[HN Gopher] TrueCaller built a billion-dollar caller ID data emp... ___________________________________________________________________ TrueCaller built a billion-dollar caller ID data empire in India Author : davesailer Score : 158 points Date : 2022-03-22 12:29 UTC (10 hours ago) (HTM) web link (restofworld.org) (TXT) w3m dump (restofworld.org) | [deleted] | yashg wrote: | I find TrueCaller immensely useful. Especially to filter out and | block spam callers. Spam calls and robocalls are a HUGE problem | in India. TrueCaller flashes spam callers in red, you can reject | the call and save a few precious minutes of your life. About half | of the calls I receive a day are spam calls. If I were to answer | them all and then reject it would be a waste of time and energy. | LinAGKar wrote: | I used to use Truecaller, and it is useful, but it got | gradually more and more obnoxious over the years, until | eventually it would nag you about paid subscriptions whenever | you opened the app, and throw up fullscreen ads whenever you | received a phone call. So at that point I uninstalled it. | oh_sigh wrote: | It's heartening to know that it isn't just Americans whose | phones are overrun by Indian spam callers. | throwaway158497 wrote: | A cabinet minister (secretary in US administration) got a | call like this out of the blue. That is when the India govt | work up to the problem. Nothing was done so far though, | yashg wrote: | Most of these are not scammers trying to scare in the name of | tax authorities or IT support scammers. They are mostly tele- | callers trying to sell property, insurance, loans, credit | cards and such. Nuisance nonetheless. | mikeyouse wrote: | An interesting side effect of these types of companies popped up | during the Navalny team's investigation of Putin's alleged yacht | in Italy. They got the ship's crew manifest and then used a | database like TrueCaller to check it out. The manifest had the | crewmember's name and a phone number - so when you look up the | number associated with 'Alexander Pechurkin', other people have | him listed as "Sanya FSB" "Alexander FSO" and "Alexander Graceful | Procurement". [FSB = Russian security services, FSO ~= secret | service, 'Graceful' = Putin's previous yacht]. Pretty interesting | work history and descriptions for a Boatswain's mate in Italy. | | https://youtu.be/WyYp9xPLa8s?t=423 | | These lists must be a gold mine for intelligence agencies. | compsciphd wrote: | true caller's dumping of one's contact list is no different what | facebook did (and does, though now does with a bit more | transparency than in the app's earlier days) | reaperducer wrote: | _true caller 's dumping of one's contact list is no different | what facebook did_ | | I don't see anyone in this discussion saying that what Facebook | did was OK. | | Or is that the point that you're making? Because one person | stole a car, it's OK for everyone else to steal cars, too? | compsciphd wrote: | no. I'm still pissed off at facebook for doing that, and I | tried at one point to convince a class action firm that deals | in privacy related things to take it up as a case. I'd like | if people who are upset at truecaller for this, aim some of | their ire at facebook. | bongoman37 wrote: | quxpar wrote: | Americans have avoided this problem by making the overwhelming | majority of phone calls spam, so any call not from an existing | contact is ignored. | oh_sigh wrote: | I would love if that were the case, but I don't see how | workable it is because caller id is spoofable, and people | commonly need to pick up calls from local unknown numbers like | doctors offices, mechanic, etc whose number you may not have(or | who may call from a whole bank of numbers). | | The best bet is to try to get a phone number from across the | country. If you live in NY, get a phone number from a city you | have no relation to, say Seattle. Then, anyone calling from | Seattle is almost certainly spam and you can still pick up 212 | or 646 numbers. | withinboredom wrote: | I did this by accident. Best bit of advice you can give, | honestly. Most people don't know that if you actually make | friends with they guy/gal setting up your account (and not | doing it online), you can literally choose your phone number. | My phone number spells my (very popular) first name and is | from an obscure part of the US. Any phone calls from there is | spam. That being said, bots tend to use that prefix for spam, | in general and for a few years there, I got a lot texts and | calls: "missed call from this number, who dis" and "I don't | want your warranty" type of things. That was annoying. | carvan222 wrote: | [deleted] | [deleted] | rootusrootus wrote: | It is genius, really. Evil, but genius. Even just getting a | reliable name for every number would be handy, I can see the | value. But the killer feature is how much information your | contacts leak in their