Location Services Raise Privacy Concerns 152
megahurt writes "Location-based services are becoming more common, and the features they add to mobile devices can be useful and even fun. But the downside is that everyone who reads the posting will know the user isn't home. On top of that, some services, such as Foursquare, can be linked to Twitter feeds. Peter Eckersley, senior staff technologist, says there are many situations in which the location data that is kept could be misused. Many of the providers of services say in their privacy policies they will give up the data in cases where it is subpoenaed. That isn't always from law enforcement; sometimes the data can be used in civil lawsuits such as divorce cases."
I think I might be starting to get it. (Score:1, Interesting)
Safer summer fun again? (Score:3, Interesting)
Now you can identify homes that have large outdoor pools, track their owners for a while and wait.
When the air horn blasts the owner is on their way back home.
Re:Need locational anonymity scheme (Score:3, Interesting)
There must be a way to get the location services you want, like finding the local Krispy-Kreme, without broadcasting your location to the service in question. Like a blocked phone number.
Yes, Always use a disposable phone. Brought for cash. Use it only once. That's what Uncle Osama tells me.
...But Pseudo-Geek Hipsters Simply HAVE to (Score:3, Interesting)
...and the number of them who owe me money, claim they're strapped for cash, yet tweet that they are the "mayor" of some downtown over-priced coffeehouse or sushi joint is ver-r-r-r-y revealing.
Gents: I may not be one of your twitter "followers," but I check your twitter pages religiously nonetheless. Pay up. Looks like my daughter's gonna need braces.
Thanks.
Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)
Why do people think that "common sense" is some intrinsic, infallible sense of what is happening around you? At best, it's a measure of "well known shared experiences" that most people remember. At worst, it's merely an expectation that other people should know the things we consider obvious.
You know, I'm going to pull some numbers out of my ass for purposes of illustration: 90% of people don't understand 90% of the workings of 90% of the technology that surrounds them on a daily basis. That might even be generous, but the specifics of the numbers is irrelevant. The barrier to having technology isn't understanding any more, it's paying for it.
They don't really know how a fridge works. Their thermostat is a complete mystery. The workings of a radio is a complete unknown. A light switch makes the dark go away if the bulb isn't burned out. Traffic signals work, but they don't know why. A smart phone is just like that black thing grandma had with the dial, but you can send pictures and text -- that's about the extent of their understanding. They're not required to know anything more than that.
Your toaster analogy is apt -- since for most people, that's about the full extent of how much they will truly understand their smart phone. And, considering a lot of these location based services are less than 2-3 years old, it's not like there has been time for these issues to come to light. People just turn it on, push the pretty buttons, and go. When their friends start using something, they do to. They're not doing any reflecting on the issues of using that technology -- they're not even thinking of it as technology, it' a button. It's part of the phone. It's infrastructure and therefore largely invisible.
They completely lack a frame of reference to seriously ponder the fact that something which is "cool" or "popular" can have ramifications beyond what they have conceived of. Heck, they can't even conceive of the potential issues, since they don't know how it all works.
The reality is, we give more and more complex devices to people on a daily basis. Companies add new features they think their users will like, but the technology is so new, that sometimes even they haven't thought through the possible issues. Computers and technology have gotten into the mainstream far faster than a general understanding of how they work. Heck, I see 10-year old kids with phones -- I'm not even sure most of them are capable of understanding what is being said on the topic of privacy, or why it's important.
I'm just not convinced any more that you can lay all of this at the feet of the users and say it's their fault. I'm not saying we don't need better consumer education. But the pace of technology in our lives means that stuff is happening that most people will never be really 'informed' on all of these topics. I just don't think this is a simple "do this" kind of fix that makes it all go away -- it' way more complex than that.
Re:You don't have to use these services (Score:3, Interesting)
This has all played out before (Score:4, Interesting)
Back in the early days of APRS (Automatic Position Reporting System?), the ham radio community was happily mounting GPS trackers in their cars and sending their position out for convenient viewing on APRS screens. It was fun.
Then Steve Dimse came along and started getting these position reports from the Internet to APRS gateways, making them available on a Java applet for anyone to see, and archiving them. People were more than a little bit unhappy at the time, but I think the consensus that was finally reached was "If you have a problem with that, turn off your tracker!".
I think the same applies here. The info is public, you should know it's public, so if you don't want it to be public, don't send it out.
Re:You don't have to use these services (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)
This is a fairly typical attitude among intelligent people, and is especially strong about their area of expertise. Unfortunately, in the real world, people are pretty much forced to use things they barely understand just to live a vaguely normal life. Many of these people simply do not have the mental capacity to address all the thing which they "should" understand. Even the most intelligent people are often dangerously ignorant in many areas (although they often fail to realise it).
No, to large extent it is up to the designers and overseers of complex (yet common) technology and systems that things behave in a relatively expected and benign way.