Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Starts Tracking Retail Store Visits On Android and iOS

Unknown Lamer posted about a year ago | from the extra-penny-per-cpm dept.

Google 157

recoiledsnake writes with news of Google tracking a bit more of your life. From the article: "Google is beta-testing a program that uses smartphone location data to determine when consumers visit stores, according to agency executives briefed on the program by Google employees. Google then connects these store visits to Google searches conducted on smartphones. If someone conducts a Google mobile search for 'screwdrivers,' for instance, a local hardware store could bid to have its store listing served to that user. By pairing that person's location data with its database of store listings, Google can see if the person who saw that ad subsequently visited the store.It is easiest for Google to conduct this passive location tracking on Android users, since Google has embedded location tracking into the software. Once Android users opt in to location services, Google starts collecting their location data as continuously as technologically possible."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

surprised, yet not surprised. (4, Insightful)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#45378879)

and the noose tightens a little bit more...

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (4, Insightful)

srmalloy (263556) | about a year ago | (#45378893)

Yet another reason not to opt-in to data collection...

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (2, Informative)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#45378911)

it's not that simple. it's tied to location services on a phone. like, you want phone navigation? that requires location services. you want it to show your location on a map? that requires location services. oh btdubs they also make records of your every location.

for iOS this is pretty easy, just don't use the core google apps (maps, google search, gmail, chrome). for android, you're kinda screwed, because it's baked into the OS. Another reason to stick with iOS. I can't say anything about windows phone OS.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (4, Informative)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#45379035)

"for android, you're kinda screwed, because it's baked into the OS."

No, it isn't. I'm getting pretty sick of these falsities being repeated.

It's baked into some APPS in the OS. You aren't obligated to use them. You can disable them and use 3rd-party tools like Waze or any of the many others.

My location tracking is off most of the time. When it is on, I use 3rd-party software. Network analysis shows that my Android phone isn't "phoning home" to Google with my location.

I sometimes use Google Maps to find things. But then I am not at the location I am trying to find.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (0)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#45379055)

well it's hella convenient for location services to be on for core phone functions, like search and maps. you use these things in so many ways that it becomes very fluid. which is why i prefer to use a phone os from a company that doesn't sell my recorded locations to others.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

Holi (250190) | about a year ago | (#45379081)

> i prefer to use a phone os from a company that doesn't sell my recorded locations to others.

And please, which company would that be?

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (2, Insightful)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#45379107)

> i prefer to use a phone os from a company that doesn't sell my recorded locations to others.

And please, which company would that be?

casting a wide net, there are four major mobile phone OS's. Here's a link to news about one OS capturing and selling location information:

Google Starts Tracking Retail Store Visits On Android and iOS [slashdot.org]

do you have any links for iOS, blackberry, or windows phone?

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | about a year ago | (#45379477)

casting a wide net, there are four major mobile phone OS's. Here's a link to news about one OS capturing and selling location information:

Google Starts Tracking Retail Store Visits On Android and iOS

do you have any links for iOS, blackberry, or windows phone?

Microsoft is doing adverts now in the UK asking potential customers if they want an email service that doesn't read their emails. They don't mention Google by name yet.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (0)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year ago | (#45379557)

The problem is that Microsoft apparently reads users emails for the same reason Google does, for targeted ads. It's a nice question that makes people suspicious, but Microsoft email is not a solution for those that answer 'yes'.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#45379701)

i'm just trying to include ms and bby so I can point out problems with android in ways that I don't get painted as an apple fanboi, but whatever. Apple doesn't serve targeted ads, and it doesn't have a financial interest in the content of my emails. and every person can get an iCloud.com email address for free with no advertising.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379763)

Apple does serve targeted ads. It's in the first sentence: http://advertising.apple.com/ [apple.com]

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379875)

That's not how targeting works, they aren't selling your location data.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379575)

Mozilla?

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379779)

> i prefer to use a phone os from a company that doesn't sell my recorded locations to others.

And please, which company would that be?

That would be Playskool [hasbro.com] .

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (4, Informative)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#45379273)

well it's hella convenient for location services to be on for core phone functions, like search and maps. you use these things in so many ways that it becomes very fluid. which is why i prefer to use a phone os from a company that doesn't sell my recorded locations to others.

Apparently you completely missed my point.

