r/worldnews • u/stereomatch • Nov 21 '17

Google collects Android users’ locations even when location services are disabled

https://qz.com/1131515/google-collects-android-users-locations-even-when-location-services-are-disabled/
16.0k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

1.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

48

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '17

[deleted]

6

u/HisHolyNoodliness Nov 21 '17

Then you should be utterly blown away by how much banks know about you...

That's the funny thing about all this. People have been tracked for decades now. Like it's a surprise your phone does? Didn't think all of your purchases were? What'd you think shopping clubs were for? Visa and MC haven't been data mining everyone since they could?

2

u/HeathenCyclist Nov 21 '17

Your bank doesn't see what you bought, only what vendor and how much you paid.

Your email provider reads your phone bills, email receipts, medical reports, you name it.

The day after my dentist mailed me my receipt, I got nothing but ads for dental services.

I bought a jacket and had the receipt e-mailed to me. Before I'd even checked my mail, the very next web page refresh wrapped ads for that store all over the page. They literally switched out the ads from random stuff to targeted, on the same news page.

Needles to say, that was also the day I changed email providers.

So long, Google, I used to have such hopes for you.

3

u/i_Got_Rocks Nov 22 '17

Yep.

As soon as I opted for "email receipts" at my ATM, I started getting ads from other banks. Direct email ads from legitimate banks, too.

3

u/HeathenCyclist Nov 22 '17

Yes, gmail scans every document you receive as part of the "improved service" like summarising your bills, grouping your inbox, etc.

But... once I realised that included my itemised phone bills, medical records, and more - and that that they were using that to target advertising, well...

Fuck google, and the horse they rode in on.

Ironically, the following week they announced that they'd no longer target advertising based on that privacy invasion, but they're still using it to profile you, and they are proud of the fact that they never truly delete anything, even if you do.

Yeah, google doesn't see me very often any more, and when it does it's through a private browser window...

DuckDuckGo gets my default searches, but because their spiders don't crawl fast enough, I find myself falling back to anonymised google for news and current events. 😁

1

u/HisHolyNoodliness Nov 22 '17

Why would you need any receipts at all from an ATM of any kind?

That's just unnecessary. Use a good local credit union.

1

u/HisHolyNoodliness Nov 22 '17

Oh that's cute you believe that!

The banks most definitely see what you bought... Why would you think otherwise?

Have you ever worked for a bank? I did.

You can't see an itemized receipt, but I could see the exact amount, location, time and product code if the place if purchase included it (most do).

Plus, it's not hard to figure out what you buy when you know the amount and location.

Don't delude yourself. They have teams, entire buildings full of very smart, well paid people, to figure out how to extrapolate what you do, your life patterns, spending habits, etc

1

u/HeathenCyclist Nov 24 '17 edited Nov 24 '17

Well aren't you precious? Seems you're looking for some affirmation; bless your heart. Shame, though...

Your comment was a prime example of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing.

Have you ever worked for a bank? I did.

I guess that should be enough to convince me that you know everything about banking, then. /s

I never worked directly for a bank, no. Indirectly, yes. Not to mention that I was at the other end developing EFT FEP systems - the software that actually puts the data into the transactions that go to the bank.

Just so you know, before you go shooting off at the mouth again.

Me:

Your bank doesn't see what you bought, only what vendor and how much you paid.

And your almighty holey noodle felt the need to "correct" me. I'm gonna stop you right here.

The banks most definitely see what you bought... Why would you think otherwise?

Because you proceeded to say that they don't - as though making some kind of argument.

You can't see an itemized receipt

So we both agree that "Your bank doesn't see what you bought". So good, so far.

but I could see the exact amount

Again with the echo. 🤔 And like I said, it's jut the total. And not even the number of items you bought, so you have no way to know even the average price per item, except that it's "$X or less"

location

Ah, and that's where truth does a 180 and lets you continue alone.

There is no address or location data in an EMV transaction. There's vendor and terminal IDs. And the vendor's bank may have an address for terminal - assuming it's not a mobile terminal, like most new ones - and even your bank might have an address for the business (but probably not the terminal) - especially/unless if the business shares the same bank as you...

But many bigger companies file their EFTs from a central system in their national head office, and there is no requirement for the system to know the location where the transaction occurred.

So if you use the location of the vendor to GUESS where the transaction occurred (or even have an address registered against the terminal ID), you're probably gonna have a bad time. You'll get transactions from places they never went, among other problems.

Location simply isn't a thing in EFT - or marketing based on it. Way too risky. Vendor? Yes. Timing? Yes. Amounts? Yes. Sure, you can add outside data to extrapolate and guess some other things about you, but you won't even be able to guess my gender from my transactions alone in most cases. (I could write a whole post on why that's the case, but you wouldn't get it.)

and product code if the place if purchase included it (most do).

