[HN Gopher] Grindr user data has been for sale for years ___________________________________________________________________ Grindr user data has been for sale for years Author : pondsider Score : 183 points Date : 2022-05-02 13:51 UTC (9 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.wsj.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.wsj.com) | racl101 wrote: | Oof. Niche dating app selling your data. Not good. | lostgame wrote: | I posted this in another comment - but - here's the worse | thing. | | It's not just niche, like a Christian dating app. | | If I am a Christian - frankly - living in North America - I've | got nothing to hide to anyone, mostly. | | I probably came from a Christian family, and - if I didn't - | being Christian isn't something that frankly carries the stigma | that being gay/trans/lesbian/bi/etc, does. | | I would know, because I happen to be Christian, transgender, | and lesbian. :P | | There's an argument that with privacy 'if you have nothing to | hide, why do you care?' - and being on the LGTBQ+ spectrum | _nukes_ that argument, just as being a stoner in a weed-hating | state might. | | Selling the orientation of individuals for profit is an | _abomination_ of capitalism, such a risk to the queer | community, and such a fundamental and brutal rape or privacy, | that I frankly hope to see a class action lawsuit over this. | | Grindr shutting down completely would not be good enough; here. | This is beyond felonious. This is a human rights violation of | the utmost degree. | headphonepoopr wrote: | I am appalled by this and I hope they have to pay for it as | much as others in this thread but, I'm sorry, categorizing | hypothetically selling your data which could hypothetically | be used for harm as a "human rights violation of the utmost | degree" really dilutes the severity of real human violations | that have actually happened (see I don't know, child rape, | forced sterilization etc). That's an interesting choice of | framing. | | Why openly disclose your sexual preference/orientation so | eagerly on hacker news comments, then? | moate wrote: | If I say stealing a car is "criminal to the utmost degree" | would you say "I'm sorry, but categorizing theft of | property as criminal really dilutes the severity of real | criminal violations that have actually happened"? | | I ask this because "human rights" is a wide and varied | collection of thoughts and ideas ranging from the right to | not be sexually assaulted to the right to not have | businesses you interact with sell data about your sexual | behaviors. | | My point is, the whole conversation is subjective. You're | both wrong in the eyes of some people and completely | reasonable and correct in the eyes of others. Just some | helpful framing you might want to use before "whatabouting" | when people's lives may literally be on the line for this | information being disseminated in their home countries. | | From the safety of my home in an exceedingly liberal state | in the US, working for an employer with a decent track | record for inclusivity, I would be Big Mad if my grindr | data was sold. From Chechnya, I would be terrified for my | safety, physically as well as at a job, in the same | situation. | | TL;dr- When people stop being hate-crimed or state- | santioned-murdered for being gay, the community will stop | "overreacting" to people outing us against our wishes. | pessimizer wrote: | > If I say stealing a car is "criminal to the utmost | degree" would you say "I'm sorry, but categorizing theft | of property as criminal really dilutes the severity of | real criminal violations that have actually happened"? | | And I'm pretty sure that if we follow the argument to | absurdity, all of us should only be talking about a | single incident at a time. The _worst_ one, that renders | the rest not only irrelevant but disrespectful and | insulting to the _real victim._ | colatkinson wrote: | What do you think would happen to an LGBT person in, say, | Saudi Arabia? The answer is, "capital punishment, fines, | public whipping, beatings, vigilante attacks, vigilante | executions, torture, chemical castrations, imprisonment up | to life and deportation." Those seem like they're well into | the category of "real human violations." | | This is also not a hypothetical situation -- something | quite similar happened in Egypt a few years ago [1]. And | that was using good old fashioned entrapment. The damage | could have been far more significant with large-scale data | analysis. | | While I can't speak for OP: they likely feel comfortable | posting about their gender/sexuality on here because they | live in a place where that won't happen. And while HN is | often less than progressive on LGBT issues, users here | generally aren't calling for public executions. But not | everyone lives in the US or Western Europe, and these | people live under a genuine threat of death. | | [0] | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia | | [1] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle- | east/egypt-l... | throwanem wrote: | If I _decide_ to tell you, or everyone who reads HN | comments, that I 'm gay, then that's up to me. I can choose | whether and how to disclose, or not to disclose, depending | on my evaluation of risk, which will be fairly accurate | because I have a lifetime of experience in making such risk | assessments and seeing how they