4 ms·

"Ultimately, free is the culprit. " False... Plenty of companies take your money and still sell your data.

meritt 6y ago
Correct. This "if the product is free, then you're the product!" thinking needs to go away. The reality is numerous companies sell your data today, regardless if you're paying for the service or not.
- snovv_crash 6y ago
  No, that thinking is correct. What isn't correct is when people think this has some bearing on when the product isn't free.
  - steerablesafe 6y ago
    Most free as in freedom software are free as in beer and are not packed with anti-features.
    - snovv_crash 6y ago
      Most cloud / Android / iOS software which is free as in beer isn't libre. Which is where the consumers are the product.
indymike 6y ago
It is possible for two things to be true at the same time. You are right, there are paid apps that sell location data to brokers... but the vast majority are free apps that rely on mass monetization of users for their income.
hnick 6y ago
And I'm not sure I need to say it on here but OSS exists, of course.
rmrfstar 6y ago
Airnb and the cell provides are good examples [1],[2]. The cell provider location data is the most insidious. They add noise to it, but the central limit theorem is a real thing and people who buy the data are aware of that. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/15/technology/data-privacy-law-access.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/15/technology/data-privacy-l... [2] https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/nepxbz/i-gave-a-bounty-hunter-300-dollars-located-phone-microbilt-zumigo-tmobile https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/nepxbz/i-gave-a-bounty-hu...
- derivativethrow 6y ago
  I’m aware of what the central limit theorem is, but I’m confused as to what you mean here. Do you mind clarifying? It sounds like you’re saying the CLT leads to deanonymization. I don’t see how the two are related.
  - rmrfstar 6y ago
    Take several measurements and average them. The variance scales like 1/n_samples, which can take you from city-block resolution to building resolution quite rapidly.
    - unishark 6y ago
      There are conditions for the central limit theorem to hold though. One can generate random noise which violates them. It's certainly hard to guarantee privacy, but it's not trivially easy to hack if they're halfway smart about it.
surround 6y ago
...such as cell service providers. All of them (in the US, at least) sell your location and browsing data to advertisers. I would happily pay for a provider that doesn’t triangulate my location 24/7, but none exist.
- chris_va 6y ago
  (not defending their practices at all...) They are required to for 911 support. Obviously they are not required to keep the data, and especially not sell it. (Minus maybe a sealed NSA directive, though that is pure speculation on my part)
  - eru 6y ago
    In the EU they are required to keep some data by law. No clue about the location data, though.
- zeepzeep 6y ago
  Right? Seems like enough people are willing to pay for their privacy, the demand is there.

Correct. This "if the product is free, then you're the product!" thinking needs to go away. The reality is numerous companies sell your data today, regardless if you're paying for the service or not.

snovv_crash 6y ago
No, that thinking is correct. What isn't correct is when people think this has some bearing on when the product isn't free.
- steerablesafe 6y ago
  Most free as in freedom software are free as in beer and are not packed with anti-features.
  - snovv_crash 6y ago
    Most cloud / Android / iOS software which is free as in beer isn't libre. Which is where the consumers are the product.

indymike 6y ago

It is possible for two things to be true at the same time. You are right, there are paid apps that sell location data to brokers... but the vast majority are free apps that rely on mass monetization of users for their income.

hnick 6y ago

And I'm not sure I need to say it on here but OSS exists, of course.

rmrfstar 6y ago

Airnb and the cell provides are good examples [1],[2]. The cell provider location data is the most insidious. They add noise to it, but the central limit theorem is a real thing and people who buy the data are aware of that. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/15/technology/data-privacy-law-access.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/15/technology/data-privacy-l... [2] https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/nepxbz/i-gave-a-bounty-hunter-300-dollars-located-phone-microbilt-zumigo-tmobile https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/nepxbz/i-gave-a-bounty-hu...

derivativethrow 6y ago
I’m aware of what the central limit theorem is, but I’m confused as to what you mean here. Do you mind clarifying? It sounds like you’re saying the CLT leads to deanonymization. I don’t see how the two are related.
- rmrfstar 6y ago
  Take several measurements and average them. The variance scales like 1/n_samples, which can take you from city-block resolution to building resolution quite rapidly.
  - unishark 6y ago
    There are conditions for the central limit theorem to hold though. One can generate random noise which violates them. It's certainly hard to guarantee privacy, but it's not trivially easy to hack if they're halfway smart about it.

surround 6y ago

...such as cell service providers. All of them (in the US, at least) sell your location and browsing data to advertisers. I would happily pay for a provider that doesn’t triangulate my location 24/7, but none exist.

chris_va 6y ago
(not defending their practices at all...) They are required to for 911 support. Obviously they are not required to keep the data, and especially not sell it. (Minus maybe a sealed NSA directive, though that is pure speculation on my part)
- eru 6y ago
  In the EU they are required to keep some data by law. No clue about the location data, though.
zeepzeep 6y ago
Right? Seems like enough people are willing to pay for their privacy, the demand is there.