Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FCC fines largest wireless carriers for sharing location data

docs.fcc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 202 posts

Re: FCC fines largest wireless carriers for sharing location data

#191

Post by hdevarajan »

ethbr1 wrote: post #90
idatum wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything should be opt-in. Burden should be on them, something like, "We want to share your data and if you agree here are the benefits to you."

That's something I think the EU got right -- being hard-nosed about true tracking consent requiring a user to receive the same outcome regardless of their choice. Anything shy is begging companies to dark-engineer patterns around obtaining it.

I don’t think the Eu got it right; crucially they missed requiring these choice points to be automatedly navigable for users (eg “.. and if you must publish the metadata representing the choice architecture this way, use these standard keywords to present options, and must allow users to use automation to make their selection “)

The first reg this happens in will I think make billions the world over realize this is what the template of all opt-in online regulation has to be and will hopefully change the world.

Re: FCC fines largest wireless carriers for sharing location data

#192

Post by beardedetim »

notfed wrote: post #164
idatum wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything should be opt-in. Burden should be on them, something like, "We want to share your data and if you agree here are the benefits to you."

Why would anyone opt-in to having their location sold? Some things should just be banned.

For the right price, I'd sell every bit of data I produce!

Re: FCC fines largest wireless carriers for sharing location data

#193

Post by ethbr1 »

hdevarajan wrote: post #191
ethbr1 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's something I think the EU got right -- being hard-nosed about true tracking consent requiring a user to receive the same outcome regardless of their choice. Anything shy is begging companies to dark-engineer patterns around obtaining it.

I don’t think the Eu got it right; crucially they missed requiring these choice points to be automatedly navigable for users (eg “.. and if you must publish the metadata representing the choice architecture this way, use these standard keywords to present options, and must allow users to use automation to make their selection “) The first reg this happens in will I think make billions the world over realize this is w…

That's a case of the perfect being the enemy of the good.

If you boil the lobster all at once, the huge ad industry will ensure such regulation never passes.

If you gradually increase regulation, then it stands a change of actually passing, and eventually accomplishes the same goal (even if over a longer timeframe).

Getting everyone to agree that a mandatory, regulated prompt is required is step 1.

Re: FCC fines largest wireless carriers for sharing location data

#194

Post by notfed »

beardedetim wrote: post #192
notfed wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anyone opt-in to having their location sold? Some things should just be banned.

For the right price, I'd sell every bit of data I produce!

Yeah, if the profit comes back to me, totally different situation :)

Re: FCC fines largest wireless carriers for sharing location data

#195

Post by [deleted] »

throw10920 wrote: post #186
jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regulators have largely been defanged in the US for decades now. Just read the article and note that this was discovered in 2018, the FCC decided to do something in 2020, and from then until now it's been gridlocked by Republican party obstruction on the panel. And this isn't nearly the end of it. It'll go to court under appeal, for more years, and who knows how that falls. The result is regulators like the FCC and S…

> Maybe we should rethink that rhetoric just a bit? Blatant emotional manipulation is not suitable for HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[deleted]

Re: FCC fines largest wireless carriers for sharing location data

#196

Post by throw10920 »

throw10920 wrote: post #186
jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regulators have largely been defanged in the US for decades now. Just read the article and note that this was discovered in 2018, the FCC decided to do something in 2020, and from then until now it's been gridlocked by Republican party obstruction on the panel. And this isn't nearly the end of it. It'll go to court under appeal, for more years, and who knows how that falls. The result is regulators like the FCC and S…

> Maybe we should rethink that rhetoric just a bit? Blatant emotional manipulation is not suitable for HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Given that you just replied with "This might be the funniest comment I've ever read here." and then deleted your comment, let me be more precise:

The line

> Maybe we should rethink that rhetoric just a bit?

exists purely to manipulate others. There's no logic, no reason, no intellect - just base degradation of others through condescension and attempts at imputing shame. Comments like this are utterly inappropriate for HN, as a casual reading of the linked HN guidelines would show.

Re: FCC fines largest wireless carriers for sharing location data

#197

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

throw10920 wrote: post #196
throw10920 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe we should rethink that rhetoric just a bit? Blatant emotional manipulation is not suitable for HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Given that you just replied with "This might be the funniest comment I've ever read here." and then deleted your comment, let me be more precise: The line > Maybe we should rethink that rhetoric just a bit? exists purely to manipulate others. There's no logic, no reason, no intellect - just base degradation of others through condescension and attempts at imputing shame. Comments like this are utterly inappropriate fo…

Yeah, I found your comment unreasonable and made a snarky reply, but then decided that didn't really contribute anything so deleted it.

I do not in any way agree my line above is somehow emotional manipulation. I think you're being overly defensive.

Re: FCC fines largest wireless carriers for sharing location data

#198

Post by paledot »

idatum wrote: post #67
jmward01 wrote: post #12

The core issue is transparency. I don't want to see a 'privacy policy', I want to see who a company has sold/given my information to and what limitations that sale has. The concept is simple. If you collect anything about me and allow some other entity access, you tell me about it/make it easy for me to see -and- block. Most of this abuse of personal data would go away if people knew it was going on.

Everything should be opt-in. Burden should be on them, something like, "We want to share your data and if you agree here are the benefits to you."

That's the current model, except "the benefits to you" are you get a telephone. Don't like it, go to the one other phone company that has an identical "agreement".

Opt-in doesn't fix anything. Only by making these practices illegal (and aggressively enforcing the law) can this be stopped.

Re: FCC fines largest wireless carriers for sharing location data

#199

Post by throw10920 »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #197
throw10920 wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given that you just replied with "This might be the funniest comment I've ever read here." and then deleted your comment, let me be more precise: The line > Maybe we should rethink that rhetoric just a bit? exists purely to manipulate others. There's no logic, no reason, no intellect - just base degradation of others through condescension and attempts at imputing shame. Comments like this are utterly inappropriate fo…

Yeah, I found your comment unreasonable and made a snarky reply, but then decided that didn't really contribute anything so deleted it. I do not in any way agree my line above is somehow emotional manipulation. I think you're being overly defensive.

Your disagreement doesn't matter - the fact is that that part of the comment was written solely to manipulate people. Nobody ever says things like "Maybe we should rethink that rhetoric just a bit?" unless they're intending to shame and guilt others. There's no informational content or facts or logic or anything remotely valuable in that statement. Its sole purpose is to tweak people's emotions, nothing more.

Re: FCC fines largest wireless carriers for sharing location data

#200

Post by heilhippo »

xnyan wrote: post #183
chatmasta wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does this work? I assumed it was tower triangulation, but the article makes it sound like it really is using GPS location. Does the SIM card have a program that somehow can access the GPS sensor via the baseband processor?

Not a clue, but according to AT&T in the article below "It is already present in all Apple and Android smartphones. An AT&T spokesperson told Fierce via email, "There is no need to deploy anything new for smartphones." I'd be interested if anyone knew how they're doing it. https://www.fierce-network.com/wireless/att-rolls-out-gps-ba...

[dead]
Post reply on HN