5 ms·

I'm really over trying to fight companies on this on an app-by-app basis. If we want this to stop, it has to be through legislation. Either we allow companies t

by lghh 9y ago

I'm really over trying to fight companies on this on an app-by-app basis. If we want this to stop, it has to be through legislation. Either we allow companies to do it and stop acting shocked when it happens, or we legislate the possibility away.

ibdf 9y ago
I don't know why everyone is always so shocked. People want smart devices/services that understand them. Where do you think the data comes from? From you!
- alexandercrohde 9y ago
  Nobody is asking moviepass to understand them...
  - parfe 9y ago
    No, they just want subsidized tickets, but then whine that MoviePass gets something out of the deal.
    - throwaway2048 9y ago
      yeah not like they are being paid or anything. The market equilibrium rests where you can extract maximum value, if they can get away with tracking, they will do it, it has absolutely nothing to do with it being a fair deal or not.
- ben_jones 9y ago
  Moreover how can our government condemn commercial data mining while at the same time expanding domestic surveillance? "Don't share your data its harmful! Unless you share it with us!".
  - lghh 9y ago
    Just because we have not made progress in domestic surveillance does not mean we can't make progress in commercial data mining. It may be hypocritical to have one at the rate we do and legislate the other (though I don't think it necessarily is), but it's better to do that than to have both.
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > Moreover how can our government condemn commercial data mining while at the same time expanding domestic surveillance? The same way they can condemn kidnapping for hire while maintaining prisons?
  - Spooky23 9y ago
    If you don’t have a problem with random tech companies tracking your every move, why shouldn’t the government?
  - s73v3r_ 9y ago
    No, those are two completely separate things.
  - mirimir 9y ago
    Domestic mass surveillance is unconstitutional. Back when the US Constitution was drafted, there was virtually no commercial data gathering. So we arguably need the Fourth Amendment extended to the commercial sector. Maybe also the First Amendment.
  - 908087 9y ago
    They won't, because commercial mass surveillance is an essential part of modern government mass surveillance.
- lghh 9y ago
  I don't need MoviePass to understand me. I want MoviePass to take my money and give me movie tickets.
  - asdsa5325 9y ago
    Which isn't profitable. If you want MoviePass to exist, they need another source of revenue...
    - chiefalchemist 9y ago
      Agreed. Seems like an app for common sense would make a couple gazillion and then some.
    - ngngngng 9y ago
      That's the struggle. Virtually unlimited movie tickets each month for the price of one movie ticket a month sounds too good to be true because it is. There's no way for this to work without some other source of revenue. If you would like the option to pay more and NOT be tracked, we just call that buying movie tickets and you've been able to do it all along.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
      - laythea 9y ago
        Yes but is the issue here not that they were not told that they were being spied on?
      - gowld 9y ago
        It's still too good to be true. Why aren't there dozens of apps offering me $100/yr flat-out for my location data? MoviePass is a play to intermediate the movie-shopping experience, so they can extort kickbacks from theaters.
    - AlexandrB 9y ago
      This can be used to excuse the worst kind of behaviour. Maybe if MoviePass can't operate profitably without violating people's privacy, it's just not a good startup idea.
- jastanton 9y ago
  I think it's because there is no apparent user facing feature that uses this data. In the future they may get parking related features, or deeper ride share integrations. But because they're not upfront with how they are using the data, and their are currently 0 user facing features it seems unwarranted.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
wskinner 9y ago
Why is a one size fits all government solution better? You control your phone and the apps on it. Don’t like the app tracking your location before and after movies? Kill it or limit it to While Using (if on iOS). And you can always uninstall it.
- Fauntleroy 9y ago
  Not all phone users are Hacker News users. They need protection from bad actors, and that just might require government action.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- lghh 9y ago
  Because privacy shouldn't be a minefield.
comboy 9y ago
I prefer non-legislative way. Mobile OSes are already doing something towards this. Notification warning like "app X is using your GPS" - even though it's closed or even though your screen is off. Or only allowing GPS usage while the app is on your screen. I don't think many people care though. And even if you disagree on that, I think it should be their right to sell their privacy for convenience if they want to.
- Sylos 9y ago
  > And even if you disagree on that, I think it should be their right to sell their privacy for convenience if they want to. Then it also has to be a right to not sell your privacy for convencience. Clearly communicate that you do sell my data to bolster your revenue and give me an option to pay more instead. It's not a legitimate business model to simply not tell me that you're selling my data and then magically have lower prices.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- brlewis 9y ago
  Mobile OSes and web APIs should have distinct permissions for foreground location data and background location data. I'll gladly give my current location in exchange for temporary convenience, but the way it works now I have to give my location away from now until such time as I uninstall the app or jump through the hoops necessary to revoke permission.
  - Gaelan 9y ago
    iOS does.
- wlesieutre 9y ago
  iOS (as of version 11) gives you an option to force "Only while using the app" access for location services. The change was probably triggered by Uber's creepy "we're going to track you for several minutes after you get out of the car" thing last year. Generated a lot of media attention and Uber has since stopped doing it. https://www.macrumors.com/2017/06/07/ios-11-restrict-location-services-any-app/ https://www.macrumors.com/2017/06/07/ios-11-restrict-locatio... https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/29/547113818/uber-ends-its-controversial-post-ride-tracking-of-users-location https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/29/547113818...
alexandercrohde 9y ago
Probably the likeliest solution is at the software level. There's no reason there couldn't be software to send fake locations to apps that you don't make an explicit exception for.
- gruez 9y ago
  already exists for android: https://github.com/M66B/XPrivacyLua https://github.com/M66B/XPrivacyLua
apotheothesomai 9y ago
Well, the government benefits from scarcely regulated data gatherers. While the law doesn't seem to matter these days, the government has long used the data of private companies which it can't legally collect.
drak0n1c 9y ago
Should the government also ban the possibility of ad-supported websites? Technology costs money and if there is a way to subsidize or remove the cost faced by consumers that isn't always a bad thing. Transparency of "this is how we are able to provide you a free app/service" could be improved, though.
- AlexandrB 9y ago
  > Should the government also ban the possibility of ad-supported websites? No, but perhaps the government should ban the possibility of surveillance-supported websites.
tetrahedr0n 9y ago
Rare is the problem that legislation actually solves. And People don't want to pay for apps with money, they "just want them". So they pay with their data. The problem here isn't with the transaction, the problem is people are in the dark with what they are actually paying with. Companies are allowed to do this. Their TOS protects them.
- mancerayder 9y ago
  Rare is the problem that legislation actually solves. And That's it - a sweeping statement about a giant topic, and move on to the next line of argumentation... You can't think of at least a dozen laws off the top of your head that protect your health or life personally?
  - qudat 9y ago
    nope.
losvedir 9y ago
As someone who uses and loves moviepass, I would hate for it to be legislated away.
laythea 9y ago
Or hit them where it hurts. Why don't you do what I did and put your money where your mouth is. Go back to using an old style text message only mobile like a nokia (other brands are available). It is such a joy to have a simple communications device. Do it!

