6 ms·

Fucking hell. This is exceptionally disturbing. This sort of service needs to be legally regulated now. The app devs must be required to warn in large block le

by eps 13y ago

Fucking hell. This is exceptionally disturbing. This sort of service needs to be legally regulated now. The app devs must be required to warn in large block letters that evryhting you do in the app, even while offline, is streamed to some random company. You can argue all you want that "everyone's doing it", but it doesn't make this any less unacceptable and going against basic expectations of privacy.

ammmir 13y ago
i think app devs may already be liable if they haven't set up a proper privacy policy for their app that explains what data they collect and how it is used. i would not automatically enable analytics tools like these without consulting a lawyer.
jstsch 13y ago
Agree 100%. I am amazed by all the positive remarks around here. I understand the startup-vibe, but I would expect 'hackers' around here to take note of privacy concerns.
jazzychad 13y ago
Sorry to bust your bubble, but most every major app (and every single game app) is already doing this by sending activity data to one company or another.
- anonyfuss 13y ago
  Doesn't make it right. It's also astonishingly user-hostile; wasting the user's resources (bandwidth, battery life, cpu) on things they don't care about, without their permission. On top of that, doing anything economical with the analytics is very rare. It's very difficult to isolate meaningful variables, and you're almost always better off spending that money paying a designer to tackle issues and features that really ought to be obvious to you already ... ... unless you're Zynga, I guess.
  - DeusExMachina 13y ago
    > On top of that, doing anything economical with the analytics is very rare. If this was true, then A/B testing would be useless, while it's quite the opposite.
    - anonyfuss 13y ago
      For most people, A/B testing a complex app (non-app websites are a completely different beast) is not economical compared to tackling larger (and hopefully obvious) design problems. If your product is so well designed and developed that there's literally nothing obvious that you can improve without either 1) isolating changes down to colors or placement, and/or 2) throwing different options at the wall to see what sticks, then I say: Congratulations.
  - nemothekid 13y ago
    >doing anything economical with the analytics is very rare. That is a very bold claim and I'm interested if you have any sources to back it up. I'm hard pressed to believe that all of Facebook's design decisions hinge on whatever side of the bed Zuckerberg woke up on.
    - anonyfuss 13y ago
      Belief that numbers can be interpreted usefully without a rigorous statistical approach is an enormous fallacy; I don't really see why the burden of proof lies on me. Once you do apply rigor, you'll find that what the numbers can tell you provides very little help in guiding application design (unless you're optimizing for extremely simple measurable metrics, eg, Zynga). Note that Zynga themselves copies a full game design, and then applies metrics to optimizing games for addiction and spendthrift response. The numbers also can't tell you that what you really need to do is rework your application's entire interaction model to cleanly integrate feature X, Y, and Z -- which will also be far too expensive to even attempt to A/B test. Most analytics users are simply playing an expensive game of "hot or cold".
  - sjtgraham 13y ago
- interpol_p 13y ago
  We don't do it in our apps or games. And I know quite a few developers who make analytics opt-in via settings (as well those who provide an opt-out). Big brand games probably do it, though.
DeusExMachina 13y ago
Aside from using some user resource (like battery or network) how is this different from what website have been doing for a long time? There are tools to even track the mouse movement of the user. Which is not the "everyone is doing it argument", but more "why does this need legal regulation now?". Why not before on web apps? The privacy implications look the same to me, but the point does not seem to be raised in the latter case.
- anonyfuss 13y ago
  > Aside from using some user resource (like battery or network) how is this different from what website have been doing for a long time? 1) Network requests (and thus communication with a remote machine that can log those requests) is an innate facet of the web. You can't load a site without explicitly choosing to make a network request. An app, however, might have no innate reason to make a network request at all. I think #1 is the most important, but also: 2) JavaScript can be disabled. 3) HTML/JavaScript and browser network requests can be reviewed. Mobile applications are almost completely opaque to users. 4) Cookies can be blocked to reduce tracking surface. 5) Web analytics and cross-web tracking is already something people are concerned about, resulting in the introduction of do-not-track and similar. Desktop apps have almost always explicitly asked permission before tracking users, whereas the web community seems to have brought to mobile a blasé approach to privacy and user respect.
- socillion 13y ago
  Disabling Javascript is an easy opt out for websites. This service is designed to produce user specific data. judging from what they record on websites (see docs, tldr everything) I'd be surprised if the iPhone version doesn't record GPS locations or what other apps you use. I'm also not sure how commonly websites record data in this detail that also maps to specific users, but if it's common on websites its definitely news to me - and all the more reason to use stuff like Ghostery/Disconnect/Noscript. Do these have iPhone equivalents yet?
  - sjtgraham 13y ago
    Not using an app is an easy opt out for people.
DenisM 13y ago
I think you're overreacting. Privacy policy disclosure is obviously in order, but that's about all there is to it.
- anonyfuss 13y ago
  When is the last time you read a privacy policy disclosure? A reasonable person would assume that if an application has no functionality that requires sending data over the network, the application won't surreptitiously spy on you and send your data over the network.
sjtgraham 13y ago
I don't think this is an invasion of privacy at all. Heap hooks into single apps, it's not like it hooks into the OS to monitor user interaction with everything a user does in every app. I would sympathise with your reaction if this was the case. I think it's perfectly good enough for a vendor to declare what data they are collecting in their ToS e.g. "we collect information on how you use the app" and why, e.g. "to consider for future versions so that we release the best possible, most useful software for our users". It's absurd to mandate that this be communicated in "large block letters" as this makes it into a bigger deal than it is. Let's take off the tin foil hats and be pragmatic. I fully expect analytics to collected on everything I use and I understand the motivation behind it too, i.e. it's to improve whatever it is I am using to make it more useful, and therefore valuable to me.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- irrationalidiom 13y ago
  > I don't think this is an invasion of privacy at all. I vehemently disagree. Most companies will just hide the fact they are collecting (and often selling) user data within slimy legalese. Consumer protection includes niceties such as warranties, and protection against false advertising, and clear display of nutritional information and safety warnings. Privacy also deserves the same treatment so users can make an informed decision, without having to wade through a hefty licence agreement. Edit: updated reply context
  - sjtgraham 13y ago
    - "Most companies" sell user data? "Slimy?" Incredible bias here. Wouldn't be so bad if you provided some evidence to support up your position. - ToS of don't have to be "hefty", they can be written in plain English. Try using facts instead of loaded, emotional language to support your argument next time.
    - anonyfuss 13y ago
      Companies I respect (including Apple) ask before gathering usage data; they don't hide it in the ToS that you and I both know nobody will read. Do you object to asking users? If so, why? My guess is that you know the answer will usually be "no". See also: opt-out vs. opt-in e-mail spam.