description of you, so all of that can be | correlated to build a more detailed picture of you. | geodel wrote: | I am sure someone can build a truly privacy respecting service | like true caller and billion plus phone users in India would just | sign up for it for something like Rs 100 a month or would they? | | It is astounding that common person understands the tradeoff when | using free service but these ignoramus critics do not. | rootusrootus wrote: | Nobody really wants to pay for services, ever. We have trained | them that everyone ought to be free. And the evil genius of | truecaller is that you're not being asked to give up your own | privacy, you are just giving up your friends'. And of course | that comes right back around to you because if just one of your | friends feels the same way, you're in the database too. | nitn wrote: | > Truecaller's database that includes users who did not register | and did not give consent to having their numbers identified. | | That's the problem with maintaining absolute privacy. The privacy | and security of your information depends on other people even if | you do everything to save it. | freebuju wrote: | Truecaller is massively popular in my country as well. | | Before I knew any better, I was ignorant of the permissions and | saw it as a worthy trade-off since my contact(s) will somehow end | up there, if they weren't already. As all it takes is for someone | else who has saved my number to download the app and give it | permission. | | Didn't give them much thought until I started seeing them buy | advertisement spots in some of the local daily newspapers. They | were getting greedy for more data. From that moment, I deleted my | account and created a new account signed in only with a random | Microsoft login and the app now lives in the work profile where | there are no contacts. | | The app will refuse to work until you grant it permission to make | calls (read your IMEI pre-Android 10) and obviously read contacts | permission. It is also quite intrusive. Coincidentally, the other | app I found employing such dirty tactics by refusing to launch at | all before being granted sensitive permissions is Whatsapp. | fareesh wrote: | When you install the app they steal your contact list and | populate their database that way. Most people are unaware of | this, or don't care since we are a third world country and | privacy is seen as a first world problem. The vast majority of | thinking here is not very sophisticated about these types of | topics. Only a very tiny fraction of the total population is | averse to sharing personal information like phone numbers. It's | common to see folks post their tax ID numbers etc on public | forums, tweets, etc. too. | | For a number of years it was quite common for folks in the lowest | income brackets to change their phone numbers quite often because | of rampant competition between mobile network providers. The | "Mobile Number Portability" system was eventually introduced that | minimized this to a large degree. Eventually the competition | subsided and this reduced significantly to a point where it's not | very common anymore per my understanding. | | When I need to use Trucaller I use it via their web interface | exclusively with a google account that has 0 contacts for them to | steal. I remember finding my number listed many years ago as my | name with (web developer) in parenthesis, likely stolen from some | old customer of mine. | jamal-kumar wrote: | I have two phones, one with a cell phone chip from a third | world country, and one which is not. | | Guess which one gets all the apps - It's definitely not the one | that costs me over 100$/mo to maintain! | 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: | "When you install the app they steal your contact list and | populate their database that way." | | What if you avoid using the system default contacts store, | i.e., keep it empty, and instead you use an app like | OpenContacts.^1 To apps like TruCaller, it will appear the the | user has no contacts. | | 1. | https://f-droid.org/packages/opencontacts.open.com.openconta... | | https://github.com/sultanhamer/opencontacts | inglor wrote: | My wife installed TrueCaller on her phone. She is technical but | not a developer. | | I asked if she knows they steal your contact list and spy on | you and her answer was "so? It's just phone numbers and names | and they need to get the data somewhere as they are providing | the service for free" | | I live in a developed country and we have a high standard of | living. | | Giving this anecdote to illustrate many people genuinely don't | see TrueCaller's spying as a big deal. This is unfortunate but | it's how things often are. | adolph wrote: | It used to be that the phone company would annually throw a | book on your porch with everyone in your town's name, phone | and address. I can see how someone