play out. (In this case I'm | not too worried, because I've been out for a long time, so | if it gets broadly fashionable again to discriminate | against us queers then I already have the same problems in | either case.) | | If I use a dating app that promises it will maintain its | data about my orientation as confidential, and that app | turns out to have been lying all along, then I'm forced to | run the risk no matter whether I would have _chosen_ to do | so. Because I can 't know who is accessing that data or | what they're doing with it, I don't even have a way to know | how much risk I've been forced to take on. And because I | have no way to remove my information from the dataset, I | don't have any control over how long that risk continues to | be present; I have to assume it's forever, or at least as | long as a copy still exists. | | It's a good example in microcosm of all the issues around | handling sensitive data that this industry has had ever | since anyone began trusting us with such data in the first | place. | pessimizer wrote: | I agree with all that you and lostgame have posted, but I | think it's irrelevant in modern times. There are so many | ways to track us (that are probably being stored | indefinitely) that your sexual orientation, private | religious or political beliefs, or anything else that can | be gleaned from your movements and associations will be | available for any future administration that decides a | certain class of people should be rounded up. | | The Holocaust, through computerized processing of census | data (via IBM), found "Jews" who didn't even know that | their maternal grandmothers were Jewish. Comparing those | primitive records and tech to today is like comparing | Hiroshima to the nukes of today. If some US | administration 20 years from now decided that they wanted | to round up all of the communists, homosexuals, and Jews | with a 90% certainty, even assuming technology hasn't | advanced an inch in the interim, they could get the list | within days. I think it would be easy even if we turned | off the data spigots _today_ and 20 years from now they | only had access to data collected between the dawn of web | 2.0 and now. | throwanem wrote: | I've never been all that favorably inclined to the | counsel of despair. | | That goes double when we're discussing an issue that goes | to the heart of how we as an industry conduct ourselves - | to what standard we hold ourselves and one another. | | Granted, right now no such standard exists. I don't think | that will always be true; if we don't regulate our own | behavior then someone will certainly do so for us. I | think it'd be a good idea if we had a say in how it | happens, and when we have people apparently arguing that | no one should expect anyone to hold us to any standard, | it's very hard for me even to imagine an argument in | support of the idea that we _deserve_ one. | | I'd also like to think that, by being in this industry, | we're not all in the position of an RJR or Philip Morris | employee trying to believe we aren't _really_ peddling | addiction and cancer. Whether that sort of thing bothers | anyone else, it 's not up to me to decide, though I think | it should. It _does_ bother me. | vinni2 wrote: | It's unfortunate that majority of the gay community uses this app | despite knowing privacy risks. | | But there are some precautions one could take to reduce the | risks. Like turning off precise location for specific apps is | possible in iOS. I assume similar feature is available in android | too. This might not help much in a big densely populated city but | in a small city this is good enough to find people on Grindr. I | also turn off the location access for Grindr once I favorite some | people I like to keep in touch with. | lostgame wrote: | As a lesbian - this is terrifying. | | Not for myself - because I'm out - but because the fact that I am | out would potentially be for sale, and - for instance - my | primary partner - isn't. | | She comes from such a traditional family, and her home country is | so anti-queer - that if they somehow found out her parents would | literally likely commit suicide - the exact same thing happened | to a friend of hers, and it's unfortunately a very real concern. | | This marks the official crossing of the line from any potential | 'if you don't have anything to hide, why do you care' bullshit | excuse that fucking idiots use to push privacy issues aside. | | If you are not out - it is not okay for _ANYONE_ you don't know | to know you're gay /lesbian/bi/whatever. | | This is a brutal fucking outrage. I'm frankly _fuming_ , like - | on the verge of an anxiety attack - over this. | | Lawsuits had _better_ fucking ensue. | | Frankly, this makes me want to preemptively leave HER (the | lesbian equivalent of Grindr) - before I find out the same shit | is happening. | | Die, Grindr. Fucking die. | | As a queer person this may be the single greatest abomination | I've seen a corporation claiming to support the LGTBQ+ community | commit. | vmception wrote: | > She comes from such a traditional family, that if they | somehow found out they'd literally likely commit suicide. | | "they" in this case is the family finding out and the family | committing suicide? or did "they" change mid-sentence. Sounds | bad for any party finding out, just trying to understand the | threat model here. If your primary