by lghh 9y ago

ibdf 9y ago

I don't know why everyone is always so shocked. People want smart devices/services that understand them. Where do you think the data comes from? From you!

alexandercrohde 9y ago
Nobody is asking moviepass to understand them...
- parfe 9y ago
  No, they just want subsidized tickets, but then whine that MoviePass gets something out of the deal.
  - throwaway2048 9y ago
    yeah not like they are being paid or anything. The market equilibrium rests where you can extract maximum value, if they can get away with tracking, they will do it, it has absolutely nothing to do with it being a fair deal or not.
ben_jones 9y ago
Moreover how can our government condemn commercial data mining while at the same time expanding domestic surveillance? "Don't share your data its harmful! Unless you share it with us!".
- lghh 9y ago
  Just because we have not made progress in domestic surveillance does not mean we can't make progress in commercial data mining. It may be hypocritical to have one at the rate we do and legislate the other (though I don't think it necessarily is), but it's better to do that than to have both.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > Moreover how can our government condemn commercial data mining while at the same time expanding domestic surveillance? The same way they can condemn kidnapping for hire while maintaining prisons?
- Spooky23 9y ago
  If you don’t have a problem with random tech companies tracking your every move, why shouldn’t the government?
- s73v3r_ 9y ago
  No, those are two completely separate things.
- mirimir 9y ago
  Domestic mass surveillance is unconstitutional. Back when the US Constitution was drafted, there was virtually no commercial data gathering. So we arguably need the Fourth Amendment extended to the commercial sector. Maybe also the First Amendment.
- 908087 9y ago
  They won't, because commercial mass surveillance is an essential part of modern government mass surveillance.
lghh 9y ago
I don't need MoviePass to understand me. I want MoviePass to take my money and give me movie tickets.
- asdsa5325 9y ago
  Which isn't profitable. If you want MoviePass to exist, they need another source of revenue...
  - chiefalchemist 9y ago
    Agreed. Seems like an app for common sense would make a couple gazillion and then some.
  - ngngngng 9y ago
    That's the struggle. Virtually unlimited movie tickets each month for the price of one movie ticket a month sounds too good to be true because it is. There's no way for this to work without some other source of revenue. If you would like the option to pay more and NOT be tracked, we just call that buying movie tickets and you've been able to do it all along.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - laythea 9y ago
      Yes but is the issue here not that they were not told that they were being spied on?
    - gowld 9y ago
      It's still too good to be true. Why aren't there dozens of apps offering me $100/yr flat-out for my location data? MoviePass is a play to intermediate the movie-shopping experience, so they can extort kickbacks from theaters.
  - AlexandrB 9y ago
    This can be used to excuse the worst kind of behaviour. Maybe if MoviePass can't operate profitably without violating people's privacy, it's just not a good startup idea.
jastanton 9y ago
I think it's because there is no apparent user facing feature that uses this data. In the future they may get parking related features, or deeper ride share integrations. But because they're not upfront with how they are using the data, and their are currently 0 user facing features it seems unwarranted.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