with that as a mental | model for contact lists wouldn't see a problem. | jabroni_salad wrote: | I think a lot of that comes from the fact that phone numbers | being private at all is not a universal consideration. My | town still, every year, sends me a paper book full of every | resident's address and landline telephone. | _jal wrote: | And here's where how something is used makes all the | difference. | | I have zero issues with my neighbors having my phone | number. If I lived in a smallish place, extending that | would be fine. | | I have huge issues with spammers and con artists having it. | | A locally distributed physical book works great for the | first and, at the very least, makes the second work for it. | | Online databases are basically made to order for the | second, and are far more extensive than needed for the | first. | | It is just another example where adding automation and | cheap storage actively makes a situation worse. | Kiro wrote: | In my country the same physical book has been available | online for decades. | websap wrote: | India has a huge problem with spam / robo callers. Also its | common for individuals to have more than 1 phone number, see | how popular dual sim phones are. | | Also true caller adds security when you're from an under | represented or a minority groups. I especially know women who | use Truecaller to make sure they know who is calling / | texting them from new numbers. | signal11 wrote: | > see how popular dual sim phones are | | Having multiple SIMs in India will go away, or at least | become something only the rich have, it's only a matter of | time. This is because having that second SIM is no longer | cost-free. | | Multiple SIMs in India were a side-effect of it being near- | free to have a prepaid SIM to receive calls. This was | subsidized by high calling charges (calling from one part | of India to another was expensive) and even higher data | prices. | | Then Jio entered the market with a ground-up 4G network and | said, this is BS. Calls and texts are free, with no | reasonable limits. We'll only charge you for data, and | we'll provide 1.5GB a _day_ or more -- starting at INR 150 | a month paid 3 months at a time. The party ended for a lot | of operators at that point as they hemorrhaged customers. | Most operators simply folded or merged until now there are | only 3 private players and one non-serious state player. | | Driven by pressure from Jio, the other two private players | (Airtel and Vi, aka Vodafone) have decided to amp up | monthly charges for pre-paid phones. Essentially, if you're | not spending at least INR 120 a month they don't want you. | India has number portability so it's not like you're held | hostage or anything. | | INR 120 sounds super low but it's not for a lot of Indians | who earn salaries closer to India's median per-capita | income, and also it's an extremely limited level of | service, for actual use you need to pay more -- typically | around INR 250 monthly for 1.5GB data per day (remember, | most Indians don't have wired Internet so 1.5GB data per | day is not excessive). Jio _and_ its competitors have hiked | prices substantially, of course. | | The last refuge for people on limited budgets is the state- | run telco, BSNL, but the government will sell it -- it's | only a matter of time. Expect prices to spike again, then. | | Anyway, multiple SIMs in India are increasingly less viable | for ordinary people. It'll take a while for behaviour to | change, but it'll change. | Pxtl wrote: | > India has a huge problem with spam / robo callers | | That's everywhere, not just India. | websap wrote: | I cannot speak about all other countries. | aldebran wrote: | I've gone a few steps further and answered the "So?". My wife | thinks I'm a conspiracy nut even though I've provided proof | of things that have happened. She thinks if it was that wide | spread it would have been stopped already. | | Fortunately we've agreed on not sharing kids pics and | information on places like FB insta etc. | [deleted] | KingOfCoders wrote: | Not that someone cares, but in the EU she would be | responsible for violating the GDPR. Many people don't know | that they are responsible as private citizens. | Kiro wrote: | Only true if she violates a national law. GDPR itself does | not apply to private citizens. | lelandfe wrote: | It's worth noting that Instagram does this too, under the | guise of "Find Your Friends." When you sign up for a new | account, they aggressively prompt you to sync your contacts | list with the app, and will continually prompt you in the | future if you choose not to. Nearly all of my friends have | this enabled. | | This is not a one-time sync, either. It will upload future | new contacts and changes. | | And, finally, if you manage to create a new account _without_ | a phone number, Instagram appears to flag your account for | suspicious activity at some