by eps 13y ago

ammmir 13y ago

i think app devs may already be liable if they haven't set up a proper privacy policy for their app that explains what data they collect and how it is used. i would not automatically enable analytics tools like these without consulting a lawyer.

jstsch 13y ago

Agree 100%. I am amazed by all the positive remarks around here. I understand the startup-vibe, but I would expect 'hackers' around here to take note of privacy concerns.

jazzychad 13y ago

Sorry to bust your bubble, but most every major app (and every single game app) is already doing this by sending activity data to one company or another.

anonyfuss 13y ago
Doesn't make it right. It's also astonishingly user-hostile; wasting the user's resources (bandwidth, battery life, cpu) on things they don't care about, without their permission. On top of that, doing anything economical with the analytics is very rare. It's very difficult to isolate meaningful variables, and you're almost always better off spending that money paying a designer to tackle issues and features that really ought to be obvious to you already ... ... unless you're Zynga, I guess.
- DeusExMachina 13y ago
  > On top of that, doing anything economical with the analytics is very rare. If this was true, then A/B testing would be useless, while it's quite the opposite.
  - anonyfuss 13y ago
    For most people, A/B testing a complex app (non-app websites are a completely different beast) is not economical compared to tackling larger (and hopefully obvious) design problems. If your product is so well designed and developed that there's literally nothing obvious that you can improve without either 1) isolating changes down to colors or placement, and/or 2) throwing different options at the wall to see what sticks, then I say: Congratulations.
- nemothekid 13y ago
  >doing anything economical with the analytics is very rare. That is a very bold claim and I'm interested if you have any sources to back it up. I'm hard pressed to believe that all of Facebook's design decisions hinge on whatever side of the bed Zuckerberg woke up on.
  - anonyfuss 13y ago
    Belief that numbers can be interpreted usefully without a rigorous statistical approach is an enormous fallacy; I don't really see why the burden of proof lies on me. Once you do apply rigor, you'll find that what the numbers can tell you provides very little help in guiding application design (unless you're optimizing for extremely simple measurable metrics, eg, Zynga). Note that Zynga themselves copies a full game design, and then applies metrics to optimizing games for addiction and spendthrift response. The numbers also can't tell you that what you really need to do is rework your application's entire interaction model to cleanly integrate feature X, Y, and Z -- which will also be far too expensive to even attempt to A/B test. Most analytics users are simply playing an expensive game of "hot or cold".
- sjtgraham 13y ago
interpol_p 13y ago
We don't do it in our apps or games. And I know quite a few developers who make analytics opt-in via settings (as well those who provide an opt-out). Big brand games probably do it, though.

