81–90 of 253 posts
Perhaps this is a good reason to use Google Voice and not give anyone the underlying real phone number with cell service.
It should be illegal to sell people's data without a wet ink signature. That's really the end of the story.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No need to invent new jurisprudence - if the location data can be used to identify an individual, it is personal data under the GDPR and enjoys all the rights and protections enabled by the regulation.
That's fine for you Europeans under GDPR. (Sure, there's careouts for weird exceptions.) That doesn't do diddly for us US citizens living in the US. Our data policy is "we will sell your data, too bad so sad".
Judging by the sentiment on HN when GDPR was coming into effect, if something like it came up for a vote in the US, a lot of HN users and other tech people would vote against it.
There was no shortage of angry geeks posting articles about their service turning away EU users rather than complying with GDPR.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's fine for you Europeans under GDPR. (Sure, there's careouts for weird exceptions.) That doesn't do diddly for us US citizens living in the US. Our data policy is "we will sell your data, too bad so sad".
It is kind of our own fault, though. Judging by the sentiment on HN when GDPR was coming into effect, if something like it came up for a vote in the US, a lot of HN users and other tech people would vote against it. There was no shortage of angry geeks posting articles about their service turning away EU users rather than complying with GDPR.
> “The allegation here would violate our contract and Privacy Policy,” an AT&T spokesperson told Motherboard in an email. That pretty much sums up how much carriers care about this. But it is nice to see Senator Ron Wyden is still doing good work, almost restores my faith in politics.
This is why utilities need to be heavily regulated. Selling real time location data to wholesalers in the bail bonds industry? Who would think there would be abuse? Only license actions and criminal penalties will stop this kind of abuse.
If you are really wanting to do that, don't carry a phone around with you.
Perhaps this is a good reason to use Google Voice and not give anyone the underlying real phone number with cell service.
All you're doing is moving that from T-Mobile/AT&T/Verizon to Google, who will sell the information at the drop of a hat for the exact same reason. You're not guaranteeing anything at all. In fact you're probably making yourself less safe as Google is going to have less protections than a cell phone company.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why utilities need to be heavily regulated. Selling real time location data to wholesalers in the bail bonds industry? Who would think there would be abuse? Only license actions and criminal penalties will stop this kind of abuse.
Do we think skipping out on a bond is OK? If you are really wanting to do that, don't carry a phone around with you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's fine for you Europeans under GDPR. (Sure, there's careouts for weird exceptions.) That doesn't do diddly for us US citizens living in the US. Our data policy is "we will sell your data, too bad so sad".
It is kind of our own fault, though. Judging by the sentiment on HN when GDPR was coming into effect, if something like it came up for a vote in the US, a lot of HN users and other tech people would vote against it. There was no shortage of angry geeks posting articles about their service turning away EU users rather than complying with GDPR.
So if you want better privacy laws in the US then they have to be much more clever than GDPR to not destroy the economy and global competitiveness!
BTW: Personally I think it is possible to do better than GDPR here in the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All you're doing is moving that from T-Mobile/AT&T/Verizon to Google, who will sell the information at the drop of a hat for the exact same reason. You're not guaranteeing anything at all. In fact you're probably making yourself less safe as Google is going to have less protections than a cell phone company.
This is completely incorrect. Google/Facebook/etc actually have far better data privacy than the telecoms. Google/Facebook/etc all sell access to target you using the data they know about you. Telecoms literally sell your data. There's a big difference.
I think we need to reassess how we treat data generated by users via phones, devices and our digital activities. We had the concept of private and public property long before intellectual property became codified by law. I believe that we are entering a new phase which may require the development of a new type of jurisprudence around things like location data. I'm definitely not a lawyer, but I'm starting to believe…
Why don't I own the copyrights to my location data, and why doesn't the carrier need to license it from me in order to sell on to these bounty hunters?