81–90 of 233 posts
I'm pretty sure Google and other large networks also build 'shadow profiles' on users to figure out who they are, who they're connected to, etc. And I wonder if this shady profiling data should be available for users to download under e.g. GDPR. Because it sounds to me like it should, but isn't.
What's the news story here? Tech companies file innumerable number of patents without implementing them to cover the space in case they get sued so they can retaliate. Realistically this patent wouldn't actually be useful in practice for the proposed application but would be useful if written carefully enough to countersue for unrelated applications of the tech.
Building a large user graph from scratch is the major impediment to someone coming along and challenging Facebook. This kind of thing is trying to head off alternative ways to build that user graph.
What's the news story here? Tech companies file innumerable number of patents without implementing them to cover the space in case they get sued so they can retaliate. Realistically this patent wouldn't actually be useful in practice for the proposed application but would be useful if written carefully enough to countersue for unrelated applications of the tech.
What? You're saying companies file patents on tech they don't intend on using so they don't get sued by patent trolls for their non-use of some other preexisting patent? That doesn't make sense on any level. And if you don't think such a thing would be useful to a company like this (if it could really be made to work) you aren't using your imagination properly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is really easy to do. At a hackathon in 2012 our team in just a few hours built tech that would detect who you were standing next to or walking past, all while your phone is in your pocket - we were trying to build a tool that would replace exchanging business cards at conferences.
Have you heard of Bump? They were doing something similar until they were acquired by Google: https://www.theverge.com/2013/9/16/4736860/bump-acquired-by-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What? You're saying companies file patents on tech they don't intend on using so they don't get sued by patent trolls for their non-use of some other preexisting patent? That doesn't make sense on any level. Why does that not make sense? This has been the case at every job I've worked withe patent filing incentives. You get a few thousand dollars for coming up with an idea and going through the motions of writing t…
Okay, I get that it adds value to the company. But what do you mean by defense? How is filing patents that you don't intend to produce so you can win legal battles any different from patent trolling?
Company A owns patents X, Y, Z. Company B owns patents M, N, O.
Company B sues company A that one of their products infringes on patent N. Company A countersues that 3 products of company B's infringes on X, Y, & Z.
That's the defensive aspect for company A. They won't instigate but they'll retaliate aggressively. This is known as the "nuclear option" as this strategy was employed during the Cold War - build up your offensive arsenal as a defensive measure to protect yourself against a first strike.
Plenty of examples during the smartphone patent wars[1] and perhaps this strategy isn't quite as successful as it once was.
For patent trolls having a large patent portfolio can increase the likelihood that you own a patent that the troll's patent is based on helping you with prior art claims. So having a large patent portfolio improves your defensiveness there. Additionally a large patent portfolio increases the value of your company because those patents are IP that have tangible value in the market; many tech companies choose not to monetize but frequently IP licenses can be bought/sold (or even the patents transferred) and mutual IP licensing is frequently part of lawsuit settlements so there's further value there. Since it's impossible to actually predict the value of almost any given patent in the future, having a large war chest improves your bargaining position/value of the patent portfolio.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've always been floored that people leave their location services turned on by default. I have mine on for no more than a few minutes a month. I only turn it on when I'm in an unfamiliar location, don't have my bearings, and looking at the map alone isn't enough to help without GPS.
You are being downvoted for this thoroughly sensible comment. At times, HN voting patterns actually scare me. My location too stays off unless I actively require it, mostly then for navigation. Yes, like just about any kind of countermeasure against anything, this one may sometimes introduce a measure of inconvenience. That's fine with me. No free lunch etc. [Edit: As somewhat expected, this comment on downvotes is i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are available for phones and laptops, e.g. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07B66VZ97/
That's pretty nice. I'll have to see if I can find some designed for ThinkPads and Samsung phones.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are being downvoted for this thoroughly sensible comment. At times, HN voting patterns actually scare me. My location too stays off unless I actively require it, mostly then for navigation. Yes, like just about any kind of countermeasure against anything, this one may sometimes introduce a measure of inconvenience. That's fine with me. No free lunch etc. [Edit: As somewhat expected, this comment on downvotes is i…
This is partially the same community that thought these violations would be a good idea in the first place, as long as we get a bit of hamfisted curated content and adtech monetization. Of course some of the invested individuals still want to defend it. Maybe just to maintain the cognitive dissonance and assure ourselves what we're doing to people is okay. Expect to be unpopular, but that's fine--popular is not the s…
by comparing the accelerometer and gyroscope readings of each phone, the data could identify when people were facing each other or walking together. More evidence we need far more privacy controls in mobile operating systems.
I've always been floored that people leave their location services turned on by default. I have mine on for no more than a few minutes a month. I only turn it on when I'm in an unfamiliar location, don't have my bearings, and looking at the map alone isn't enough to help without GPS.
Have you ever tried putting yourself in the shoes of people who leave their GPS on? Can you see how much better the user experience is? Can you understand why someone who never had a negative experience involving their location data might prefer to leave their GPS on?
I leave my GPS on all the time. I love going back in time and see where I was at any given time. I can download the data and correlate it with a bunch of other metrics I keep track on. If it wasn't free, I would pay for it.
I'm not floored that you turn your GPS off. I've met many people just like you. Some of them had traumatic experiences in the past, others generally don't think other people are trustworthy. I can respect that. Just don't assume it's the default sentiment, because it's not.
Here's an interesting survey about trust:
https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/05/ssc-survey-results-on-...
Jokes on them, I have electrical tape on my camera lens. Something I learned from Facebook's CEO, ironically.
Same, but I like gaff tape because it peels off easy and re-sticks well without leaving a gummy residue