Location services on Android phones do NOT "call home" to Google. Google APPS do.

Don't use the Google apps, and it's not an issue. And by the way, this is is true for BOTH Android and iOS. Google apps will report your location the same amount and the same way, whichever phone you are using.

The only difference is that Google bundles their apps with Android. Apple doesn't bundle them with iOS.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (3, Interesting)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45379427)

Don't use the Google apps, and it's not an issue. And by the way, this is is true for BOTH Android and iOS. Google apps will report your location the same amount and the same way, whichever phone you are using.

I'm afraid you're missing the fact that when Google, does apps for iOS, they need to stay within the app review guidelines, including on privacy issues. Which excludes lots of bad behaviour. On Android, Google are free to do whatever they want, within the law.

You claim there is no difference, but that's a big one.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (4, Informative)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#45379565)

I'm afraid you're missing the fact that when Google, does apps for iOS, they need to stay within the app review guidelines,
...
You claim there is no difference, but that's a big one.

I didn't miss anything, and no there isn't.

Apple guidelines do not require apps to NOT phone home... in fact there was a big flap about that just recently... iOS apps tracking people in ways that they did not approve.

Android app guidelines are actually stricter than Apple's. You have to explicitly consent to EVERY phone service that is accessed by an app: not just location but accelerometers, compass, notifications, wifi, phone data, etc.

IN BOTH CASES you have to explicitly approve of Google Maps using your location data in order to use Google Maps. There is no practical difference.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (3, Insightful)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45379629)

Apple guidelines do not require apps to NOT phone home... in fact there was a big flap about that just recently... iOS apps tracking people in ways that they did not approve.

Wrong.

"4.1 Apps that do not notify and obtain user consent before collecting, transmitting, or using location data will be rejected"

Android app guidelines are actually stricter than Apple's. You have to explicitly consent to EVERY phone service that is accessed by an app: not just location but accelerometers, compass, notifications, wifi, phone data, etc.

a) It's a poorer system. It's pre-approval, on mass, which means the user doesn't know why an app needs access to resources before approving them. iOS seeks approval at the time of requiring the resource, enabling the user to know what the resource is needed for.

b) There is no such limitation on Google on Android, because Google don't have to do it from within an app, and therefore not within a sandbox.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (2, Insightful)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#45379451)

ok, here's the deal. On android phones, the default browser and maps apps phone home all ur info. On iOS phones, the default browser and maps app do not phone home all ur info. This is the difference between android and iOS. agreed? now, which one sounds better to you?

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#45379613)

Frankly, Android.

Because lots of Apple apps, guidelines or no, have been caught "phoning home" info that people certainly did not want known.

On Android, (A) you have to explicitly approve all such services that an app can access on your phone, in advance, and (B) unlike iOS, there are no "no competition" rules for Android apps. If you can find a better (or better for YOU) app than stock Android apps, just use it and stop using the stock Android app. Try that on Apple. You can't.

Granted, Apple asks for some permissions too but after some of the recent scandals it is obvious that isn't enough.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (2)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45379673)

Because lots of Apple apps, guidelines or no, have been caught "phoning home" info that people certainly did not want known.

On Android, (A) you have to explicitly approve all such services that an app can access on your phone, in advance, and (B) unlike iOS, there are no "no competition" rules for Android apps. If you can find a better (or better for YOU) app than stock Android apps, just use it and stop using the stock Android app. Try that on Apple. You can't.

You're confusoing two different things. App sandbox (on Android) with App Store Approvals (on iOS).

The problem is that iOS also has a sandbox, which you ignore. And you also ignore the fact that Android has no app approvals process.

Again the big picture is that third party developers can do a lot more than users don't want on Android then on iOS. And Google can do ANYTHING on Android, but they can't on iOS.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#45379985)

You're confusoing two different things. App sandbox (on Android) with App Store Approvals (on iOS).

No, I'm not "confusing" or "ignoring" anything.

Listen up: recent scandals have demonstrated that Apple's "sandbox" DOESN'T WORK for things like this, as Chalie Miller [cnet.com] and a lot of others [informationweek.com] found out.

Ultimately, keeping withing Apple's "sandbox" is up to the developer, and if you have a malicious developer, it makes no difference.