wskinner 9y ago

Why is a one size fits all government solution better? You control your phone and the apps on it. Don’t like the app tracking your location before and after movies? Kill it or limit it to While Using (if on iOS). And you can always uninstall it.

Fauntleroy 9y ago
Not all phone users are Hacker News users. They need protection from bad actors, and that just might require government action.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
lghh 9y ago
Because privacy shouldn't be a minefield.

comboy 9y ago

I prefer non-legislative way. Mobile OSes are already doing something towards this. Notification warning like "app X is using your GPS" - even though it's closed or even though your screen is off. Or only allowing GPS usage while the app is on your screen. I don't think many people care though. And even if you disagree on that, I think it should be their right to sell their privacy for convenience if they want to.

Sylos 9y ago
> And even if you disagree on that, I think it should be their right to sell their privacy for convenience if they want to. Then it also has to be a right to not sell your privacy for convencience. Clearly communicate that you do sell my data to bolster your revenue and give me an option to pay more instead. It's not a legitimate business model to simply not tell me that you're selling my data and then magically have lower prices.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
brlewis 9y ago
Mobile OSes and web APIs should have distinct permissions for foreground location data and background location data. I'll gladly give my current location in exchange for temporary convenience, but the way it works now I have to give my location away from now until such time as I uninstall the app or jump through the hoops necessary to revoke permission.
- Gaelan 9y ago
  iOS does.
wlesieutre 9y ago
iOS (as of version 11) gives you an option to force "Only while using the app" access for location services. The change was probably triggered by Uber's creepy "we're going to track you for several minutes after you get out of the car" thing last year. Generated a lot of media attention and Uber has since stopped doing it. https://www.macrumors.com/2017/06/07/ios-11-restrict-location-services-any-app/ https://www.macrumors.com/2017/06/07/ios-11-restrict-locatio... https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/29/547113818/uber-ends-its-controversial-post-ride-tracking-of-users-location https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/08/29/547113818...

alexandercrohde 9y ago

Probably the likeliest solution is at the software level. There's no reason there couldn't be software to send fake locations to apps that you don't make an explicit exception for.

gruez 9y ago
already exists for android: https://github.com/M66B/XPrivacyLua https://github.com/M66B/XPrivacyLua

apotheothesomai 9y ago

Well, the government benefits from scarcely regulated data gatherers. While the law doesn't seem to matter these days, the government has long used the data of private companies which it can't legally collect.

drak0n1c 9y ago

Should the government also ban the possibility of ad-supported websites? Technology costs money and if there is a way to subsidize or remove the cost faced by consumers that isn't always a bad thing. Transparency of "this is how we are able to provide you a free app/service" could be improved, though.

AlexandrB 9y ago
> Should the government also ban the possibility of ad-supported websites? No, but perhaps the government should ban the possibility of surveillance-supported websites.

tetrahedr0n 9y ago

Rare is the problem that legislation actually solves. And People don't want to pay for apps with money, they "just want them". So they pay with their data. The problem here isn't with the transaction, the problem is people are in the dark with what they are actually paying with. Companies are allowed to do this. Their TOS protects them.

mancerayder 9y ago
Rare is the problem that legislation actually solves. And That's it - a sweeping statement about a giant topic, and move on to the next line of argumentation... You can't think of at least a dozen laws off the top of your head that protect your health or life personally?
- qudat 9y ago
  nope.

losvedir 9y ago

As someone who uses and loves moviepass, I would hate for it to be legislated away.

laythea 9y ago

Or hit them where it hurts. Why don't you do what I did and put your money where your mouth is. Go back to using an old style text message only mobile like a nokia (other brands are available). It is such a joy to have a simple communications device. Do it!