point and mandates that you do. | They can then correspond your phone number with other users ' | contact lists to determine your identity. It can even suss | out if you provided a Google Voice/VOIP number and require a | "real" one instead. | | https://help.instagram.com/195069860617299 | techsupporter wrote: | > When you sign up for a new account, they aggressively | prompt you to sync your contacts list with the app, and | will continually prompt you in the future if you choose not | to. | | Even everyone's much-loved Signal does this. Contacts sync | is presented as "not now" or "yes forever." The "not now" | message even explicitly says they'll bug you again. | nathancahill wrote: | Signal is worse, because when you sign up with a phone | number, everyone that has your number in their address | book gets a notification from Signal that you signed up. | tompagenet2 wrote: | Are you sure? This page [1] says this is not the case | | [1] https://support.signal.org/hc/en- | us/articles/360007061452-Do... | thelittleone wrote: | Contact lists should be treated like PII and have laws and | technical controls against sharing them without the | permission of the contact. Incredibly difficult to do no | doubt. But if people are ok to share their contact let | them. Let others opt out. | digitallyfree wrote: | Honestly it's the same thing with the (well-educated) people | who have their entire lives on the Google cloud and don't | have an issue with the privacy practices of Facebook and | Tiktok. They know the companies use their data and they don't | mind or care - all they want are their free services. | | To them features/functionality/cost is first, and privacy is | an afterthought. I see this view in a lot of people nowadays. | amelius wrote: | We definitely need some scenarios where this kind of spying | plays out badly for the user, so we can use them in arguments | against these practices. Without examples, I can't blame | users for calling these dangers hypothetical, really. | dankboys wrote: | Perhaps too niche, but Bellingcat have used these sort of | apps in the past to identify Russian officers | rajeshp1986 wrote: | Folks in India consider phone numbers as non-personal Info. | They even write their phone no.s on social media profiles | openly. | | I started using TrueCaller some 8 years back and the biggest | reason for me to use it was to prevent Robo callers/spams. | zakember wrote: | In case you haven't yet done it already, you can ask TrueCaller | to unlist your phone number from their System: | https://www.truecaller.com/unlisting | mountainofdeath wrote: | I consider it a fair trade. I hand over my contacts and you | tell me with high-confidence who the other person on the other | end is. | reaperducer wrote: | Can you explain what it is that gives you the right to hand | other people's personal information to another entity? | | Especially as part of a commercial transaction to a for- | profit company? | | "Hey, Bob! I'm going to give some company your name, phone | number, occupation, and whatever else I know about you stored | in my contact list in exchange for a beer. Is that OK?" | RubyRidgeRandy wrote: | Do you make someone sign a legal document when you give | them your number detailing the uses and limitations of how | they can share your number? No. You don't. | | Once you give your info away it is not "your" info anymore. | It is info about you, but you do not own it. | | Is it rude? sure, but not illegal. | mcronce wrote: | Lots of things are amoral but not illegal. I also don't | think anybody above you claimed it was illegal. | Nextgrid wrote: | > Is it rude? sure, but not illegal. | | Depends on the jurisdiction. Under the GDPR this might | very well be illegal, though obviously enforcement of it | is significantly lacking so it's unlikely to ever | actually be tested in court. | httgp wrote: | The issue here is that your contacts did not agree to you | sharing their information with a third-party. | withinboredom wrote: | I don't know. If you give me a soda, that soda becomes mine | to do what I want. I can pour it on the ground, drink it, | or give it to someone else. I feel the same way about ways | to contact someone. With today's technology, they can block | people they don't like but it's not my job to be their | gate-keeper. | elevenoh wrote: | The poor analogy, mild sociopathy view | putlake wrote: | This illustrates the reverse lookup problem with these | services. You can take pains to use a Google account with zero | contacts. That safeguards the information of your contacts. But | Trucaller already has your information because they get it from | _other people_ who have added you in their contacts list, and | who aren 't as privacy conscious as you are. | bongoman37 wrote: | asteroidp wrote: | I am assuming it has plenty of cell spoofing tech in there too | zerop wrote: | Advantage it brought to me is