3 ms·
They were making a related but cogent point about the security implications of Google having this info versus the cell phone carriers. It did not, directly or e
by aeorgnoieang 9y ago
They were making a related but cogent point about the security implications of Google having this info versus the cell phone carriers. It did not, directly or even by implication, contradict anything you wrote – you're right that this is a privacy violation, but I didn't interpret the comment to which you replied as denying that.
- urda 9y agoIt absolutely is relevant, let's take a moment and review the key point: > I can guarantee you Google protects this data more securely than your carrier does Part of acting as a company who cares about user's data includes not collecting data that is sensitive. This is especially true with location data, and is extra especially true when you do it anyway without the user's permission. Acting like this proves to me, the end user, that google does not guarantee to protect this data more securely than my carrier. I can see how one could be easily confused by the original comment, but if you take a moment and review it again you'll see it rings even more true now.
- elefanten 9y agoNo, you're still misunderstanding. The comment is only comparing how well secured the data by whoever holds it. The claim is ONLY arguing that Google would secure the data once they have it better than carriers would. It is not arguing that Google is better at "acting as a company who cares about user's data".