5 ms·

Why you & your girlfriends should stop checking in

13 points by skennedy 15y ago

stfu 15y ago
The greatest benefit of these overblown stranger-danger stories seems to be the fact, that it creates more awareness of privacy issues outside of our typical EFF friend circles.
- Bud 15y ago
  I only partially agree. Overblown stories like this can also cause the issues in question to be taken less seriously, because the stories are inaccurate and, well, overblown. For instance, the author complains: "But did any of those apps get shut down by a barrage of vitriol from concerned citizens? Did young women stop checking in and sharing their location with anyone with a 3G connection? Hardly." But the fact is, creepy apps like this are shut down all the time, including the Girls Around Me app referenced in the article. Already gone. I also think it's hilarious to see any kind of threat in an app which supposedly tells you the age and gender of people you are in a bar with, using face recognition. Um, I can usually tell the age and gender of people I am looking at by, uh, LOOKING AT THEM. So I fail to see the heinous threat here.
  - evincarofautumn 15y ago
    If SceneTap is “an absolute sewer of an application”, then anyone with eyes, a brain, and the ability to count is an absolute sewer of a person. Then again, the URL is “i-hate-all-apps-bah-humbug”, so this might be somebody’s strange idea of an April Fool’s prank. I thought it was satire at first.
- potatolicious 15y ago
  I disagree. In a single breath the author has: - accused people who use check-in services as "narcissistic" - cynically insinuated that said users (stereotyped into "social media-happy women") are too stupid/apathetic and will continue to "hit the snooze button" on privacy concerns Author also doesn't seem to realize that both Facebook and Foursquare allow you to limit checkins to only your friends/family, exactly as she sees fit. To people who aren't using check-in services, this article says nothing that they're concerned with. To people who already are, the author's hostile and accusatory attitude will convert no one. To take an oft-used redditism - this is circlejerk for people who are already opposed to the whole concept of check-in services.
skennedy 15y ago
How clever can people get with a set of API's, do something questionable and/or scary, and not get publicized? That's what scares me. So many open API's out there and clever people will keep their mash-ups confined to a closed circle audience. Makes me wonder when companies that offer open API's will be more discerning.
georgieporgie 15y ago
I wonder if the author also refuses to go to bars, because there have been people beaten at or abducted from them, or drive a car, because there have been cases of road rage, or avoid churches because they have been boarded and burned, or schools because there have been shootings, or... People shouldn't base their lives and decisions around imagined scenarios that involve sociopaths. This is just more shoddy, fear-based 'journalism' piggy-backing on a scare wave. It does nothing to improve people's understanding of their privacy settings and options, and does everything to exploit a trend for more page views.
- batista 15y ago
  >I wonder if the author also refuses to go to bars, because there have been people beaten at or abducted from them, or drive a car, because there have been cases of road rage, or avoid churches because they have been boarded and burned, or schools because there have been shootings, or... Do you use this "take-it-to-the-extreme" for every argument you hear? Most of the times, arguments are meant to be considered at the level at which they are told and for the situations for which they are told. For example, when one tells you to wear something warm when outside is snowing, he doesn't mean you should wear 20 overcoats and a special thermal suite. So, to avoid schools because "there have been shootings" and such, is not at all like "avoid declaring your exact location to the whole world especially now with the availability of pervert-targeted-apps like Girls Around Me". For one, the statistics on rapes and sexual assaults VS school shootings don't favor your argument in the least.
  - georgieporgie 15y ago
    Do you use this "take-it-to-the-extreme" for every argument you hear? I didn't, and I don't know why you think that I did. For one, the statistics on rapes and sexual assaults VS school shootings don't favor your argument in the least. It would be awesome if the people making this claim supplied some of these statistics.
- tesseractive 15y ago
  > People shouldn't base their lives and decisions around imagined scenarios that involve sociopaths. Women are constantly trying to figure out how much risk is attached to behaviors that men take for granted, and alter their behavior accordingly. It's all fine and well to say not to worry about "imagined scenarios" involving sociopaths, but there are many real life stories of women who have been stalked and received persistent death threats just for having a blog online and being only moderately well known. And in the case of something like check ins, any stalker wouldn't just have your email to send threats to, they would have your physical location. Unless you are a woman, I would suggest that you may not have the best perspective from which to tell other women what they should and should not be afraid of.
codesuela 15y ago
This whole "Girls Around Me" thing has been blow way out of proportion. Every site seems to imply that this is the go to app for rapists. However, to play devils advocate, I would argue that you are actually SAFER with this app than without. There are three scenarios that can play out: 1. Someone opens up this app, looks for girls nearby and pics one from this app. In this case it would stupid for the rapist to go for the girl because her whereabouts are known so the police would know the area where she was abducted and therefore it would be easier to identify the rapist/murderer as they can check nearby security cameras and know where to look around. The conclusion would be that if the rapist/murderer/whatever was following logic he would avoid people listed in this app. This leads us to the second possible scenario: The rapist/murderer does not follow any logic and just commits his crime based on primitive instincts (ever heard of rapists who have intercourse with sheep and kettle?) In that case you loose any way because that person strikes at random and thus the chances are not increased because you checked in somewhere. and then there is the final and third scenario: Someone is trying to murder or rape YOU specifically after picking you out from this app. But lets be reasonable the chances of that happening are ABYSMAL because guess what most people don't want to rape you. Also relevant: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Oww4Ap3YZA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Oww4Ap3YZA
tonylemesmer 15y ago
Not just a danger for girls. Anyone sharing this kind of info inherently has some kind of smartphone and therefore is a target for mugging / robbery
mvkel 15y ago
Foursquare has already revoked their access. Still, this kind of writing is pure sensationalism. It's virtually the same "concern" publications were having over robbers monitoring your Foursquare account to break into your house when you're not home.