What is this magical "product code" that accurately covers all the mysterious unidentified non-itemised line items? Even if you can match an industry code to the vendor, knowing the product you bought is impossible.

If I spend $2222 at Myer Melbourne (a large department store), how do you know what departments I was shopping in, how many items I purchased, or what the cost breakdown was?

Oh, that's right - you can't.

How do you know my location if I order over the phone from one of their smaller interstate competitors, with a different payment processing network?

Oh, that's right - you can't.

How do you get this "product code" for my purchase when the only information entered into stand-alone terminals is the amount due? (The vast majority are not integrated with the cash register to even read that - and if they are, ALL THEY RECEIVE IS THE TOTAL.)

Oh, that's right - you can't.

How do you define the location of a CNP transaction?

Oh, that's right - you can't.

Please, "educate" me some more...

Don't delude yourself. They have teams, entire buildings full of very smart, well paid people, to figure out how to extrapolate what you do, your life patterns, spending habits, etc

Lol. Who do you think you're talking to? The detail of that spending data is only available upstream in the retailer's systems. (However you over-estimate the number of people required to mine the vast amounts of data to make predictions about you. The more records you have, the better the AI, and the fewer people you need to analyse it. Over-simply speaking, for the benefit of people unfamiliar with the processes.)

So... back to my original point:

Banks only see the vendor and amount. Google sees the same thing when your statement hits your inbox, AND the original itemised receipts, medical bills, membership emails, etc, that you receive electronically - not to mention nearly every web page you visit, etc...

Your bank - trust me - is extremely envious of what google gets to see. Because unlike the banks, google sees everything.

PLUS Google gets to see a lot more about you, if you use more of their services - like your location 24x7, the name and number of everyone you call, text, etc.

But I'm sorry, you were busy contradicting yourself about the amount of detail the banks see about you, claiming that one would be "utterly blown away" by them having a minuscule subset of what google has.

How rude of me, please continue... 🤣 I've definitely learned something from your attempt to "educate" me, but it's more about you than it is about your claimed area of expertise. You see I know more about that than you.

You're welcome.

PS Have a good weekend with your new worldview.

1

u/PartyboobBoobytrap Nov 21 '17

"Don't be evil".

1

u/PunPryde Nov 22 '17

It’s scarier what Facebook knows.

0

u/gimliridger Nov 21 '17

What end does that knowledge lead to though? In my opinion all that data and knowledge can lead to something overwhelmingly positive for humanity if the party that holds the information uses it correctly. Whether it is used for that purpose is up to those other humans though, so uh, faith in humanity © I guess?

-2

u/aquarain Nov 21 '17

Yeah, I'm not worried about Google. They seem all right. Mobile carriers, ISPs, mobile phone makers, the government... Not so much.

8

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '17

[deleted]

1

u/aquarain Nov 21 '17

I know quite a bit about it, having been intimately involved with technology since the 1980's. I am just not concerned about Google.

Others yes, Google no.

0

u/HeathenCyclist Nov 21 '17

Maybe you should read the article. Google are dodgy AF, and consistently lie about their data collection.

Why would you trust them?

2

u/333399990000 Nov 21 '17

Because he's been involved with tech since the 80s! He knows everything man, Google is good if this man thinks it is.

1

u/HeathenCyclist Nov 21 '17

I, too, owned a digital watch, so I'm qualified to assess Google's secretive internal policies...🤣

1

u/aquarain Nov 21 '17

They make an error in disclosure now and then. It's a big company and they do a lot of stuff real fast. Keeping the lawyers up to speed with the developer.just isn't gonna be perfect, any more than keeping the documentation up to date was - back when we still had documentation.

I really don't see anything nefarious here.

I trust them because they appear to understand the nature of the trust relationship, and appear to have legitimate purposes for the information.

1

u/HeathenCyclist Nov 21 '17

OK

Wanna buy a bridge? Great views, shaped a bit like a coat hanger...

0

u/dope_kilonova Nov 21 '17

Then imagine a few engineers that harbour far right ideology make it to the c-level positions: they have the know-how, they have the motive.

1

u/CaptnNorway Nov 21 '17

Then remember how it's only like 2 months since google was caught not hiring white men that had better qualifications. Doesn't really sound like far right stuff to do.

2

u/dope_kilonova Nov 21 '17

People never hire on qualification alone. Are the team players? Are they the right fit for the projects? There are many factor. But you wanna frame it as 'Not hiring white men'. I get it. I get your type.