that I can know if caller is spam | and ignore/block the call. TrueCaller added value there. | rootusrootus wrote: | I just assume every call not from a contact is spam and let | them go to voicemail. It's even a built-in feature of the | phone. That's the world we seem to live in now, where the POTS | network has been thoroughly corrupted by the mere existence of | SIP. | 2Gkashmiri wrote: | oh boy. this is interesting. | | back in 2011. i had "heard" about this. i had an iphone 3GS and | an iphone 2G at the time. the 3GS had gotten ios5 if i remember | correctly. | | installing the app, it asked me very strangely to "allow | truecaller to access your contacts". it took me a few moments to | decide no. at the time, IOS had a "parental setting" to hide | permissions behind a separate password, like location, contacts, | payments, gallery, web, yada yada. | | i learned that truecaller works on "you give your contacts and in | exchange we give you a one way access to just search for numbers | with names and not the other way around. | | over time, it became ubiquitous, with people relying on it | because "who saves a contact". | | now its an obnoxious app that comes preinstalled on all cheap | custom roms, shows full page ads every time it displays on screen | after a call, it even shows up AFTER you have disabled screen | overlays, i assume it gets preferential treatment by these rom | makers, | | this is the reason why i have never signed up to whatsapp or | given facebook any contacts access or even 2fa ( old fb account, | not logged in 3 years) | | fuck truecaller | superasn wrote: | The best way to run truecaller is to install this app called | 'Island'. This creates a new profile called work profile for you. | Use a new google id for this work profile. Then install true | caller inside island. I rarely use it but all I have to do is | turn on the work profile, look up a number and then turn it back | off. | | I keep all crap apps in the work profile since there is a | shortcut in the android drawer to turn it off and on in 1 click. | I also assume it saves a bit of battery since these apps can't | drain it while work profile is off. | Melatonic wrote: | Do you know if this works if I already have a legit work | profile setup on my phone? Do you need to give Island | administrator privileges on the device? | superasn wrote: | If you already have a work profile then Island will want to | delete it first so I guess this won't work sorry | Brajeshwar wrote: | I believe, Truecaller is an auto opt-in and you have to manually | opt out if you want your number not be listed. I had to "unlist" | my number manually. Check if your number is already in and then | unlist at https://www.truecaller.com/unlisting | malfist wrote: | I just tried to put my phone number through it and it gave no | indication of success or failure. Pulled up the debugger and | see that it gives a 400 exception of "ProfileNotDeactivated" | when I submit my number. | | Seems seriously shady. | gruez wrote: | >Check if your number is already in | | How do you check whether your number is "in"? | Brajeshwar wrote: | I'm sorry; I didn't realize they need you to login to check | that now. Earlier you can check any number. | criddell wrote: | Enter your phone number on this page: | https://www.truecaller.com/ | | Once you do, you have to log in with either your Google or | Microsoft identity and agree to let them download your | contacts. | rhacker wrote: | One piece of legislation that I wish would exist is a | universal opt-out requirement with no contracts. Many times | you want to "opt-out" of something they require you to | create an account or agree to something. | | Since they have already done an action without your consent | or agreements they should be able to remove you permanently | without requiring you to agree to anything, signing up or | mailing crap. | martin_a wrote: | You must be joking. You are joking? Aren't you?!? | CyberShadow wrote: | Thank you for posting that link. The last time I checked, they | were asking to install their app and then unlist yourself from | there. | jbverschoor wrote: | Well now they want you to sign in with google/microsoft. | Never gonna do that. I should create a few dozen fake | accounts for these kind of companies. | CyberShadow wrote: | Indeed. You may also want to buy a bunch of (preferably | pre-activated) SIM cards, as registering such accounts will | require a phone number, and they limit the number of | accounts that can be created with one phone number. | happylion0801 wrote: | There is no such thing as unlisting a number, atleast last time | we tried multiple times but it still keeps showing up | jabl wrote: | IIRC when looking into this some time ago, if someone who has | your number uses truecaller then your number will reappear. | So depending on your level of paranoia you might want to | regularly check that unlisting