I checked Pixel xl 2 was 10% cheaper than an iPhone X
      • dragonwriter 9y ago
        Sure, Google also sells pricey hardware, it's just not their core business.
    • stingraycharles 9y ago
      If people were not be there to watch the ads, what would those placements be worth? It’s not the placement that’s the value that’s being sold, it’s watching the ads that is. So they definitely use your data to sell your attention, which is the currency you’re paying with.
      • dragonwriter 9y ago
        > It’s not the placement that’s the value that’s being sold Yes, it is ad placement that is the actual thing being sold. Advertisers hope to get something else out of it (usually sales), but what is actually sold is placement. > So they definitely use your data to sell your attention, which is the currency you’re paying with. No, they are selling the placement. The placement is valuable because, in aggregate, there is an expectation that a certain share of the people to whom it is shown will give some attention to it, but the advertiser generally pays by impression, not by seconds viewed × share of viewers attention devoted to the ad during that time. But, in any case, either selling placement or attention is different than selling the user, which is a flatly inaccurate description used solely because of its emotional charge.
    • baxtr 9y ago
      What's your hypothesis on why they collect so much data on people?
• tryingagainbro 9y ago
  Only governments can tame this beast now, way too big and too rich for any startup. I noticed several chrome instances running on "Task manager" almost all the time. Used Chrome maybe months ago. So I uninstalled. Who knows what they were doing, collecting. I trust them as much as I (would) trust a hustler on the old 42nd street
  • akoncius 9y ago
    yeah. I decided to avoid chrome at all costs when noticed that when you install chrome and have firefox already installed , chrome automatically without user’s acknowledgement installs some mysterious google plugin which does not sure what. To verify it , I reproduced same scenario again and plugin was installed again. After that I uninstalled chrome and avoid google products as much as possible.
    • gatmne 9y ago
      This is interesting. Could you share more information about your setup: What operating system you use, Order of browser installation, and the name/id of the plugin would be a good start. It would be even greater if you could upload a zip archive of the plugin.
    • bartvk 9y ago
      You better back that up with additional data, because for now it sounds unbelievable. When was this, what OS, which Chrome version, were you able to replicate on a clean install, what was the name and version of the Google plugin, and put a few screenshots on imgur too.
    • kerberos84 9y ago
      Chrome does not allow you even to turn off auto-updates. Why? Because then they can't use their new tracking and advertising techniques on you.
      • Karunamon 9y ago
        Or rather, because people can't be trusted to update their browsers and turn their machines into a danger to themselves and others. No need for assuming malice.
• eknkc 9y ago
  I tell all my friends / family to get an iPhone if they are upgrading. I used iOS and Android phones and I like both. However it makes even me nerveous to use a banking application or similar on an Android. Can’t imagine what kind of shit my dad would have running on an Android device with all the fake fishing apps, bloatware, tracking etc going around. With a non jailbroken iPhone I have a lot more peace of mind.
  • kevin_thibedeau 9y ago
    > With a non jailbroken iPhone I have a lot more peace of mind. Ignorance is bliss.
    • xgbi 9y ago
      You seem to have something to share, could you elaborate? From my point of view, the sandboxing and authorization model of iOS is way better than what is available on Android right now. You could argue that newer versions of Android provide a way to ask for permissions, but suffices to target API level 22 on your app and you're off of it. And fon't get me started on full disk encryption and buggy TPM implementations on Android. So.. what do you know that we don't?
    • codedokode 9y ago
      As far as I know, the "jailbreak" is performed by using closed-source software that often is heavily obfuscated to prevent analysis. You cannot be sure that it doesn't install a backdoor as a bonus.
  • rightos 9y ago
    > However it makes even me nerveous to use a banking application or similar on an Android. Can’t imagine what kind of shit my dad would have running on an Android device with all the fake fishing apps, bloatware, tracking etc going around. Do these people not do banking on Windows machines? The malware situation was infinitely worse on Windows - I see an Android device with some unwanted ads maybe once a year from a friend or family member, but Windows devices are a weekly occurrence and the really nasty stuff - like password sealers and banking trojans do exist, but are extremely hard to come by on Android, compared to Windows where clicking a pop-up and a run button could leave you permanently infested.
• zipwitch 9y ago
  I'm not sure that avoiding (some of) the panopticon by aiding and abetting wealth concentration via child slave labor is such "an obvious answer".
