Apple, Google ban location tracking in apps using their contact-tracing system • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple, Google ban location tracking in apps using their contact-tracing system

#201

Post by dchyrdvh » Tue, May 05, 2020, 12:40 AM UTC

eternalban wrote: post #80

cm2187 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't think the 5 eyes don't get handed out mobile data location directly from the cariers? I am more concerned about a database that will inevitably be accessed by lots of researchers, and of course one will think it's a good idea to store a copy on a USB key or a public s3 bucket, etc. It the same story happening again and again and again...

This is a legal framework, that is what is happening now. I noted this a while back in a flippant comment "Capitalism with Chinese Characteristics" (which didn't go down well :). A contact tracing system and a virus with n days of non-symptomatic incubation, and international borders. Let's think this through a bit. Of what benefit is to the traveler admitting/host country (H) to note on the "medical passport" issued…

But imagine the new frontiers it opens! Countries would exchange and trade massive amounts of user data like oil. Want to participate in air travel? Better to sign treaties to buy tracing data, as without it your country won't be compliant with the international safety laws. I see trillions of new wealth being built there. On a serious note, this reminds me of a quote from one book: "the fourth round will be remarked by a fierce battle between materialistic and spiritual forces in humanity". We're like being subjected by a high voltage electrolysis now: those with moral are being dragged to the right and those without it - to the left.

Re: Apple, Google ban location tracking in apps using their contact-tracing system

#202

Post by bigiain » Tue, May 05, 2020, 12:41 AM UTC

bduerst wrote: post #93

SSLy wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll use an analogy: they might not be the warlords, but they are the weapon traffickers.

I interned in St. Louis one summer and my neighbor worked at Boeing. The only reason I remember him to this day is because he introduced himself as a programmer working on smart bombs. He immediately said it was okay because he didn't fire the bombs, he just made them smarter so they didn't kill innocent people.

Yeah, and the commenter upthread didn't personally saw Jamal Kashoggi up alive, and he's got a whole headful of justifications as to why he couldn't possibly be complicit in that. When he is. He doesn't have a single atom in his body with the ethics and morals of Tim Bray...

Re: Apple, Google ban location tracking in apps using their contact-tracing system

#203

Post by CuriousCosmic » Tue, May 05, 2020, 12:42 AM UTC

alex_young wrote: post #157

taywrobel wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it a realistic expectation that we have no one working on smart bombs/weapons technology in general? I’d love to be in the utopia world where there is no war and the entire planet gets along. But even the US has political bipolar disorder, so we’re a looooong way from global peace. I do think we spend an absurd and inappropriate amount on defense, but as long as we are forced to develop weapons due to the global g…

Maybe you can’t convince everyone else to behave ethically, but you can hold yourself to that standard. Working on bomb tech is over a line for me personally.

As someone involved with the industry, this is my take.

The work defence contractors do and will continue to do is a measurable positive in the world. This work generally falls into three categories:

First is projects that make the lives of armed forces personnel easier. There is no moral or ethical hazard with these projects. They simply are making it so that pre-existing work, often non-combat work, is less tedious.

Second is projects that actively protect the lives of armed forces personnel and assets. Why would somebody have any reason to feel anything but pride in their work when they know that the only things it could ever do is save lives.

Third is the arguably morally shaky stuff. Weapons technology would fall under this category. The thing people seem to miss about this category however is what new projects' goals are. Very rarely is it ever to create a more lethal weapon. Almost all development of this kind focuses on either making existing technology cheaper, more precise, or have increased range.

In the first case, you could argue that it makes the weapons more likely to be used which is fair however if a weapon system is in active use already, it is unlikely that a cheaper version would do anything other than bring down operating costs. In the second case, these projects are actively making these weapons safer. Look at the Hellfire R9X as a prime example. This weapon sole purpose is to minimise casualties and minimise damage to the surrounding area. Finally the third and last case I mentioned. Increasing range is important for force projection reasons but the most immediate benefit is that it allows armed forces personnel to be further from danger. These people would be in this fight regardless but now they are able to operate from a safer distance instead.

Weapons tech gets a bad rap for obvious reasons but I see that as mostly having been a relic of a past era. Nowadays there isn't really any reason to make more lethal weapons. We already have those and you can see a steady trend in new military technology towards lower risks, costs, damage to the surroundings, and minimising civilian casualties.

Additionally, in my experience, you generally have a choice whether you work on a project or not. Leadership fully understands what they do as an organisation and get that some people may not be comfortable with doing certain projects. If you can't conscientiously work on a certain type of project, simply say so and leadership will take that into account when planning personnel assignments for projects.

TL;DR Armed conflict and existing weapons will never go away. What we as a society(namely the modern purpose of defence contractors) can do instead is make armed conflict less dangerous to those caught in the crossfire and those who risk life and limb to defend our countries.

Re: Apple, Google ban location tracking in apps using their contact-tracing system

#204

Post by thelittleone » Tue, May 05, 2020, 12:42 AM UTC

fooey wrote: post #37

ramshorns wrote: post #8

Sure. It's maybe a bit unsettling to see a global corporate monopoly telling countries what they're allowed to do, but in this case it's the right thing.