page. | wara23arish wrote: | Is true caller any different than an automated yellow pages? | rootusrootus wrote: | For one, yellow pages was centrally managed by the phone | company you were a customer of, and opt-in (you may be thinking | of the white pages for residential customers, which was opt- | out). Also, the information in the white/yellow pages is | curated and just the name provided by the customer. TrueCaller | gets every tidbit of information that your contacts decide to | use to annotate your number. Many people use more in the | description than just your name. | wara23arish wrote: | Thanks for the explanation, I didn't grow up in the west/US | so we had no such thing or service. I just remember movies | with big yellow books with contact or company information. | | I would say most people would use contacts like "Joe Plumber" | or "Maria Tinder". | | Truecaller is kind of a substitute for identifying spam calls | where I grew up where there is no alternative. Also helps | when someone is calling you and you want to avoid answering | them. | | Most people definitely don't care that it's taking all your | contact info though the utility of the app is well worth it. | vishnugupta wrote: | Yellow pages is a flat list. TrueCaller is a contact graph | which is very strong proxy for social graph. | CyberShadow wrote: | If I give you my phone number, and you have True Caller | installed and save my number to your contacts, I unknowingly | and unconsensually also give my phone number to True Caller and | essentially the entire world. | wara23arish wrote: | Aren't yellow pages also adding everybody's number without | consent? | | I didn't grow up with them so I might be wrong. | jeffbee wrote: | It was the white pages but yes. That's why there is such a | yawning gap between reality, where nobody gives a fuck if | you know my phone number, and niche online privacy | activism, where for some reason people care a lot. | Nextgrid wrote: | It's done by your phone company and they're supposed to let | you know and allow you to opt-out. | Brajeshwar wrote: | I have had many experiences where I tried to order tea at a small | tea-stalls (digitally empowered) on the streets of India, and | first thing they ask is my phone number! I reject anyone asking | my phone number unless dire and a must-one. I also noticed that | almost everyone will blurt out their number when anyone ask them. | rootusrootus wrote: | Some businesses do exactly the same thing in the US. It is | fascinating to be a bystander and hear how willing most people | are to just give over their phone number. And of course, not | just the store could be recording it, anybody within earshot | could. | lotsofpulp wrote: | Most people do it to get a discount, or convenience of some | sort such as a text when your food order is ready for pickup. | rootusrootus wrote: | Many times, yes. But even places like great clips do it, | and they're not giving discounts. At best, they might send | you ads that give you coupons you could have gotten anyway. | | Always worth remembering, in any case, that _someone_ | always registers <your-area-code>-867-5309. Use that to | get discounts wherever, like Safeway. I remain a little | surprised they didn't long ago put that number pattern on a | blacklist. | Luc wrote: | What do they do with the number? | reaperducer wrote: | In the U.S., if it's a supermarket or a large chain store, | they either sell it to other companies, or use it as a unique | ID for your purchase history and customer profile. Sometimes | both. | | I'm not sure what a small-time tea stall would do. | nmridul wrote: | Last two years, maany shops and malls started collecting names | and phone numbers of visitors in the guise of COVID xontact | tracking | GekkePrutser wrote: | But do people still put up with this? Here I haven't seen | this for a long time. | happylion0801 wrote: | Indias privacy laws are truly lacking. I am surprised that the | government hasn't enacted any laws for this yet. | | I have a number of stories for this. Indians are so used to this | that sometimes people are shocked when I say no to sharing | information that they request. | | For example in a startup, the HR reached out on WhatsApp to all | employees in a group and asked for certain documents and | information etc. | | About Truecaller: - It's default opt in (with almost no way to | opt out*) | | - It requires access to your entire contact list - to mitigate | this, I request Apple and Google to implement folders for | contacts or something similar to how you can limit access to all | photos on iOS per app. That way you can create an empty folder | and share it with Truecaller | | - It's also impossible to change the wrong data that Truecaller | somehow gets from some other contact list | | My sibling recently got a new number and Truecaller assumed some | other name and identity. Fellow Indians