That was part of my point. No, app developer CAN'T do a lot more on Android than they do on iOS. Lots of people keep saying that but the distinction is illusory. The ONLY difference is that on iOS, they're slightly more likely to get caught because of the app vetting that Apple does.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

Uberbah (647458) | about a year ago | (#45379685)

unlike iOS, there are no "no competition" rules for Android apps. If you can find a better (or better for YOU) app than stock Android apps, just use it and stop using the stock Android app. Try that on Apple. You can't.

Nonsense with no basis in reality. You can find no shortage of apps for browsing, music, videos, camera effects, etc for IOS devices that don't come from Apple.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#45379713)

you're being silly. stop being silly! all your args are for 3rd party apps, and we're talking about first party apps.

I think the "no competition" thing was an issue earlier but is no longer an issue. there are plenty of options for browser, maps, address book, camera, calendar, etc. I don't think there are options for the phone parts - phone and sms. so you need to chillax here, welcome to 2013.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#45379645)

To put it a different way: Apple's "walled garden" isn't worth much if the "wall" is really just hot air.

I'm not an Apple-hater. I like OS X and I develop on Macs. I just don't like the tradeoff on iOS between "security" and freedom, because like nearly all such trades, it turns out the security is largely illusory.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45379889)

I'm not an Apple-hater. I like OS X and I develop on Macs. I just don't like the tradeoff on iOS between "security" and freedom, because like nearly all such trades, it turns out the security is largely illusory.

Well that's odd, because your complaints about iOS are based on falsehoods. Either you're an Apple-hater, or your dislike of iOS is based on misapprehensions.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

lgw (121541) | about a year ago | (#45379989)

OK, here's the deal: if you don't learn how to write, no one will take you seriously. Hey, mash whatever keys you want to, it's a formerly-free country, but if you seek credibility you should make a bit of an effort.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (4, Informative)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about a year ago | (#45379139)

You can disable them and use 3rd-party tools like Waze or any of the many others.

FYI Google bought Waze several months ago, and the two services are being integrated already. I'm seeing Google ads on Waze at times, and Waze alerts show up on Google Maps.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

realityimpaired (1668397) | about a year ago | (#45379243)

That would have been the update to Google Navigate a few months ago that showed traffic congestion, wouldn't it? It didn't used to do that... I've found it quite useful for the most part, on the occasion that I've actually needed to use navigate.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

alostpacket (1972110) | about a year ago | (#45379523)

Navigation has had the traffic layer for years.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#45379293)

"FYI Google bought Waze several months ago, and the two services are being integrated already. I'm seeing Google ads on Waze at times, and Waze alerts show up on Google Maps."

Google search has been added to Waze, and Waze alerts are now showing on Google Maps. That's it.

If Waze ever starts "calling home" to Google, I'll stop using it. It's that simple.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (3, Funny)

maccodemonkey (1438585) | about a year ago | (#45379683)

Google search has been added to Waze, and Waze alerts are now showing on Google Maps. That's it.

If Waze ever starts "calling home" to Google, I'll stop using it. It's that simple.

The Waze servers already belong to Google. It's already calling home. And the call is coming from inside the house.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45379385)

Network analysis shows that my Android phone isn't "phoning home" to Google with my location.

Yet. TFS says it's a beta test. If you're not part of the beta test, then your checking is irrelevant.

You insist that this only only happens in apps. Yet since Google builds the stack of software, they can collect data, and phone home from anywhere. For things like this, it works better for Google if it's always collecting data. So who's to say they won't?

Re: surprised, yet not surprised. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379583)

It's great! It's so great that you are extra careful to shut it off.

Most people are not tech savvy. They wouldn't know how or why they would want to shut it off.

You are failing at you biggest responsibility as a technology geek - ensuring the less technically knowledgable around you are not harmed by technology.

You are shutting it off for obvious reasons. Why aren't you looking out for your friends and family?

Anonymous post because /. mobile sucks donkey balls.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379617)

>Network analysis shows that my Android phone isn't "phoning home" to Google with my location.
How dumb are you? They get the data from your third party apps access their location api. Seriously. Are you retarded?

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (4, Informative)

MacDork (560499) | about a year ago | (#45379131)

like, you want phone navigation? that requires location services.

You can enable the GPS without using Google's location services. I used Google maps today. Location services off.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#45379241)

then what is the ostensible legitimate purpose of location services?????