  • eknkc 9y ago
    https://www.reddit.com/r/iamverysmart/ https://www.reddit.com/r/iamverysmart/
• geofft 9y ago
  I have an iPhone specifically because I want to use Google services (Calendar and Hangouts) without associating my entire phone with my Gmail account. A few Android releases ago, I was able to create a new Google account for my phone, with no contacts or anything, and still use Hangouts. It's recently gotten aggressive enough that I'm pretty sure that all my photos, location history, contacts, etc. are visible to my Gmail account and that my Gmail account has permissions to install apps on my phone, so I gave up and got an iPhone, where the only apps that care about my Google account are the Google apps I choose to install.
• bobajeff 9y ago
  > impractical "solution" of just not using a smartphone (a false dilemma) when the obvious answer is to get an iPhone. What is your life like to where you think not having a cell is impractical. In any case a smart phone is fundamentally a weak point in privacy/security no matter which one you get.
  • ctrl-j 9y ago
    > What is your life like to where you think not having a cell is impractical. In the 90s it was inconvenient to be out and about if you were expecting a call. You might be able to check your messages though, by dialing your answering machine from a payphone. Payphones barely exist anymore, so it would be even more inconvenient. If you need to be reachable at all (nowadays by email/sms), a cell phone is nearly a requirement. If you do not need to be reachable, you still put yourself at a significant disadvantage by not carrying one. What is your life like where you would not be inconvenienced by not having a cell phone?
    • ssfsa 9y ago
      My uncle, a top professor at a top 10 US research university didn't have a phone until two years ago. He did fine. In fact, he attributes his significantly higher productivity to not having a phone. Donald Knuth gave up email in 1990. Too distracting. (I dunno but I wouldn't think he has a cellphone) When I started grad school in '07 I wanted to forgo a cellphone. I couldn't. My advisor was even annoyed I held out on a smartphone for as long as I did (caved in 2010). In 2013, sick of my smartphone I went back to a dumbphone. It was great until 2015 when I started working at a place so crappy I have to routinely tether my phone for productive internet access. My point: it's very possible to live w/out a cell phone. Frankly it's not even hard (I "forget" my phone at home). However, unless you're tenured or are otherwise your own boss, you'll be forced to have one.
    • 3131s 9y ago
      > What is your life like where you would not be inconvenienced by not having a cell phone? Mostly pleasant and stress-free. I haven't owned any phone in ~6 years.
• clementine95 9y ago
  Come on, there is nothing impractical about not using a smartphone. You’re free to invent any excuse you need to justify your use of it, but there is virtually nothing you need a smartphone for. The obvious answer is not to get an iphone. Today it’s android, tomorrow it’s apple—you’re willingly using a massive closed stack to handle your location at all times. Trust is simply naive. If you accept you’re trading privacy, security, and money for a massively convenient liability, you’ll be much happier.
  • khedoros1 9y ago
    Well, yes, it's all convenience. So is having a phone in the first place. Or access to easy transportation. I'd argue that it's convenient to the point of being impractical to do without.
• dawnbreez 9y ago
  >the solution is to buy a (much more expensive) phone from this specific competitor This sounds like advertising. Also, I'm fairly sure that Apple also sells data. Indeed, given current privacy laws, it's basically guaranteed that if a company has proprietary software, it is selling data from that software.
  • labster 9y ago
    This sounds an awful lot like FUD. Care to back up any of those generalizations with evidence?
    • dawnbreez 9y ago
      The trouble is that the evidence is basically "Apple says they don't". Because the source code is not open, we can't know for sure one way or the other.
      • kgarten 9y ago
        No the source code won't help you. If you want to hide sth. you can hide it ;) http://wiki.c2.com/?TheKenThompsonHack http://wiki.c2.com/?TheKenThompsonHack
        • labster 9y ago
          Oh come on. For that to work Apple would have to become a major backer of a compiler, and even then provide major libraries that link to everything. And possibly even invent its own variant of C. What are the chances of that? Oh. Well. I'll just be hiding in this corner, then.