Yeah, in this case, I think it's clear that if GPS data was attached, user adoption would be ruined. The most important thing is to get absolutely as many people possible using the technology. Besides, for their own selfish reasons, neither Google or Apple want to be so blatantly attached to something that could be so easily abused.

Ok so devils advocate here.

Google and Apple need to advocate privacy for reasons. But they also want to help the government (PRISM example). So they carefully craft a bug that only government knows about and that allows the extraction of location data. If ever discovered it was not intentional. The NSA backdoor at RSA is an example [1].

[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-security-nsa-rsa/excl...

Re: Apple, Google ban location tracking in apps using their contact-tracing system

#205

Post by pdeuchler » Tue, May 05, 2020, 12:50 AM UTC

taywrobel wrote: post #102

dave5104 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious if "accountability" actually means anything in practice, or if it's just some of the Palantir corporate kool-aid. I don't think everyone associates government agencies with pristine records of holding themselves accountable.

I’ve only worked with a handful of LEOs in my time there, but the ones I did work with were genuinely concerned about it. If you’ve never worked with a government agency before, let me tell you, Hanlon’s Razor is in full effect. Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. The higher ups know that free reign for their officers to look up anything is a recipe for legal nightmares. The ind…

> The individual officers are often just too dumb

You know, my dad always told me to just listen to people... eventually they'll tell you who they truly are.

Re: Apple, Google ban location tracking in apps using their contact-tracing system

#206

Post by dang » Tue, May 05, 2020, 12:50 AM UTC

Someone wrote: post #156

The title of this article is incorrect. FTA: “Apple […] and […] Google on Monday said they would ban the use of location tracking in apps that use a new contact tracing system the two are building ”. So, contact tracing apps that don’t use that system, such as the one from the UK ( https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-52441428 ) still would be allowed to do location tracking.

Ok, I've tried to fit that in the title above.

Re: Apple, Google ban location tracking in apps using their contact-tracing system

#207

Post by agakshat » Tue, May 05, 2020, 12:50 AM UTC

karambir wrote: post #9

Will be interesting to see if they can ban Indian govt. app[1] which needs full location access(clarified)[3]. A lot of people like this app(including me) but also know government does not have good track record in securing private data. Previously Apple were made to bend their rules when India threatened to ban Apple devices if they don't allow TRAI Do Not Disturb app in 2018.[2] [1] https://play.google.com/store/ap…

As another commenter pointed out, if the app is not using the contact tracing framework developed by Google and Apple, then the app can basically do whatever it wants (mandate continuous location access etc.).

Re: Apple, Google ban location tracking in apps using their contact-tracing system

#208

Post by IG_Semmelweiss » Tue, May 05, 2020, 12:51 AM UTC

EGreg wrote: post #200

andrepd wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Palantir is involved Holy shit, and I didn't think that this whole contact tracing bullshit could look even worse.

Can someone please explain to me how a “libertarian” like Peter Thiel could start and run one of the most anti libertarian companies? What are his beliefs, exactly? I mean besides “zero to one” and “competition is for losers, build a monopoly”? I wonder how much effect he had on Zuck early on. He was the first big check in. Seems it was a great match there.

I will venture a guess.

Principles dont matter if you dont have the money to put them into practice.

If palantir is what it takes for him to fund/back a visionary company or leader that will create a truly freer society, then that investment was well worth it.

Re: Apple, Google ban location tracking in apps using their contact-tracing system

#209

Post by bigiain » Tue, May 05, 2020, 12:51 AM UTC

taywrobel wrote: post #64

GaryNumanVevo wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They create tools that enable the government to infringe on the privacy rights of their citizens

I could argue the exact same about literally any database used by the government. Their tools are just easier to use and more expressive. If you don’t like the bullshit the government does, that seems like an issue you should take up with the government, no? You’re using a tech company as a scapegoat.

Some databases used by governments are for things like making sure people driving cars have received the required training/certifications to share public roads, or that their vehicles carry the necessary insurance.

Other databases get used to track down, torture, and murder critical journalists - by dismembering them with a bone saw while they're still alive.

Remind me again which kind of database Palantir staff work on?

Re: Apple, Google ban location tracking in apps using their contact-tracing system

#210

Post by taywrobel » Tue, May 05, 2020, 12:54 AM UTC

conanbatt wrote: post #175

taywrobel wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with that analogy. Palantir isn’t getting them more data. It’s helping them use it more effectively. The organizations already have all the data recorded. If you don’t like the data that organizations record, I’m right there with you, but demonizing the tools that allow them to access data more effectively is an absurd stance to take. Their system also does things like add an immutable audit log, or enforc…

A rationalization at best. Facilitating an immoral act is active participation.

Do you buy things from amazon? They treat their warehouse employees terribly, so I hope not, lest you facilitate an immoral act.

Do you ever use uber? They work to keep their drivers legally declared as contractors, despite treating them employees in all other regards. That’s pretty immoral, so I hope you don’t encourage it by supplying them with business.