13 points by skennedy 15y ago

stfu 15y ago

The greatest benefit of these overblown stranger-danger stories seems to be the fact, that it creates more awareness of privacy issues outside of our typical EFF friend circles.

Bud 15y ago
I only partially agree. Overblown stories like this can also cause the issues in question to be taken less seriously, because the stories are inaccurate and, well, overblown. For instance, the author complains: "But did any of those apps get shut down by a barrage of vitriol from concerned citizens? Did young women stop checking in and sharing their location with anyone with a 3G connection? Hardly." But the fact is, creepy apps like this are shut down all the time, including the Girls Around Me app referenced in the article. Already gone. I also think it's hilarious to see any kind of threat in an app which supposedly tells you the age and gender of people you are in a bar with, using face recognition. Um, I can usually tell the age and gender of people I am looking at by, uh, LOOKING AT THEM. So I fail to see the heinous threat here.
- evincarofautumn 15y ago
  If SceneTap is “an absolute sewer of an application”, then anyone with eyes, a brain, and the ability to count is an absolute sewer of a person. Then again, the URL is “i-hate-all-apps-bah-humbug”, so this might be somebody’s strange idea of an April Fool’s prank. I thought it was satire at first.
potatolicious 15y ago
I disagree. In a single breath the author has: - accused people who use check-in services as "narcissistic" - cynically insinuated that said users (stereotyped into "social media-happy women") are too stupid/apathetic and will continue to "hit the snooze button" on privacy concerns Author also doesn't seem to realize that both Facebook and Foursquare allow you to limit checkins to only your friends/family, exactly as she sees fit. To people who aren't using check-in services, this article says nothing that they're concerned with. To people who already are, the author's hostile and accusatory attitude will convert no one. To take an oft-used redditism - this is circlejerk for people who are already opposed to the whole concept of check-in services.

skennedy 15y ago

How clever can people get with a set of API's, do something questionable and/or scary, and not get publicized? That's what scares me. So many open API's out there and clever people will keep their mash-ups confined to a closed circle audience. Makes me wonder when companies that offer open API's will be more discerning.

georgieporgie 15y ago

I wonder if the author also refuses to go to bars, because there have been people beaten at or abducted from them, or drive a car, because there have been cases of road rage, or avoid churches because they have been boarded and burned, or schools because there have been shootings, or... People shouldn't base their lives and decisions around imagined scenarios that involve sociopaths. This is just more shoddy, fear-based 'journalism' piggy-backing on a scare wave. It does nothing to improve people's understanding of their privacy settings and options, and does everything to exploit a trend for more page views.

batista 15y ago
>I wonder if the author also refuses to go to bars, because there have been people beaten at or abducted from them, or drive a car, because there have been cases of road rage, or avoid churches because they have been boarded and burned, or schools because there have been shootings, or... Do you use this "take-it-to-the-extreme" for every argument you hear? Most of the times, arguments are meant to be considered at the level at which they are told and for the situations for which they are told. For example, when one tells you to wear something warm when outside is snowing, he doesn't mean you should wear 20 overcoats and a special thermal suite. So, to avoid schools because "there have been shootings" and such, is not at all like "avoid declaring your exact location to the whole world especially now with the availability of pervert-targeted-apps like Girls Around Me". For one, the statistics on rapes and sexual assaults VS school shootings don't favor your argument in the least.
- georgieporgie 15y ago
  Do you use this "take-it-to-the-extreme" for every argument you hear? I didn't, and I don't know why you think that I did. For one, the statistics on rapes and sexual assaults VS school shootings don't favor your argument in the least. It would be awesome if the people making this claim supplied some of these statistics.
tesseractive 15y ago
> People shouldn't base their lives and decisions around imagined scenarios that involve sociopaths. Women are constantly trying to figure out how much risk is attached to behaviors that men take for granted, and alter their behavior accordingly. It's all fine and well to say not to worry about "imagined scenarios" involving sociopaths, but there are many real life stories of women who have been stalked and received persistent death threats just for having a blog online and being only moderately well known. And in the case of something like check ins, any stalker wouldn't just have your email to send threats to, they would have your physical location. Unless you are a woman, I would suggest that you may not have the best perspective from which to tell other women what they should and should not be afraid of.

codesuela 15y ago

This whole "Girls Around Me" thing has been blow way out of proportion. Every site seems to imply that this is the go to app for rapists. However, to play devils advocate, I would argue that you are actually SAFER with this app than without. There are three scenarios that can play out: 1. Someone opens up this app, looks for girls nearby and pics one from this app. In this case it would stupid for the rapist to go for the girl because her whereabouts are known so the police would know the area where she was abducted and therefore it would be easier to identify the rapist/murderer as they can check nearby security cameras and know where to look around. The conclusion would be that if the rapist/murderer/whatever was following logic he would avoid people listed in this app. This leads us to the second possible scenario: The rapist/murderer does not follow any logic and just commits his crime based on primitive instincts (ever heard of rapists who have intercourse with sheep and kettle?) In that case you loose any way because that person strikes at random and thus the chances are not increased because you checked in somewhere. and then there is the final and third scenario: Someone is trying to murder or rape YOU specifically after picking you out from this app. But lets be reasonable the chances of that happening are ABYSMAL because guess what most people don't want to rape you. Also relevant: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Oww4Ap3YZA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Oww4Ap3YZA

tonylemesmer 15y ago

Not just a danger for girls. Anyone sharing this kind of info inherently has some kind of smartphone and therefore is a target for mugging / robbery

mvkel 15y ago

Foursquare has already revoked their access. Still, this kind of writing is pure sensationalism. It's virtually the same "concern" publications were having over robbers monitoring your Foursquare account to break into your house when you're not home.