    • Johnny555 9y ago
      It's right there in their privacy policy, they already say that they can share your location and other "non-personal information" for any purpose. And it's a very small step from "occupation, language, zip code, area code, unique device identifier, referrer URL, location" for a vendor to identify you. If they weren't selling location information, then they could just say it: https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/ https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/ Collection and Use of Non-Personal Information We also collect data in a form that does not, on its own, permit direct association with any specific individual. We may collect, use, transfer, and disclose non-personal information for any purpose. The following are some examples of non-personal information that we collect and how we may use it: We may collect information such as occupation, language, zip code, area code, unique device identifier, referrer URL, location, and the time zone where an Apple product is used so that we can better understand customer behavior and improve our products, services, and advertising.
• chimeracoder 9y ago
  > It's amazing to me how many comments here excuse Google's behavior by offering the impractical "solution" of just not using a smartphone (a false dilemma) when the obvious answer is to get an iPhone. Smartphone or not, carrying any phone means providing this information to your carrier at all times. I don't like the idea of sending this information to anybody, but to be honest, Google is the entity that I'm the last concerned with at the moment. Unlike literally every cell carrier on the market, hey have an excellent track record from a data security perspective, and their entire competitive advantage relies on them not providing that raw data to any third party.
  • afrophysics1 9y ago
    If you don't believe him just google it!
  • narrator 9y ago
    You can also set your phone to airplane mode with WiFi and Bluetooth enabled most of the time unless you need 4g for something like driving directions. Google has much better security than the phone companies anyway, so letting the phone companies know where you are is bad enough. I had the idea to "red team" myself and find out if there's a way of finding out my location history from shady online data broker and then take countermeasures.
    • trendia 9y ago
      Google knows the GPS location of almost every Wifi router, even if nobody has ever (successfully) connected to it with location services. By design, Android will search all Wifi SSID's and send the GPS coordinates back to Google, so that if another phone not using location services connects to that router, Google knows their location by cross-referencing with the stored GPS coordinates.
    • zcid 9y ago
      Unfortunately, we can't even entirely trust our phones then either. You can turn on airplane mode in the OS, but it could still choose to reactivate the radio for short bursts without you knowing. Or the the radio could be set to phone home on a regular basis on its own recognizance. This could potentially occur even if the phone is turned off. There is no way to ever completely trust a cellular device.
• pjmlp 9y ago
  > when the obvious answer is to get an iPhone. It is only obvious when one enjoys a wealthy life. There are lots of countries out where people can barely afford something better than a feature phone, and when they do, their hard worked savings are just enough for an Android device.
  • as1mov 9y ago
    It's really humbling to see what people in different living circumstances take for granted. Apparently privacy is the fundamental right only for the people who can afford a $700+ device.
    • heimidal 9y ago
      I take your point, but I think it’s important to note that the iPhone SE is half that price. In India, it’s about $309 today.
      • seszett 9y ago
        > In India, it’s about $309 today. So about three times the average monthly wage if the numbers I find are right. (Sneak edit) Just to write it down another way, that means 25% of the average yearly income. For a phone.
        • megy 9y ago
          So, get one second hand and it will be even cheaper. The point was it is not $700 for security.
          • literallycancer 9y ago
            Ever tried using an old iPhone?
            • kalleboo 9y ago
              Ever tried using one of those dirt-cheap Android phones?
• lemagedurage 9y ago
  Apple provides a black box with iOS, they have full control. Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative. A more sensible way of dealing wirh the issue would be to use an open source Android version like AOSP or LineageOS, not run proprietary gapps, and replace its functionality with F-Droid, MicroG and Yalp-store. Your location will stay out of Apple's/Google's hands and you can still enjoy all convenience of a smartphone. Keeping your freedom in your own hands.
  • wyager 9y ago
    > Apple provides a black box with iOS And google does it with Google Play Services. All we have to go on is the historical record of the manufacturer, and apple’s is vastly better. Obviously a high-quality open-source smartphone would be preferable, but I’m not aware of such a thing (Although I’m hopeful that purism’s phone will be good).
  • chappi42 9y ago
    Agree. Another sensible way (if you are prepared to 'phone' a bit more frugal) is a Sony Xperia X with Sailfish. (But check together first.)