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year ago | (#45379573)

Traffic tracking, Google now integration, etc. I get a Google now notification when my spouse (or other friends sharing their data) leave work. I get notifications if I have to leave early for something to make it on time because of traffic, etc. That sort of thing.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | about a year ago | (#45379941)

Medium range location fixing when there's no access to GPS.

Without location services your phone has two options, get a fix from the carrier based on the tower location (very crappy accuracy that's lucky to get you in the right suburb) or a GPS fix.

With location services the phone will scrap all the WiFi points in the area and based on which it can see it looks up a Google database of location data to determine where you are without a GPS fix. In my house for some reason it assumes I'm 4 houses down the road, but better than without it turned on where it puts me at the shopping centre about 600m away.

With location services enabled when you have a GPS fix it will send the location data to google including what wifi points are in the area, what cells you're connected to, and how fast you're travelling (plus anything else that Google put into their very liberal definition of "anonymous data is collected")

Re: surprised, yet not surprised. (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379299)

That's bs.

Google maps needs to access your location. Please turn on Location services.

On Android

Re: surprised, yet not surprised. (3, Informative)

ThatsMyNick (2004126) | about a year ago | (#45379485)

That is bs. Google maps does need to use Google Location services, it can use GPS just fine. On android.

Re: surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

MacDork (560499) | about a year ago | (#45379497)

Nope. Location On, Location services Off [imgur.com] I'm using Google maps without signing into a google account too.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379325)

I only have a basic voice/sms plan on my smartphone, and Gmaps being rubbish in offline mode is the reason I started using alternatives (such as MapsWithMe). The download offline maps feature in gmaps seems intentionally broken, limited and clunky to use. You can only have the arbitrary number of 6 rectangular areas downloaded at any one time with a size limit, and it has a habit of randomly forgetting them, real handy when you are lost miles from a wifi point. It's almost like the reason the feature exists at all is due to some obscure contractual obligation but they want to make it as inconvenient as possible. It also doesn't allow saving offline location markers, something which should be trivial to implement, instead you need a data connection to use the 'Places' service (which presumably gets intensively data mined and rapes your privacy).

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379647)

Google don't want you to work in offline mode. Google want you online and being tracked. Don't expect radical improvements in offline maps any time soon.

You've sourced an alternative, that's great. You could also buy a street directory. It won't track you. Works without wifi. Works without power. Works when you're lost and have no GPS. Are you required to use the wet RAM? You bet. Is it the answer for all situations? I concede, no it isn't. It (like your smartphone) is just another tool to achieve a task.

When a company offers a service for free and that service steps away from a their own core business model, no one can complain when it isn't maintained as well as the parts that are core business. You get what you pay for. If you'd like offline location markers, buy a GPS. Or the aforementioned (paper) map.

Be that as it may... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379389)

...there is more money to be made in tracking people than there is in selling phones to people who don't want to be tracked, so expect all industry players to continue moving in this direction.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (3, Informative)

TubeSteak (669689) | about a year ago | (#45379209)

I question Google's ability to accurately track your store habits.
More often than not, Google Maps puts stores in the wrong place, if not the wrong side of the street.

It's a problem that I find curious, since my Garmin GPS (which I use a lot more) gives me that problem much less often.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#45379239)

but if a store's wifi ids re registered with google, then they'll know your location based on this beacon. obv works best in a home depot, not so much in a mall.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45379461)

bv works best in a home depot, not so much in a mall.

That's the reason why they're starting to use low power bluetooth for exactly this functionality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBeacon [wikipedia.org]

Gives you a specific store within a mall.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (1)

n3r0.m4dski11z (447312) | about a year ago | (#45379525)

Just took a look at my wifes phone, and the only android setting which said it would phone home was settings -> location access -> wifi and mobile network location

Which I have now turned off. The other services which are GPS location and access my location do not say anything about sending anything to google. The first option, wifi and mobile network detection, does.

Probably this person article submitter does not realize that there is a setting. That its set by default is worrying however. But im sure most people like it.

Re:surprised, yet not surprised. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379167)

and the noose tightens a little bit more...

It should be mentioned that Google's admob transfers your location data using a constant encryption key. [ucsb.edu] According to the Snowden leaks, the NSA decided using cell tower data to track everyone's location was too inefficient and ultimately gave it up. Now I think I see why. I'm sure no one at the NSA has ever decompiled Google's code and snarfed their constant encryption keys.