partner found out about the | widely reported data leak existing and becoming suicide sounds | now extremely probable. The other possible readings of that | sentence are, extreme, but less extreme in probability. | | Just a couple readings of this that aren't clear. | pinot wrote: | It's perfectly clear given the context.. no one's family | member commits suicide over finding out their relative is | gay. | dev_tty01 wrote: | You are fortunate to have grown up in a culture where that | is mostly true. However, in some cultures, the "shame" of | that disclosure about their child is considered worse than | death. Horrifically sad, but true. | prepend wrote: | I think GP is saying there are countries with stigma | against homosexuality that family members would kill | themselves to find out that their children were gay. That's | what I understood. | lostgame wrote: | Absolutely, 100%. | vmception wrote: | Narrator: it wasn't clear. The family member was who was | being referred to. | lostgame wrote: | Her parents, sorry. Edited. A very similar thing happened to | her friend, so it's a reasonable concern. Her home country is | fucked in that regard. | Syonyk wrote: | > _...the single greatest abomination I've seen a corporation | claiming to support the LGTBQ+ community commit._ | | Just wait a few months, something else will probably show up. | Remember that "claiming to support the LGBTQ+ community" is, in | almost every case, just a calculated way to increase their | profits. Change a few logos, let the PR department fund a | float, and wait for the additional dollars to roll in! | | > _Frankly, this makes me want to preemptively leave HER (the | lesbian equivalent of Grindr) - before I find out the same shit | is happening._ | | Good. Do it. The entire core of our modern consumer tech | ecosystem is based around this sort of deception and lying. If | it's a popular app, it's making the money on the backend | somewhere. Robinhood (the stock trading app) was _literally_ | just selling off order flows to the high frequency traders who | would pay them rather obscenely large sums of money for the | "Heyo, I've got someone ready to buy 15 shares of GME, I'm | going to buy 15 shares of GME now, and... buy!" data. They | _existed_ to sell out an audience who didn 't know better for | fractions of a cent per trade, but in volume. | | If you don't mind some dense reading, Zuboff's book on | Surveillance Capitalism is well worth the read. The author is | just in love with high scoring Scrabble words for no good | reason, unless she finds a reason to invent a new word instead. | But the outcome of it is that you'll want to regularly frisbee | your smartphone across the room into the nearest wall without a | case. | | "Modern consumer tech" is absolutely, 150%, at odds with _any_ | concept of personal privacy. And the more people start opting | out, the sooner we can go back to "My personal habits are not | your profits." | Jensson wrote: | Any large company that doesn't explicitly say "we aren't selling | your data" is definitely selling your data. You can't really | trust what they say, but you can trust what they don't say. | pedro2 wrote: | It's worse. Google and friends don't sell your data either. | | They just assign you to various buckets and then aggregate the | information in those buckets to sell targeted advertising. | | But they don't sell your data :) | | At this time, it's best to assume apps with trackers embedded | (you can check that with Aurora Store) sells data associated | with you indirectly. | EduardoBautista wrote: | How is this worse? I'd much rather companies do this instead | of selling the actual data. In fact, I don't think this is | much of a privacy issue at all. | pedro2 wrote: | My point is, unless you are a lawyer, you can't trust | anything they write about how they use your data -- they | don't speak the same language as us. | johndfsgdgdfg wrote: | The irony is what you wrote is categorically false. | Selling user personal data to a third party, which users | have no idea how that data will be used, is not better | than companies showing users targeted ads. Not everything | on earth has to be a hot take. | pessimizer wrote: | > Selling user personal data to a third party, which | users have no idea how that data will be used, is not | better than companies showing users targeted ads. | | This isn't what was said. What was being said is that the | people who claim that they don't sell your data have such | complex ways of still selling your data while being | literally truthful that there's no way to confidently | evaluate risks no matter what they say. | | edit: I mean, do you know for certain that a determined | attacker can't bulk unmask Google or Facebook users | through skillful monitoring of ad auctions and specific | ad placements? | aaomidi wrote: | It definitely is still a privacy issue. You only need a few | data points to fully identify a person. | | But no it's not as bad as just selling the raw data. | Syonyk wrote: | Just read anything from a privacy policy in a Nixon-intonation | "I am not a crook!" style and you'll get what you need from it. | A touch of Futurama-Nixon jowl-flapping adds much to the | imagined statements. | | They're all written in the, "Well, _technically,_ our lawyers | claim we 're not _lying_... " style. But they're sure not end- | user friendly, which is the exact point. | | And any