  • JonFish85 9y ago
    "Apple provides a black box with iOS, they have full control. Maybe the next iOS update comes with privacy intrusion because it's more lucrative." This is true, but it's also potentially worthwhile to consider that Apple has positioned themselves as a hardware company (i.e. the majority of their money is based on selling units of hardware), whereas their main competitor here (Google) is an ad company (i.e. the majority of their money comes from selling their users' data). Apple has chosen to highlight their commitment to privacy partially because they feel it helps their market position, whereas for Google, it would hurt it. Certainly it doesn't mean that Apple is infallible, just that I think it makes it easier to accept that Apple is more likely to protect privacy more than Google. I'm pretty biased towards Apple, so obviously this may not work for everyone; if you need source code to feel secure, then by all means, go for it. For people who are looking for less work but some of the benefits, I think that Apple is a decent way to go.
• as1mov 9y ago
  Or maybe buy a Android phone and flash AOSP without Play Services. As much as I like privacy, I am not tempted to buy a $700+ device which seems to be getting costlier and gimped with each new version.
• gregman1 9y ago
  Haha, Apple and infosec in the same sentence!
  • fhood 9y ago
    In case you were unaware, Apple and infosec come up together very frequently, often because 0days for iOs are exceptionally rare and valuable.
• mtgx 9y ago
  I don't disagree with your first point, but I disagree with the second. Encouraging everyone to "just buy an iPhone" is a false dilemma of its own. No. The "obvious" solution here is to regulate companies and give huge fines for doing stuff like this, without explicit user permission. Google went through hell in Germany over its "error" in collecting user data from their Wi-Fi hotspots. Why can't the U.S. do the same in this case? It's not just an absolute privacy outrage, but also an outrage because Google will drain my phone's battery life without permission, just to serve its own interests.
  • bjelkeman-again 9y ago
    The “obvious” solution takes time to implement and with the current administration in power upon the US, there is little hope they will do the right thing here.
    • ssfsa 9y ago
      The former CEO of google is bff with the clintons and was heavily involved with Obama's campaign. Good for him, I guess. But the previous administration did very little for internet privacy and rights. Dont fool yourself that the problem is the "current" administration and the next administration from the "good guys" will solve everything.
• bovermyer 9y ago
  I would much rather have a "feature" phone or no mobile at all than have an iPhone again, even if it were free. Living in a walled garden to escape prying eyes is sacrificing freedom for security.
  • rimliu 9y ago
    That's like trading walled garden for the solitary cell in the name of freedom. What freedoms of a feature phone cannot you get on iPhone?
    • bovermyer 9y ago
      I see your point. Still, my latter comment stands, even if the first one just betrays my personal hatred of Apple.
  • Angostura 9y ago
    Which freedoms are in practice giving up? The freedom to run Apps that could circumvent the protections put in place to protect your privacy and data?
    • ufo 9y ago
      The freedom to run GPL-ed software, for instance (the APP store terms of service are incompatible)
• endorphone 9y ago
  Ignoring the appeal to conjectured authority, the notion that a completely closed box device, by a company that has many revenue streams, solves this problem is absolutely ludicrous. That this ridiculous claim gets posted on an otherwise reasonable site regularly is outrageous.
• Feniks 9y ago
  How many commenters do you think make their money in the tech industry? Always follow the money.
• fulafel 9y ago
  Unfortunately iPhones are way too expensive for most people [1]. [1] http://news.gallup.com/poll/166211/worldwide-median-household-income-000.aspx http://news.gallup.com/poll/166211/worldwide-median-househol...
  • code_duck 9y ago
    You can get older models for about the same price as cheap Android phones - i'd much rather use a 5 or 5S than anything by Kyocera, for instance. I made the mistake of buying a cheap Andriod phone for $40 when I could have gotten a 4S for 50. The 4S would have had a superior camera, security and even typing performance. Currently I have a iPhone 6 that i got for 200, no contract. Seems pretty affordable to me. In Liberia, maybe not, but I imagine there are millions of iPhone 4s they would be welcome to take off our hands.
    • fulafel 9y ago
      Yeah, but this works only as long as only few people want those :)
      • code_duck 9y ago
        I suppose that would be true about $40 android phones too? I think Apple would be glad to sell however many iPhone 5s's for cheap because that's basically what the iphone SE is.
• cptskippy 9y ago
  Did Apple stop collecting that data? Last I heard, you had to opt out of it. http://blog.chron.com/techblog/2013/10/your-iphone-knows-where-youve-been-puts-it-on-a-map/ http://blog.chron.com/techblog/2013/10/your-iphone-knows-whe...