believe Truecaller more | than they believe the person they are talking to (shows how much | spam gets passed around) | | This is NOT just TrueCaller. The same thing happens with Paytm | and other payment apps. | | Paytm for example assumed another identity and they requested us | to submit multiple docs to prove our identity even though we | never used the platform before. Even after multiple attempts and | submitting multiple ids they refuse to change the data | ALittleLight wrote: | I really like the idea to share a fake list. I think creating | separate contact list folders is a bit much for the user, but | adding a general permission grant option like "As if empty" or | "Use placeholder" might be easier. An app requests my contacts? | I can "grant" permission to an empty contacts list. | | I think this idea generalizes to other permissions too. Want to | know my location? I hit the "placeholder" button and the app | gets some generic location that never changes. Valid data flows | through, so the app can work, but not my private information. | redtriumph wrote: | In India, privacy is always secondary. I remember, last time I | was at jewelry shop in Western MH, I had to provide PAN card or | Aadhar card since purchase warranted this check. W/o even | thinking, folks in my family forwarded those details on | Whatsapp. | nindalf wrote: | PAN Card - Tax identification | | Aadhaar - "Universal" identifier. Needed for pretty much | anything. Including, apparently, buying jewellery. | el-salvador wrote: | Is it like in El Salvador, where the Unique ID number is | even needed to pay the $2 water bill? | GekkePrutser wrote: | So if you're a tourist you can't buy anything? Weird. | | Spain has a similar thing for this, you have to give your | NIE/DNIe number everywhere. Like when ordering something | online. But not in brick and mortar shops. | | Still I find it a very poor practice in terms of privacy. | pradn wrote: | Buying stuff through QR codes is very common in India | now. You can pay for everything from groceries to street | food using QR codes. It runs off the government-sponsored | UPI standard. However, AFAIK you need an Indian bank | account to be able to participate. It's quite a pain | coming from abroad, and I just used cash instead. That | does mean I have am prone to paying foreign withdrawal | fees, but alas. It does work pretty well for the people | of India though. | geodel wrote: | Yeah, I truly wonder when 80 percent of population surviving on | less than 2-3 dollars a day why doesn't government just double | down on privacy first leaving everything else aside. | happylion0801 wrote: | Not sure why you are being sarcastic. Being poor doesn't mean | people don't deserve privacy. In fact it can enable for more | business opportunities. | | Government doesn't operate in series on an issue one by one. | This is why you have so many ministries in the govt. Just | because roads don't exist doesn't mean govt should stop | building railways and only think of roads. | vishnugupta wrote: | That's not the point though. Govt can sure enact/enforce | tough laws. But poor people just don't care; for a few | bucks they will happily part with their IDs and PII info. | When demonetisation happened most of the ill-gotten | currency made its way to the banking system through poor | people's bank account. | | In other words, privacy is a luxury that poor people can | ill afford. Do poor deserve privacy? Absolutely. But it | doesn't take much to get them part with their private data. | They are stuck at the lowest level of Maslow hierarchy | where as privacy is at least two level above them. Can | government do something to protect their privacy? Probably, | but I just can't see how it'll be successful when the | citizens themselves don't care much about privacy. | klyrs wrote: | I believe that the point the sarcasm meant to address was | that poorer people cannot afford to push back and | prioritize their privacy the way that folks with more | privilege can. | Marwari wrote: | Was home few days back. Someone needed PAN details from Papa, he | shared PAN, Aadhar and all other documents with other person on | WhatsApp; including things he didn't ask for. | | People don't know privacy and not aware of misuses in India. | | And phone number in India is not considered private info. We keep | putting banner with number everywhere offline to online. | lnxg33k1 wrote: | I think this shows limit of GDPR which maybe could be improved by | making companies your data is shared with, seek authorization to | treat those data directly, maybe let's say you sign up on $ocial | network which share your data with markEURting company, then | maybe markEURting has to send you an email to be authorized? So | that Truecalled can get numbers from contacts list, but can't use | them if not authorized? ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-03-22 23:01 UTC)