These invasive practices should be outlawed. The people working at Google should be ashamed of themselves. They are exactly what facilitates the NSA and their ilk in stalking every phone carrying person on the planet.

Duplicate (4, Informative)

jklovanc (1603149) | about a year ago | (#45378881)

Re:Duplicate (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379113)

you must be new here... don't be surprised when this shows up tomorrow...

If only Google could... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379121)

Build a tool to help Slashdot editors find dupes... Oh wait, they did [google.com] .

Re:Duplicate (1)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#45379123)

A duplicate? There is a way out. [slashdot.org]

Dup... please! (1)

openfrog (897716) | about a year ago | (#45379317)

Not only a dupe, but one of the first remark on the discussion was that, not CREDIT CARD COMPANIES already track your every purchase and visits to specific stores, and have done this for a long time.

This is a forum of well-informed people. We would want to read about Google other things that what the PR firm hired by Microsoft spews out day in or day out.

Either that or I am going to find another IT news forum. I want to read informed opinions, and while we still find interesting discussions here, it is becoming far and between... Anyone else having this feeling?

Re:Dup... please! (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about a year ago | (#45379483)

Credit card companies only get info when people choose to use their credit cards for payment. There's always cash for those people that don't want to be tracked.

Now if this Google tracking is transparent and opt in, then that's equally no problem. However Google isn't that trustworthy. They have a track record of collecting data without seeking approval first, and making it difficult or impossible to get that data deleted.

Re:Dup... please! (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | about a year ago | (#45379891)

Not only a dupe, but one of the first remark on the discussion was that, not CREDIT CARD COMPANIES already track your every purchase and visits to specific stores, and have done this for a long time.

But CREDIT CARD COMPANIES don't put adverts on my phone.

Thank god it's Google (5, Funny)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | about a year ago | (#45378883)

Since they said they "do no evil" we can all trust them completely. If it was another company I'd be worried.

Re:Thank god it's Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379109)

I seem to remember that the "Do no evil" thing was coined by Marissa Meyer. That's not to suggest that she would try a similar approach in the next company, but it's not an actively maintained part of the current Google culture any more. That's not to say that there are no Googlists who still believe in that motto, but the resulting coverage may be getting more and more spotty. It's similar to most U.S. citizens still believing to live in the land of the free and the home of the brave somehow while the government has moved on.

Re:Thank god it's Google (4, Insightful)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about a year ago | (#45379159)

I seem to remember that the "Do no evil" thing was coined by Marissa Meyer.

She's also the one who said there'd never, ever be ads on the Google.com main page - which is now happening.

I'm not a huge fan of hers, but it is interesting to note that some of these philosophical changes at Google coincided with her apparently being expelled from the inner circle at the company.

Re:Thank god it's Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379605)

"Don't be evil" is the informal corporate motto (or slogan) of Google.[1] It was first suggested either by Google employee Paul Buchheit[2] at a meeting about corporate values in early 2000[3] or, according to another account, by Google engineer Amit Patel in 1999.[4]

ala wikipedia

Re:Thank god it's Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379219)

This is like their core service with the search engine. Your results and ads are based on your location. Googling London in Canada doesn't point you to the UK London as the first result for example. But now its on a phone so "oh noooo"!!!!1

Re:Thank god it's Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379333)

I think the motto is "Do only evil"

you can turn off tracking (1)

ozduo (2043408) | about a year ago | (#45378909)

and google obliges!!

Re:you can turn off tracking (3, Insightful)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#45378915)

and google obliges!!

why would you think that they may any attention to your privacy settings? have you hired a team of lawyers to review their TOCs? they ignored my safari privacy settings.

Re:you can turn off tracking (0)

ozduo (2043408) | about a year ago | (#45378969)

I was using irony to make my sarcastic point! sorry it went over your head. (that's another demonstration of irony)

privacy nuts need not reply (-1, Flamebait)

metalmaster (1005171) | about a year ago | (#45378913)

no seriously....we've heard it all before

Re:privacy nuts need not reply (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45378925)

no seriously....we've heard it all before

Sure, Mr. Metalmaster...