time they claim they're not doing something explicitly, | look for ways they might have navigated around it carefully. | Roku's "you agree to let us do anything we want" policy, for | instance, includes a dutiful agreement to not do anything | prohibited by the laws of the country your data is stored in. | Of course, they then later state that they can move your data | to any country they want. | mrtweetyhack wrote: | blakesterz wrote: | "The activities that have been described would not be possible | with Grindr's current privacy practices, which we've had in place | for two years." | | At least according to them, it's more accurate to say "Had been | for sale for years". They say they've put a stop to it. | jmcgough wrote: | I don't really trust them tbh they've never cared that much | about user safety or privacy. You can still triangulate | people's location, in Egypt this was used to imprison LGBT | people. | hsbauauvhabzb wrote: | Don't quote me, and I'm not defending grindr, but I _think_ | they geoban certain locations for this reason. | heavyset_go wrote: | It's a nitpick, but it's trilateration and you're right that | it is still trivial to do. | daniel-cussen wrote: | I'm sure there's navigators who discovered California-sized | lands (from the perspective of Europeans not of those who | already lived there), that called it "triangulizacion" in | Spanish. They triangulized, or triangulated. | | And it was cool the first time, with mountain peaks, and a | very accurate compass, going on a hike and figuring out | where you were on a map, without the whole satellite | cakewalk. | | But all of that's a nitpick of a nitpick, you and the | parent post are totally right. But like totally. You should | all have read the last paragraph in this post first, what I | said doesn't change things, it's trivial to get our | positions. | heavyset_go wrote: | Haha, yeah, that's what I get for doing a "well, | akshully" on my phone. | rkallos wrote: | Grindr's response to this article: | https://blog.grindr.com/blog/the-wsjs-old-news | | > What the WSJ describes would not be possible with our privacy | practices today, practices we proactively implemented two years | ago | | > Grindr takes the privacy of its users extremely seriously, and | we have put privacy before profit | | > Grindr does not share users' precise location, we do not share | user profile information, and we do not share even industry | standard data like age or gender | onlyrealcuzzo wrote: | > or gender | | Gee, I wonder if the advertiser can take a guess. | verisimi wrote: | I'm pretty sure that lots and lots of companies are collecting | and selling data. | | What I really wonder is whether disclosure of these sorts of | leaks is selective. I suspect it is. The point being that in | showing one or 2 cases, and then showing the system taking a | retrospective action, gives the impression that we are being | protected. I suspect that grindr has been selected as a | sacrificial lamb (of little consequence - eg its not tinder) - | and will possible be put through some legal process and appear to | be made an example of. | | If so, the news will have some headlines, and it will appear that | the governance process is doing its job. | | I don't think we are being protected though - it would be easy to | pass legislation that made these sorts of actions illegal. What | is being protected is the reputation of those businesses | undertaking the collection. The cost is that we are kept in | ignorance of how bad and systemic the situation really is. | pessimizer wrote: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_hangout | pedro2 wrote: | Aurora Store allows to list the trackers embedded in apps you | install. | a-dub wrote: | there's another system i saw on here that uses the VPN api to | monitor for saas adware connections in apps. i think it was | developed in europe or was part of a research project. | | the future of firewalls will be keeping your data in is my | bet... | heavyset_go wrote: | Anyone have a link to this or have information that makes | finding it easier? | a-dub wrote: | found it! | | https://trackercontrol.org/ | heavyset_go wrote: | Thanks | a-dub wrote: | worth noting that this doesn't catch instances where the | app developer collects the data itself and then sells it | (as opposed to just linking in a collection library from | the third party). | | i suspect that there will probably be some cool research | projects that try to embed identifiable watermarks in | behavioral data and then attempt to detect them in | purchasable data or data products and/or realtime | behavior of ad companies. | Melatonic wrote: | Wow. This is pretty bad. So much potential for abuse or | discrimination using this data. | junon wrote: | Anyone have a non-paywalled link? | [deleted] | Vladimof wrote: | https://archive.ph/9V4kY | nerdjon wrote: | I hate that all of these apps (Grindr and similar) appear to take | security and privacy secondary... which is just insane given the | market they are serving. | | Sex is still considered taboo in many parts of the world and some | parts of the US. | | Now this, we have them using the Facebook API and them knowing | every time I open the app (or did). | | I have made every choice I can to reduce the privacy invasion | that these companies engage in, but there are simply no | alternatives for this one. I would be very surprised to find out | that Scruff is actually any better. | | The web based ones are likely far far worse. | | I hate that this has become normal so much. | firephonestival wrote: | If you are a startup, you cannot create a popular app in a | crowded marketplace by being scrupulous about best practices. | | Match owns almost all of the dating-app market, and they have | extremely deep pockets to buy/extinguish competition with. | | Because of the consolidated nature of the market, and the | winner-takes-all nature of the industry, I really believe that | it is impossible for a new entry to gain popularity _and_ focus | on hard problems like security. | | This is fundamentally a problem with capital allocation and | incentives. There's not much that a small team can do about it. | rhizome wrote: | > _If you are a startup, you cannot create a popular app in a | crowded marketplace by being scrupulous about best | practices._ | | > _Match owns almost all of the dating-app market, and they | have extremely deep pockets to buy /extinguish competition | with._ | | Match owns almost all of the dating app market because | they've acquired who? Startups who created popular apps in a | crowded marketplace that they don't already own. | | Now, if you want to argue that you cannot create a popular | app in a crowded marketplace without accepting a buyout offer | from the dominant player, now that's a topic I think is worth | quite a bit of discussion. | ramesh31 wrote: | >I really believe that it is impossible for a new entry to | gain popularity and focus on hard problems like security. | | Well, they _can_. New entrants to the dating app market | always start out this way. They gain loads of initial trust | and word of mouth growth by putting users first. But they | inevitably fall victim to the same market forces as their | competition, and slowly become the same thing. It happened to | Tinder, it happened to Bumble, and it will happen to Hinge. | rchaud wrote: | Or they get acquired by the Match company (Tinder, OKC, | Match.com, others) and just start poisoning the UX straight | away. | nerdjon wrote: | Maybe for security (however that being second for any app is | a serious issue). | | But this is a conscious choice. A small team should not need | to make the decision to do something like this. | | Also Grindr or Scruff isn't exactly small and have a fairly | devoted base that doesn't end just because they get into a | relationship. | aerostable_slug wrote: | > have a fairly devoted base that doesn't end just because | they get into a relationship. | | At least in the US, one might imagine this is more | important to users than hiding their sexual preference. | throwanem wrote: | That's quite a claim when, until Grindr's practice of | selling PII was disclosed, no one had any reason to | imagine that by using the app they would be disclosing | their sexual orientation and behavior. In light of that I | have no idea what preference you imagine to have been | meaningfully revealed here. | madamelic wrote: | Users kinda suck and hate to pull out their wallets if they | don't have to. | | Dating apps also suck at giving compelling reasons to pay | them unless the app is purposefully made worse so they can | sell the functionality back. | nerdjon wrote: | How much of that is because they have been conditioned | that things should be free though? | | We have 10+ years of Google, Facebook, and others handing | out major tools and functionality for free because of the | privacy invasion. | | I have to wonder how things would have looked had that | not become the norm. | | As far as being purposefully made worse, yeah both apps | do that. Grindr charges $100, Scruff charges $120 a year. | Considering how popular both apps are I have to assume | they are pulling in quite a bit of money. | [deleted] | throwanem wrote: | You appear to be arguing that it's better to betray your | customers' intimate confidences, than to find a market you | can address _without_ doing that. | | I'm sure that can't be what you are _trying_ to say - | although, if it is, I can certainly understand why you made a | throwaway to say it. | [deleted] | bombcar wrote: | I think he's saying don't even try, because some other | company won't bother and it'll crush you. | throwanem wrote: | Fine! Don't try, then. "Someone is going to do this | shameful thing, therefore there is no reason why _I_ | should _not_ do this shameful thing " isn't quite the | logic of a sociopath, but only because a sociopath sees | no need in the first place to excuse his own immoral | behavior. | firephonestival wrote: | I'm not saying it's better, but that it is unavoidable | given current market conditions. | | We all want our data to be handled securely, and we should | try to understand why that does not happen. | throwanem wrote: | There's a difference between understanding why people | behave dishonestly, and making excuses for dishonest | behavior. You're doing the second one under the color of | the first. | | No one _has_ to make a dating app. I don 't see how "no | one could do it without betraying their users either!" as | you argue - and, again, even granting this is true, which | you've done nothing thus far to show - excuses the actual | betrayal that actually has occurred. If you'd like to | make an argument that it does, I'd be interested to hear | that. | pessimizer wrote: | I'm pretty sure it's just an observation