5 ms·

Another beautiful device and it is only at the cost of your privacy.

by GeorgeMac 12y ago

bdkauff 12y ago
Can you elaborate?
- BigBlackCamry 12y ago
  I think he's saying he rather use a landline, so they can't pin point his location via GPS
  - MiguelHudnandez 12y ago
    You would need a very long cord for that land line for that to be an effective countermeasure! I think it is just generic Google-hatred.
    - Artemis2 12y ago
      Well, you can still follow a cord...
      - BigBlackCamry 12y ago
        No, he has a point. If the cord is long enough, whoever is following it will get tired and turn around.
        richbradshaw 12y ago
        Also you can tie the person up with the cord.
    - serf 12y ago
      why not just generic mobile-phone hatred? they are all privacy intrusive in some way or another. it's not all Brand Y vs. Brand X.
  - final 12y ago
    I think he's saying that in the last few years Google has become extremely thirsty for all king of user data. Their latest Android apps by default send a ton of personal data to the Google servers. E.g. the Android keyboard periodically uploads a list of the hundred most often typed words, unless you go to settings and disable this "feature".
    - serf 12y ago
      I think he's saying that any modern phone has firmware on it that has the keys owned by a third party other than the purchaser of the hardware. Anyone with the keys can potentially be 'thirty for user data', which may include "Peaceful-country-turned-regime's" 's, new owners.
  - GeorgeMac 12y ago
    No I was merely stating the Google's business model is subsidised via owning your data. Which then they can manipulate/share at their discretion. Which is fine because you get an affordable piece of tech right? ... right? ...
exodust 12y ago
It's true. There's no selective control of permissions per app on Android. This is a glaring omission. Eg, granting permission for the app to use the internet, while denying access to your address book. This is important for maintaining control of your private data. Google needs to do better on this front. Apple introduced selective permissions at least, but Google is way behind.
- brianzelip 12y ago
  (off topic) hey @exodust, don't forget to codepen some examples of ur web approach! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8349825 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8349825

Another beautiful device and it is only at the cost of your privacy.

bdkauff 12y ago

Can you elaborate?

BigBlackCamry 12y ago
I think he's saying he rather use a landline, so they can't pin point his location via GPS
- MiguelHudnandez 12y ago
  You would need a very long cord for that land line for that to be an effective countermeasure! I think it is just generic Google-hatred.
  - Artemis2 12y ago
    Well, you can still follow a cord...
    - BigBlackCamry 12y ago
      No, he has a point. If the cord is long enough, whoever is following it will get tired and turn around.
      - richbradshaw 12y ago
        Also you can tie the person up with the cord.
  - serf 12y ago
    why not just generic mobile-phone hatred? they are all privacy intrusive in some way or another. it's not all Brand Y vs. Brand X.
- final 12y ago
  I think he's saying that in the last few years Google has become extremely thirsty for all king of user data. Their latest Android apps by default send a ton of personal data to the Google servers. E.g. the Android keyboard periodically uploads a list of the hundred most often typed words, unless you go to settings and disable this "feature".
  - serf 12y ago
    I think he's saying that any modern phone has firmware on it that has the keys owned by a third party other than the purchaser of the hardware. Anyone with the keys can potentially be 'thirty for user data', which may include "Peaceful-country-turned-regime's" 's, new owners.
- GeorgeMac 12y ago
  No I was merely stating the Google's business model is subsidised via owning your data. Which then they can manipulate/share at their discretion. Which is fine because you get an affordable piece of tech right? ... right? ...

exodust 12y ago

It's true. There's no selective control of permissions per app on Android. This is a glaring omission. Eg, granting permission for the app to use the internet, while denying access to your address book. This is important for maintaining control of your private data. Google needs to do better on this front. Apple introduced selective permissions at least, but Google is way behind.

brianzelip 12y ago
(off topic) hey @exodust, don't forget to codepen some examples of ur web approach! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8349825 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8349825