  • QAPereo 9y ago
    Maybe they do, maybe they don’t, but at least they’re not aggregating and selling it.
    • halflings 9y ago
      Who said they are using or selling it? This is literally from the article: > “In January of this year, we began looking into using Cell ID codes as an additional signal to further improve the speed and performance of message delivery,” the Google spokesperson said in an email. “However, we never incorporated Cell ID into our network sync system, so that data was immediately discarded, and we updated it to no longer request Cell ID.”
      • kerberos84 9y ago
        Ah, of course we should believe the google spokesperson.
        • cptskippy 9y ago
          I don't think we should trust any of the big tech companies with our data. We should instead accept that anything we share with them is not necessarily private. Despite Apple positioning itself as the privacy minded company righteously protecting your personal information, they still share it with 3rd parties to implement products like Siri. They're very secretive and don't talk about that fact and they only begrudgingly admit it when something like a data leak occurs. Do we have any transparency into those companies that Apple is sharing data with? What standard does Apple hold them to with regards to protecting that data? No one knows because Apple won't say. Apple's stance on security and privacy is as much theater as it is truth. They're in the business of selling you a product and to make it appealing. The sad fact is they could tell you the new iPhone 11 allows you to fart rainbows but only if no one is looking and people would believe it.
• zaarn 9y ago
  I don't think Apple is viable for a lot of users. For one it's more expensive, I have to pay a hefty price to get a recent Iphone, compared to being able to get a usuable android phone starting at 100€ or less. Additionally, I'm a primarly linux user and from what I've gathered, Linux is not supported by Apple at all, rather, you have to buy into the Apple ecosystem to properly use an iphone. Which is the third point; to use an iPhone I need to become part of the Apple ecosystem while most Android phones interop with any OS and Hardware relatively straightforward most of the time.
• sAbakumoff 9y ago
  I've got an idea for the new startup - tin foil hats for your android phone.
• Nicholas7900 9y ago
  Hacking a phone or a computer does not depend on programming language, but exploit the existing vulnerabilities. If you mean by create Windows virus/trojan/malware, them are generally written in Visual C++ (VC++), and you can learn it by buying books for basic knowledge and go to practice. so i think adrian lamo uses c plus or v plus for hacking. I don't know why every one talk about Nicholas Shields, I'm not the only Hacker online, but if you like to know what hackers use i can tell you , to hacking web site for example you need script python or Perl or ruby ... but its not the important part because first you should know what you will do and then it will be easy because maybe you will found some code in the internet like here Exploits Database by Offensive Security , so there is a different between someone who hack by using tools and code already done and someone who found "zero days" bugs and expel hacking. Well, if you wish to contact me for hacking issues : compositehacks@gmail.com
• amelius 9y ago
  It's amazing to me how many hardcore devs/hackers still are reliant on Google for everything they do, and don't come up with alternative solutions. It's not like Google has a monopoly on tech knowledge.
• andrepd 9y ago
  I don't follow. The alternative to using proprietary software that has proven to be malicious is... to use another proprietary device? No. The alternative is to install Lineage OS, don't install any Google trash, use F-droid only and a Play Store interface if you have to.
• j45 9y ago
  Non-privacy apologists who make such comments are from a newer internet generation and they have not yet experienced valid reasons why this type of behaviour is an issue. There is very much a reality of smartphones existing for over a decade before this type of data collection was done. It is in no way required or critical. If it was beneficial, it still should be a setting that can be turned off. This isn't applicable just to service companies like Google who value user information, even when purchasing from a product company such as Apple has laptops phoning home at an incredibly unreasonable rate compared to MacOS 1-2 versions prior. It's like having to run a firewall on your own devices to protect yourself from the manufacturer. Can we imagine if our routers do this, or did?
• deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
• k3a 9y ago
  "get an iPhone" - what a stupid suggestion. Why do you think it is more secure for god sake? Because Apple told so? The only way to regain control over SW and to prevent spying and data leakage is by using free software, where you can read and modify the source code, build the firmware yourself. Because as long as there is source released and some company decides to add a tracking functionality, people will notice and make a fork without it. This is how it works on GNU/Linux for a decade and I am happy I can use it. Now I only wish people stopped buying these smartphones with proprietary blobs tracking them and demanded free software. Most people are easy (I don't want to say stupid) and don't see the problem unfortunatelly. :(