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

Meta will start collecting "anonymized" data about Quest headset usage

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 27 posts

Re: Meta will start collecting "anonymized" data about Quest headset usage

#11

Post by KomoD »

ewzimm wrote: post #10
KomoD wrote: post #2

> These policies only seem to apply to users who make use of a Meta account to access their Quest headsets Didn't they make it a requirement to use the Quest headsets?

Apparently people using old Oculus accounts are exempt. The strange thing here is the apparent lack of ability to opt out. It's pretty standard practice among data collection devices to at least have an option to turn it off, and since most people don't do so, it doesn't seem to have a large impact on analytics, but omitting an opt out except if using an account type that can no longer be created seems like a great w…

Even if you're able to opt out I'm sure they'll screw you over by disabling some features if you opt out

Re: Meta will start collecting "anonymized" data about Quest headset usage

#12

Post by ewzimm »

KomoD wrote: post #11
ewzimm wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently people using old Oculus accounts are exempt. The strange thing here is the apparent lack of ability to opt out. It's pretty standard practice among data collection devices to at least have an option to turn it off, and since most people don't do so, it doesn't seem to have a large impact on analytics, but omitting an opt out except if using an account type that can no longer be created seems like a great w…

Even if you're able to opt out I'm sure they'll screw you over by disabling some features if you opt out

In previous versions, the features that were disabled had to do mostly with disabling multiplayer coordination if you choose not to share precise location information, in other words, just the things that would need that data to function. My Quest is currently updating, so I'll see soon if there's really no opt-out, but I wouldn't expect any change in function for removing analytics if their past is any indication.

Re: Meta will start collecting "anonymized" data about Quest headset usage

#13

Post by penjelly »

ChrisLTD wrote: post #7

I'm actually shocked Meta doesn't already do this. I wonder what anonymous usage data Apple is collecting on the Vision Pro.

its nuts how much these devices will be able to learn about us. User privacy will have to change if they can spatially map out your bedroom, your body and your movements.

Re: Meta will start collecting "anonymized" data about Quest headset usage

#14

Post by ewzimm »

ewzimm wrote: post #12
KomoD wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you're able to opt out I'm sure they'll screw you over by disabling some features if you opt out

In previous versions, the features that were disabled had to do mostly with disabling multiplayer coordination if you choose not to share precise location information, in other words, just the things that would need that data to function. My Quest is currently updating, so I'll see soon if there's really no opt-out, but I wouldn't expect any change in function for removing analytics if their past is any indication.

I don't see much difference in the current version, and the anonymized data that you can't opt out of seems mostly to do with crash reports. It's laid out in this article, and although I'd prefer a full off option, it's not any worse than Windows and does respect choices after updates.

https://www.meta.com/en-us/help_app/614185856801362/

I don't even disable everything, but the option should always be there.

Re: Meta will start collecting "anonymized" data about Quest headset usage

#15

Post by waffleiron »

laurent123456 wrote: post #3

> "Your audio data" > "Certain data" about hand, body, and eye tracking > Fitness-related information > "Information about your physical environment and its dimensions" > "Voice interactions" That kind of data can 100% be matched back to a Facebook profile. There should be a legal definition of "anonymous data" so that companies like Facebook cannot have the opportunity to pretend they care about their user's privacy…

Recital 26 of the GDPR has a quite good definition

>To determine whether a natural person is identifiable, account should be taken of all the means reasonably likely to be used, such as singling out, either by the controller or by another person to identify the natural person directly or indirectly. To ascertain whether means are reasonably likely to be used to identify the natural person, account should be taken of all objective factors, such as the costs of and the amount of time required for identification, taking into consideration the available technology at the time of the processing and technological developments. The principles of data protection should therefore not apply to anonymous information, namely information which does not relate to an identified or identifiable natural person or to personal data rendered anonymous in such a manner that the data subject is not or no longer identifiable.