And Google says "F*ck the NSA"? (1, Insightful)

JoeyRox (2711699) | about a year ago | (#45378929)

It occurs to me that Google isn't mad on principle that the NSA spies on Americans using Google's data centers but instead that they're mad the NSA is riding on Google's spying coattails. Nobody likes competition I guess.

Re:And Google says "F*ck the NSA"? (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | about a year ago | (#45379051)

Nobody likes competition I guess.

I think it's more like, "Gas, grass, or ass--nobody rides for free," myself.

Re:And Google says "F*ck the NSA"? (1)

game kid (805301) | about a year ago | (#45379197)

It's Eric "maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place" Schmidt and Larry "shouting match [with Brin over more datamining]" Page we're talking about...they couldn't properly feign outrage about the NSA if the NSA found their personal sex tapes and demanded them at gunpoint.

Re:And Google says "F*ck the NSA"? (1)

fermion (181285) | about a year ago | (#45379271)

As I said before, Google has the idea that they are the only ones who honest, professional, good enough at generating profits to so they should collect data. Collecting data just to prevent someone from blowing up downtown is just frivolous.

Re:And Google says "F*ck the NSA"? (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year ago | (#45379587)

They do seem to be one of the few that doesn't regularly leak user data. They've got a pretty decent record of keeping your private data private.

Give up your cell phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45378959)

Let the whole world go back to telegraph days..

Tell these fucknuts we are tired of their trashing our humanity for their greedy ways.

Re: Give up your cell phones (1)

j-stroy (640921) | about a year ago | (#45378981)

Telegraph is probably cheaper than SMS.. !60 cents per message! Canada to US with Telus.

Re: Give up your cell phones (1)

n1ywb (555767) | about a year ago | (#45379005)

Ham Radio is still here and pretty low cost.

Re: Give up your cell phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379245)

Why are you with Telus? Telus sucks. It's true.

Not saying Bell or Rogers are any good, just that Telus is extremely sucky.

Re: Give up your cell phones (1)

realityimpaired (1668397) | about a year ago | (#45379305)

Telegraph is probably cheaper than SMS.. !60 cents per message! Canada to US with Telus.

Weird. It's included in the base cost of my plan with Koodo, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Telus. Unlimited international texting. And I've had months where I sent over 3000 international texts (not just to the US... to friends/family all over Europe, Southeast Asia, and parts of Africa) without seeing it show up on my bill, so I can vouch for it actually being international, and for "unlimited" being at the very least an arbitrarily large number that's beyond what I would consider heavy usage.

You might want to look at this: http://mobility.telus.com/en/ON/mobile_messaging/int_mess.shtml?INTCMP=ILCq4srvesmsg2 [telus.com]
$10/mo as an addon gets you unlimited international texting with Telus... considering that all of their current plans currently have unlimited domestic texting already, not a bad deal, I suppose. Perhaps you need to change to a current plan offering? I know a few people who got dinged when Koodo started the unlimited domestic long distance included thing, because they were on a grandfathered plan and didn't change over before they started making LD calls....

Re: Give up your cell phones (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379977)

Yikes. It's a shame my carrier (Ting) doesn't extend up there without international roaming yet -- they don't care where a text's sender/recipient are, so you'd be paying US$3 for 100 messages, $5 for 1000, and similar cheap prices.

NSA/Google can suck my GNU/Balls (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45378993)

fuck those cunts

No thanks. (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about a year ago | (#45379011)

I'll stick with my Qualcomm QCP-1900 from 1998 - w/o a GPS chip - that just makes voice calls.

Will they honor (2)

bobstreo (1320787) | about a year ago | (#45379015)

The do not track header?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track [wikipedia.org]

And Airplane mode is your friend in a store apparently.

Re:Will they honor (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | about a year ago | (#45379061)

what if you want to make a call?

Re:Will they honor (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379105)

Why?

Seriously, what did fucking people do before cell phones?

Did the human race die out because they couldn't place phone calls any and/or everywhere?
Fucking spoiled little babies and their phones...you deserve what you get for your weakness

Back in the stone ages... (1)

Archfeld (6757) | about a year ago | (#45379205)

We went to the MA-Bell/(insert local phone company here) pay phone that was on nearly every block and dropped a dime in the slot, made a call and wandered on about our business. If you were a drug dealer, or so self absorbed that you could not be out of touch you carried an ancient device known as a pager.