DeusExMachina 13y ago

Aside from using some user resource (like battery or network) how is this different from what website have been doing for a long time? There are tools to even track the mouse movement of the user. Which is not the "everyone is doing it argument", but more "why does this need legal regulation now?". Why not before on web apps? The privacy implications look the same to me, but the point does not seem to be raised in the latter case.

anonyfuss 13y ago
> Aside from using some user resource (like battery or network) how is this different from what website have been doing for a long time? 1) Network requests (and thus communication with a remote machine that can log those requests) is an innate facet of the web. You can't load a site without explicitly choosing to make a network request. An app, however, might have no innate reason to make a network request at all. I think #1 is the most important, but also: 2) JavaScript can be disabled. 3) HTML/JavaScript and browser network requests can be reviewed. Mobile applications are almost completely opaque to users. 4) Cookies can be blocked to reduce tracking surface. 5) Web analytics and cross-web tracking is already something people are concerned about, resulting in the introduction of do-not-track and similar. Desktop apps have almost always explicitly asked permission before tracking users, whereas the web community seems to have brought to mobile a blasé approach to privacy and user respect.
socillion 13y ago
Disabling Javascript is an easy opt out for websites. This service is designed to produce user specific data. judging from what they record on websites (see docs, tldr everything) I'd be surprised if the iPhone version doesn't record GPS locations or what other apps you use. I'm also not sure how commonly websites record data in this detail that also maps to specific users, but if it's common on websites its definitely news to me - and all the more reason to use stuff like Ghostery/Disconnect/Noscript. Do these have iPhone equivalents yet?
- sjtgraham 13y ago
  Not using an app is an easy opt out for people.

DenisM 13y ago

I think you're overreacting. Privacy policy disclosure is obviously in order, but that's about all there is to it.

anonyfuss 13y ago
When is the last time you read a privacy policy disclosure? A reasonable person would assume that if an application has no functionality that requires sending data over the network, the application won't surreptitiously spy on you and send your data over the network.

sjtgraham 13y ago

I don't think this is an invasion of privacy at all. Heap hooks into single apps, it's not like it hooks into the OS to monitor user interaction with everything a user does in every app. I would sympathise with your reaction if this was the case. I think it's perfectly good enough for a vendor to declare what data they are collecting in their ToS e.g. "we collect information on how you use the app" and why, e.g. "to consider for future versions so that we release the best possible, most useful software for our users". It's absurd to mandate that this be communicated in "large block letters" as this makes it into a bigger deal than it is. Let's take off the tin foil hats and be pragmatic. I fully expect analytics to collected on everything I use and I understand the motivation behind it too, i.e. it's to improve whatever it is I am using to make it more useful, and therefore valuable to me.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
irrationalidiom 13y ago
> I don't think this is an invasion of privacy at all. I vehemently disagree. Most companies will just hide the fact they are collecting (and often selling) user data within slimy legalese. Consumer protection includes niceties such as warranties, and protection against false advertising, and clear display of nutritional information and safety warnings. Privacy also deserves the same treatment so users can make an informed decision, without having to wade through a hefty licence agreement. Edit: updated reply context
- sjtgraham 13y ago
  - "Most companies" sell user data? "Slimy?" Incredible bias here. Wouldn't be so bad if you provided some evidence to support up your position. - ToS of don't have to be "hefty", they can be written in plain English. Try using facts instead of loaded, emotional language to support your argument next time.
  - anonyfuss 13y ago
    Companies I respect (including Apple) ask before gathering usage data; they don't hide it in the ToS that you and I both know nobody will read. Do you object to asking users? If so, why? My guess is that you know the answer will usually be "no". See also: opt-out vs. opt-in e-mail spam.