Does it make sense to give the troops special phones instead of their own? I always find it weird that soldiers can take their own phones into the base.
US Military disables ad trackers on troops' phones
61–70 of 115 posts
Re: US Military disables ad trackers on troops' phones
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
You insist on using broad brushstroke language like "masked goons". Nobody is going to listen to your lack of nuance on other topics either.
How much nuance is there really to explore in that topic if even longtime ICE agents are themselves decrying the current state of the agency, and rightfully blaming the current administration for opening the floodgates to any redneck who can read a job application https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-polit...
[deleted]
Re: US Military disables ad trackers on troops' phones
#63These things need to include more details. What is the report that ads were used to target deployed troops? What is the device use policy as of today? FOBs and semi-permanent installations are not secret locations. They're extremely obvious, have marked fences, gates, and guards in uniform. They're on satellite and aerial photos, sometimes on maps, depending on how long they've been in place. During patrols and any o…
The US military hasn't yet been in a military altercation with a peer adversary that can actually exploit that information. The war in Ukraine shows that these information leaks can have severe tactical consequences.
China APTs are in our telecoms and no one is willing to fix that. China helps Russia, Russia helps Iran
Re: US Military disables ad trackers on troops' phones
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dude, FAANG still manage to do it, day in day out.
IIRC they actually don't and it materially reduced Meta's profit when Apple rolled out the advertiser ID system.
"Facebook says Apple iOS privacy change will result in $10 billion revenue hit this year" (2022):
* https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/facebook-says-apple-ios-priv...
See also perhaps "It’s not Meta - its APPLE who have screwed us small advertisers":
Re: US Military disables ad trackers on troops' phones
#65Wow, it's like there should be a law that allows anyone to disable all data tracking about then, not just anonymize it. This is a large conversation about Consent, which is a concept Silicon Valley refuses to acknowledge.
To them, the consent is using the device/service/whatever. You see it in various bits of EULA and ToS all the time. "Continued use of implies agreement with the license terms". Now, is that at all feasible when you need a smartphone to do things like pay for parking in cities or to read menus at restaurants? No. Do the people in SV who think this way also try to wedge their products and services in every single nook,…
[dead]
Re: US Military disables ad trackers on troops' phones
#66Oh boy, what an easy way to see if the phone's user is military or not.
Re: US Military disables ad trackers on troops' phones
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems like stalking laws in most jurisdictions should already cover this. Is there any legal precedent that could help without the need for new laws?
In a different legal environment this would be a good approach, but currently I don’t think the courts would accept this argument, as they are trying to push Congress to legislate rules on things like this (which Congress steadfastly refuses to do). Prior courts were more willing to “legislate from the bench” but current justices have expressed concern that Congress is abdicating its rulemaking responsibility.
That’s a hilarious idea. Given the Supreme Court of today, afraid of legislating from the bench? Are you serious?
Re: US Military disables ad trackers on troops' phones
#68theguardian.com now requires a user-agent header
Any string is acceptable, including zero characters
Re: US Military disables ad trackers on troops' phones
#69Does it make sense to give the troops special phones instead of their own? I always find it weird that soldiers can take their own phones into the base.
Most of what goes on on most bases is as unsecret as it gets. The rooms where sensitive things happen have security measures in place and they keep you from bringing your phone in there. Usually a little locker is provided where you store your phone while you are inside the protected area. In some very sensitive places there may be additional active and passive measures but usually people with access to those areas police themselves.
Re: US Military disables ad trackers on troops' phones
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a different legal environment this would be a good approach, but currently I don’t think the courts would accept this argument, as they are trying to push Congress to legislate rules on things like this (which Congress steadfastly refuses to do). Prior courts were more willing to “legislate from the bench” but current justices have expressed concern that Congress is abdicating its rulemaking responsibility.
That’s a hilarious idea. Given the Supreme Court of today, afraid of legislating from the bench? Are you serious?
Yes. The majority of their decisions seem to bear that out. While the current court isn’t run by strict constitutionalists, the direction of the court seems to be in favor of rolling back previous precedent that overstepped constitutional boundaries and restoring constitutional balances based on originalist interpretations. This doesn’t please anybody, of course, because both political “teams” have lost major fights in this process.
Not that every decision bears this out, of course, and it’s also a slow process.
IMO this restoration is a necessary step in restoring the operation of the constitution. As a country we need to decide if we’re going to actually follow it (including making use of the long-dead amendment process) or throw it out (amounting to a revolution). Selectively ignoring parts of it depending on who is in power, or based on whatever the bipartisan intelligence/defense agenda requires, is unworkable and needs to end ASAP.