Which of course relies on threat modelling as technology doesn’t stand still. However it’s quite clear that if you can link the data in any way to an individual, it’s not anonymous.

I work in privacy and I’d even argue that collecting anonymous data is likely not possible unless using something like differential privacy. It’s more likely they are collecting personal data (because even your IP would link this data to you) and then anonymise it afterwards (i.e. store it without your IP address).

Re: Meta will start collecting "anonymized" data about Quest headset usage

#17

Post by tweetle_beetle »

laurent123456 wrote: post #3

> "Your audio data" > "Certain data" about hand, body, and eye tracking > Fitness-related information > "Information about your physical environment and its dimensions" > "Voice interactions" That kind of data can 100% be matched back to a Facebook profile. There should be a legal definition of "anonymous data" so that companies like Facebook cannot have the opportunity to pretend they care about their user's privacy…

Probably goes without saying, but Quest users are obliged to have a Facebook account. So that can't even be qualified with "if they have a Facebook account", the vast majority of users do.

As far as I know, the original workaround of using a developer registered account now requires an invite and it's hard to see that not quietly being dropped at some point and all users requiring a "real" account.

It's a shame looking in from the outside at how good the pricepoint is for the hardware, but can't bring myself to get involved with Meta. Just about the only aspect of a user (they aren't even 'just a user' if they've spent hundreds on Quest and apps, they're a fully blown customer) they aren't collecting data on is their DNA.

Re: Meta will start collecting "anonymized" data about Quest headset usage

#18

Post by crtified »

tweetle_beetle wrote: post #17
laurent123456 wrote: post #3

> "Your audio data" > "Certain data" about hand, body, and eye tracking > Fitness-related information > "Information about your physical environment and its dimensions" > "Voice interactions" That kind of data can 100% be matched back to a Facebook profile. There should be a legal definition of "anonymous data" so that companies like Facebook cannot have the opportunity to pretend they care about their user's privacy…

Probably goes without saying, but Quest users are obliged to have a Facebook account. So that can't even be qualified with "if they have a Facebook account", the vast majority of users do. As far as I know, the original workaround of using a developer registered account now requires an invite and it's hard to see that not quietly being dropped at some point and all users requiring a "real" account. It's a shame looki…

From ~late 2022 onwards, Quest users were no longer obliged to have a Facebook account, but rather a (non social-media) 'Meta account'.

Not defending them. Merely anecdoting that, as one of that small minority who never cultivated a Facebook account, getting and using a Quest unit had no special or far-reaching implications for me or my private information.

Re: Meta will start collecting "anonymized" data about Quest headset usage

#19

Post by JohnFen »

waffleiron wrote: post #15
laurent123456 wrote: post #3

> "Your audio data" > "Certain data" about hand, body, and eye tracking > Fitness-related information > "Information about your physical environment and its dimensions" > "Voice interactions" That kind of data can 100% be matched back to a Facebook profile. There should be a legal definition of "anonymous data" so that companies like Facebook cannot have the opportunity to pretend they care about their user's privacy…

Recital 26 of the GDPR has a quite good definition >To determine whether a natural person is identifiable, account should be taken of all the means reasonably likely to be used, such as singling out, either by the controller or by another person to identify the natural person directly or indirectly. To ascertain whether means are reasonably likely to be used to identify the natural person, account should be taken of…

> I’d even argue that collecting anonymous data is likely not possible unless using something like differential privacy.

I think this is undeniably true.

Aside from differential privacy (which is pretty weak sauce itself), the only way there can be "anonymous data" about people is if that data is aggregated and only the aggregation is kept. The collected raw data must be deleted.

The problem with that is that there's no way to know if a company is actually doing that. All we have to go by is what they say, and I think a strong argument can be made that we shouldn't believe what companies say just because they say it. Especially if those companies are the likes of Facebook.

So, as things currently stand, "anonymous data collection" is a misnomer and any time I see a company asserting they're doing such a thing, I think that company is lying. Or, maybe worse, deluding themselves.

Post reply on HN