Re:Will they honor (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379639)

Fucking spoiled little baby making a ruckus on the internets because he has no need to make random calls.
What we did before cell phones doesn't matter anymore, that's the past and not the now. If you have no friends to call, don't take it on random internet people. Baby.

Re:Will they honor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379733)

Fuck you faggot.

I have friends, but we actually meet in person and hang out.
We don't need to be annoying fucktards talking on the phone constantly instead of paying attention to the world around us.
Hope you walk in front of speeding bus while wasting time on your phone.

Re:Will they honor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379819)

"No, I have a life! YOU don't have a life! I'm rubber, you're glue!"
That's how your reply sounds like.

And how does having to be on touch correlate with walking in front of buses? You assume everyone that uses a cell phone to be in touch is some sort of moron that can't walk across the road, while you are super duper smart and flawless? And you are surprised to be called out?

Well, to meet real life friends you need to make appointments. It tends to happen that the other persons might have issues or something makes them get there late. I suppose you still wait for a long time in some place instead of getting the call and change your plans. You must be that one unreachable guy that no one can notify of anything via phone or anything else. Or maybe your friends have to wait for you because you didn't call them to tell you were coming late or you had something urgent to do.
Sounds smart, yes.

Heh. No, not really. You are just some "new stuff sucks I am superior to all of you sheep" guy.

Re:Will they honor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379999)

It seems unlikely that you have friends. Generally someone given to the sort of unprovoked petty nerdrage you displayed is a friendless,insecure loner whose only outlet is to try to belittle people on the internet.

Re:Will they honor (1)

thegarbz (1787294) | about a year ago | (#45379951)

Seriously, what did fucking people do before cell phones?

Buy incorrect presents, get the date wrong on the card, miss things you could shop for that never made it on the grocery list, not confirm with a friend if the item you have in your hand is the same price?

By the way what did you fucking do before you had a car? What did you do before you had electricity? What did you do before you evolved into human form?

The old way is NOT the better way.

Re:Will they honor (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379633)

Airplane mode is your friend everywhere*. Let's hope the change in FDA regulations doesn't make airplane mode disappear.

(*Unless you have FOMO syndrome or related technoaddiction.)

I wonder (1)

kilodelta (843627) | about a year ago | (#45379085)

Does this depend on location data being turned on? Because I turned mine off the day I got my Android phone.

Re:I wonder (4, Informative)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year ago | (#45379291)

Then you're fine. Don't let the FUD bother you.

One reason I switched to ZTE Open (FireFox phone) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379127)

It's not perfect either although its also slightly less privacy invasive. There is one non-free app (a nokia maps app) although other than that it appears to be 100% free software (excluding non-free modem firmware and wireless drivers). The phone leaves a lot to be desired although the point of getting it is it's a bit more freedom friendly than any (?) other phones on the market.

Is it still available? As of 11/9/13 it is... but who knows for how long. When they are gone they are gone...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/ZTE-Open-powered-by-Firefox-OS-3G-unlocked-smartphone-orange-eBay-exclusive-/281165818989?pt=Cell_Phones&hash=item4176c9ec6d .. note a shill... bought 3. not perfect. barely 'good enough' as a basic phone. but can't beat the $80 USD price point. will suffice for freedom conscious users.

Short on details, sources (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379133)

This article is far too vague. It also conflates the anonimized location services with opt-in location sharing. Location sharing, as one would expect, is an opt-in feature to share location data with Google (as used by Google Now).

Maybe they can rate consumers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379257)

I mean honestly- if you search for "screwdrivers" like it suggests in the fine summary, you are simply a moron. Everyone knows where to buy screwdrivers. At a bar. Or they know that liquor stores and grocery stores sell the items to make your own. If they wanted the other use of screwdriver, they know that Orchard Supply, Home Depot, Lowe's, Ace Hardware or the like have that. Not hard. So the person searching for screwdrivers would be rated "dumb". That might make them attractive to some advertisers; especially since they also have a smart phone - so they may be rated "dumb, with disposable income". Advertisers would be happy to help them dispose of said income.

Shock...! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379311)

Apparently most people think their personal info has no value since they still uses Google services. Fun part is most is also jabbering about the NSA spying. Ohh the irony...

Google doesn't care (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379423)

Google doesn't have to. They're the ad company.

remind me again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45379687)

which one is the NSA and which one is Google?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?