171–180 of 205 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Would you ban ad supported apps? There's no need to ban ad supported apps when you can just ban the practice of using ads targeting users based on individual characteristics.
You trust the adtech companies to pinky promise to totally not do that anymore?
Who's selling the data is the far more serious issue here. Behind this is a remarkably well-structured syndicate. The supply chain looks something like this: consumer apps embed ad SDKs → those SDKs feed location signals into RTB ad exchanges → surveillance-oriented firms sit in the RTB pipeline and harvest bid request data even without winning auctions → that data flows to aggregators who don't have any direct relat…
I find myself uninstalling every app unless I really need it and use it. It's amazing how many apps just sit around in your life over time. get them off your phone
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You trust the adtech companies to pinky promise to totally not do that anymore?
how about jailing CEO's of companies who do this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm game for throwing rocks at Apple and Google, but I don't get this one. > consumer apps embed ad SDKs → those SDKs feed location signals into RTB ad exchanges → surveillance-oriented firms sit in the RTB pipeline and harvest bid request data even without winning auctions Would you ban ad supported apps? Assuming the comment you're responding to is realistic, I'm not sure how the OS is to blame.
This is really simple to explain: Apple does not let you restrict app network access[1] You have no ability to know who your app is connecting to, and you cannot select or prevent it. [1] except maybe the cellular data toggle
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is very different from buying your data from a company especially when the user consented to their location being tracked. No, it's not 'very different'. When you sign a cellular contract you consent to all sorts of tracking and data collection, but it still requires a warrant for government to obtain.
You don’t actually consent (per-se) in most cases. Hence the warrant. If you consented, no warrant would be required.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don’t actually consent (per-se) in most cases. Hence the warrant. If you consented, no warrant would be required.
Consenting to data being collected by a company does not mean you consent to a search by the government of said data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is very different from buying your data from a company especially when the user consented to their location being tracked. No, it's not 'very different'. When you sign a cellular contract you consent to all sorts of tracking and data collection, but it still requires a warrant for government to obtain.
Requesting != Buying When this goes back to the courts you can come back to this comment and still be angry you are wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Consenting to data being collected by a company does not mean you consent to a search by the government of said data.
As noted, the company can sell it however. Which is even easier than a search, which typically requires paperwork.