about the | situation that any player in that market would find itself | in, so therefore when you look at apps in that market | they're shitty about privacy. | | It's a comment about dating apps, not about people who | decided _not_ to go into dating apps i.e. found "a market | you can address without doing that." | rootusrootus wrote: | > Match owns almost all of the dating-app market, and they | have extremely deep pockets to buy/extinguish competition | with. | | Sounds like a business opportunity. | tomc1985 wrote: | There's a few other sites that are good for hookups, but I | wouldn't trust any apps. Sniffies and A4A are the ones I know | of | nerdjon wrote: | I don't imagine sniffies, a4a, MH, bbrts (for anyone reading, | please don't look these up while at work... or at least not | on a work computer... these are all Gay hookup sites) is any | better. Particularly the first one when it comes to location | data considering it just legit shows a map if people. | | I really don't trust any of them (App or Website), enough so | I have seriously contemplated getting an iPod touch or | something and tethering anytime I want to use them. But I | have not quite gone that far yet. | | There are certain conveniences the apps get you. | aaomidi wrote: | Eventually EU is going to ban data warehousing for any purpose | other than storing and giving it back to the user. | | And honestly, I think it's necessary. | doliveira wrote: | I really hope so. Maybe this will yield better privacy- | preserving schemes for data analysis and recommendation | engines. Necessity is the mother of invention (or whatever | the equivalent idiom is in English). | | I think I'm hardly making an original argument, but a big | problem is binding Compute and Data, so companies have an | incentive to hoard as much data as possible and keep it | hostage. Feels like deep down that's the whole valuation of | Silicon Valley | perfunctory wrote: | Why do you think the EU will do it? | baisq wrote: | They don't have a tech industry so they have nothing to | lose from it. | dspillett wrote: | They are the closest to doing it than anywhere else at | least, and still edging in the direction of greater | regulation not less or on a plateau. | OkayPhysicist wrote: | Probably because they're the jurisdiction that's taking | user privacy rights the most seriously so far, with enough | market share to leverage their demands. | ajsnigrutin wrote: | Because most of that kind of industry is US based, and they | earn money from EU users, so on one hand, you seem to be | working "for the people", on the other hand, you fuck the | americans :) | smm11 wrote: | Grindr's UI is second-to-none, in my opinion. | | At least the last time I checked it out, which was the day before | I interviewed there. Were I working there, and found this out, I | would no longer be working there. | pinewurst wrote: | https://archive.ph/9V4kY | toper-centage wrote: | At this point we need to be able to set our reported location | manually on our phones natively. I don't want any number of apps | to be able to sneakily collect such data. Android sort of allows | it through 3rd party apps, but Google has all incentives in not | making this trivial. | m3047 wrote: | There's a funny thing about cellphone modulation: makes it hard | to locate a device. Cell phones need GPS so they can give their | location to the eNBs (towers) so that the best tower can be | selected, the towers can't do it on their own. | est31 wrote: | Android 12 finally has a feature to select approximate location | per-app. iOS has supported this for a bit longer, since version | 14. The accuracy of the "approximate" location is also much | bigger for Android 12 than it is for iOS, but it's a good | start. | Syonyk wrote: | I would go further. At this point, the "sneaky snacky | smartphone" approach to data collection (in which everything | that _can_ be collected _is_ being collected, and probably used | for things you can 't imagine it would be useful for) starts to | press heavily on the "And I therefore shouldn't carry a | smartphone" side of the scales. | | I've seen some fun papers of "Well, you _could_ do this awful | thing... " (comparison of accelerometer data to deconflict | which nearby phones are in the same vehicle vs separate ones to | better refine social graphs), in addition to all the stuff we | _know_ is being done (ultrasonic signals in various ads, | tracking shoppers by their wifi /bt beacon MACs, etc). I assume | the state of what's actually being done is far worse than | what's in the papers, because someone, somewhere, though they | could get a signal out of something. | | Trying to "de-evil" this sort of system is, first and foremost, | fiddling around the edges of what's possible (I expect various | people are reading and thinking, "Oh, you think spoofing GPS | will matter, _cute!_ ), but it's also remaining in the | ecosystem that has, repeatedly, demonstrated that they're going | to get their paws on everything they think they can justify, | and then expand that over time. | | There's no reason that a TV needs to be doing automatic content | recognition on various inputs, but they're all doing it these | days. | | I've given up and I no longer carry a smartphone. I'd encourage | those who can get away with it to do the same thing. You can't | go hoovering up all my data from a dumber KaiOS device because | it doesn't run all the apps, and if a company makes their | desktop/laptop interface so painful to use to drive people to | the phone interface, well, they're probably doing things I | don't want to support anymore. | | Trying to "reduce the harm" of smartphones, more and more, | feels like trying to figure out how to mitigate the impact of a | world class meth addiction by focusing on the symptoms - "Oh, | you need to hydrate better!" "Here's some skin moisturizer and | a toothbrush!" and so on - without ever stating that the | problem is the meth and that you need to stop using that, not | try to figure out how to avoid losing your teeth while doing | it. | bombcar wrote: | I wonder if our smartphone addiction is going to look to | people in the future the same way we look at smoking now. | | He says whilst posting from his phone ... | Syonyk wrote: | I sure hope so. And I hope that future is an awful lot | closer. The past decade or so of teenagers can speak to | just how nasty smartphone addictions can be, in terms of | mental health, suicides, etc. I grew up with the internet, | but we didn't have profit-driven advertising empires | pretending to "connect people together" back then, either. | | Part of my reason for not carrying a smartphone anymore is | to be a better example to my kids, and I certainly point | out couples staring at his-n-hers smartphones at a | restaurant instead of actually enjoying each other's | company. | | Odds are good that instead of a smartphone, my daughter | will just end up with her HAM license and a VHF handset | instead. It'll cover the common cases direct simplex if I | put a base station on the house, and my wife isn't opposed | to getting her license either. :) | bombcar wrote: | HAM is nice also because it helps you remember that | someone could be listening at any time, a lesson we often | forget. | kbos87 wrote: | This is really tough because the only purpose of Grindr is to | give it your location to see who is around you. There also | needs to be much stronger requirements for end user | transparency about where their data is going. | heavyset_go wrote: | It would still serve its purpose even if you spoofed your | location to be somewhere nearby or elsewhere. Nobody needs to | be able to figure out exactly where specific users | are/live/work via the platform. | nerdjon wrote: | Removing that ability removes one of the key functionality | of these apps and why they are popular. | | Seeing that someone is 100 ft away is a common start of a | conversation. Maybe they live in the same apartment, at a | local coffee shop, work in the same building. Which leads | to... well... | | That doesn't excuse the privacy issues though. | heavyset_go wrote: | Plenty of people already spoof their locations on the app | and the app itself offers location changing | functionality, I'd hardly say that is removing | functionality or defeating the purpose of the app. | bobro wrote: | dont they? isnt the point that you share your true location | and in return see others' true locations? | mrguyorama wrote: | Tindr straightforwardly sells the option to "Swipe" from | other locations. | mistrial9 wrote: | > we need to be able to set our reported location manually on | our phones | | down-low, we have an emergency | kevin_thibedeau wrote: | It's a shame that LineageOS doesn't let you spoof apps with | bogus data anymore. It's much easier to let them think they're | getting permissions than try to play whack-a-mole with opt out | settings that could get reset at any time by bad actors. | a-dub wrote: | my understanding was that the first instance of that was way | back in cyanogenmod back in the late 00s and that it was | quashed when google basically said "we'll let you bootleg the | play store, but only if you don't screw up revenue streams by | feeding app developers garbage data" | Melatonic wrote: | If you enable "mock locations" in the Android developer | settings I believe you can do just that. It has been awhile | though | InitialLastName wrote: | A long time ago, when I lived within dating distance of the | default coordinate (maybe City Hall?) of a global-destination | city, a dating site I used introduced a feature that let users | set their locations manually. Within hours of rollout, the site | was completely unusable due to being full of people from around | the world saying "I wonder what the dating scene in $city is | like?". | [deleted] | rchaud wrote: | That is still the case on some big apps like OKCupid. There | are green-card hunters from poor countries that fill up the | swipe queue and all have the same giveaway line: | | "I'm not based in [your city], I just change the location to | talk to new people". It's frequent enough that I stopped | using the app altogether. OKC was already going downhill well | before this. | NaturalPhallacy wrote: | OKC died when match bought it and they took down their blog | post about why you should never pay for a dating app. | heavyset_go wrote: | Even if you use 3rd party apps, Google location services will | side step your mocked location. Apps can detect mocked | locations, as well. | | Pretty sure SafetyNet, or something like it, from Google will | also tattle on you if you spoof your location in apps that | don't want you using mock locations, preventing you from using | mock locations at all with apps. ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2022-05-02 23:00 UTC)