Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police • Hacker News Board

Re: Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

#191

Post by JohnFen » Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 8:44 PM UTC

rando444 wrote: post #160

mrhappyunhappy wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can anyone recommend a good alternative for iOS to do just this?

You can probably find one in the app store just based on reviews. Pretty much all "no root firewalls" work the same way.. The software pretends to be a VPN client in order to get the network traffic and filter it. Since you're letting the software have control over all your network traffic, make sure you trust the software manufacturer.

> The software pretends to be a VPN client in order to get the network traffic and filter it.

This is why I stick with root firewalls -- I also use a VPN, and I don't think you can have your Android device use more than one VPN at a time (without rooting it).

Re: Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

#192

Post by JohnFen » Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 8:51 PM UTC

maimeowmeow wrote: post #153

gist wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did not say 'only reason'. Of course there could be other benefits. And I am guessing we are not talking about the same restaurant experiences either.

veggies are real cheap compared to meats. 1 pound of meat or seafood is 4-30 dollars wholesale versus 1-5 dollars a pound for veggies, so after markup, what are most dishes going to contain? Fillers: carbs and veggies.

> veggies are real cheap compared to meats.

That depends a lot on where you live, and what quality of veggies and meat you're talking about.

What's cheap is cereals.

Re: Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

#193

Post by JohnFen » Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 8:54 PM UTC

spurgu wrote: post #165

incompatible wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the typical movement patterns for a phone at home? Mine is usually sitting on a particular spot on my desk.

In that case you should be safe to go out and do some mischief! Or... image recognition in CCTV's might recognize your face and couple it with the fact that you're not carrying your mobile.

Face recognition (even by humans), particularly with CCTV data, has a very high rate of false positives. You might be able to make the case that the fact that your phone wasn't there is evidence that the image isn't really you.

Re: Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

#194

Post by JohnFen » Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 8:57 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #3

DontGiveTwoFlux wrote: post #2

The article describes a case where an innocent man had to spend a week in jail. Eventually, he was released and the presumed actual perpetrator was caught. The lead seemed to come from the location data, so it wasn’t useless at least. But the so called justice system says that it got it right here. The innocent man lost his job when he couldn’t work for a week. Depending on his situation he could miss rent and be evi…

> Why do we have a system that says justice was served? Suggest specific improvements and call them into your representatives. The closer you can make your proposals to a bill, the more likely it is that the problem becomes an issue. In this case, I’d argue we need publicly-subsidised attorneys for wrongful arrest. It should also be unlawful to dismiss an employee because they were arrested and never indicted. Giving…

> It should also be unlawful to dismiss an employee because they were arrested and never indicted.

Replace "indicted" with "convicted" and I agree. Further, it should by unlawful to refuse you housing because you were arrested even if you weren't convicted (this is common practice right now).

Re: Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

#195

Post by JohnFen » Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 9:01 PM UTC

rexpop wrote: post #112

loteck wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They probably do, but they also have to listen to hundreds of thousands of others just like you, and pick which opportunities to act on. Can you understand why they may both listen to you and not take action on your concern?

Their responses are often unrelated, or antithetical to my stated position. I think they have an inaccurate classifier.

You should know how these things work. When you contact your representative with an opinion, they just add one to their tally of how many voters expressed the same opinion.

The totals for how many voters expressed which opinions are what carries the most sway with them. Whether or not those tallies are in alignment with the general public is not relevant.

So, when you contact them, you'll get a canned response telling you what their current stance is, regardless of whether that's the same as yours. But make no mistake, your opinion was added to the count.

This sort of thing is why phone banks and contact-your-representative campaigns are so common. In bulk, they're effective and can change policy even in ways that most of their constituents don't agree with. They're only looking at the numbers of contacts they've received.

Re: Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

#196

Post by JohnFen » Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 9:04 PM UTC

isoskeles wrote: post #9

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do we have a system that says justice was served? Suggest specific improvements and call them into your representatives. The closer you can make your proposals to a bill, the more likely it is that the problem becomes an issue. In this case, I’d argue we need publicly-subsidised attorneys for wrongful arrest. It should also be unlawful to dismiss an employee because they were arrested and never indicted. Giving…

> It should also be unlawful to dismiss an employee because they were arrested and never indicted. I disagree. The cost of bad policing shouldn't be paid for by businesses. The police should bear the consequences, not have yet another victim (some business) to burden with more punishment.

> The cost of bad policing shouldn't be paid for by businesses.

How does that count as "businesses paying for bad policing"?

Re: Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

#197

Post by JohnFen » Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 9:05 PM UTC

isoskeles wrote: post #97

deogeo wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> bad policing But arresting someone reasonably suspected of some crime isn't bad policing, even if they are later found to be innocent. That is why arrest and trial are separate.

Let's agree to disagree. I think that detaining an innocent person against their will is bad policing.

That's not always bad policing. The police aren't in the business of determining guild or innocence. The courts are. There will be innocent people who are arrested.

But I don't see how preventing companies from being able to fire people solely because of an arrest actually costs them anything.

Re: Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

#198

Post by dleslie » Mon, Apr 15, 2019, 11:15 PM UTC

SquareWheel wrote: post #187

shadowprofile76 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You buy this information indirectly any time you use any of Google's targeted advertising services. And yes, anyone can buy into it.

>buy this information indirectly... Which means what? If you aren't actually getting user information, then simply put you aren't buying user information. Anything else is twisting words to distort their meanings.

> That is their business: they sell their ability to know everything about you to anyone willing to pay for that information.

Google has information about you. Incredibly detailed, intimate information about you. Harvested by collecting and correlating all of your usage of their products and services.

Anyone can pay Google to use that knowledge in pursuit of other services, like targeted ads. No, you do not get access to that knowledge directly, but Google has it and is using it when paid to do so.

In effect, you can pay Google to have indirect use of that knowledge.

Re: Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

#199

Post by rexpop » Tue, Apr 16, 2019, 12:03 AM UTC

JohnFen wrote: post #195

rexpop wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their responses are often unrelated, or antithetical to my stated position. I think they have an inaccurate classifier.

You should know how these things work. When you contact your representative with an opinion, they just add one to their tally of how many voters expressed the same opinion. The totals for how many voters expressed which opinions are what carries the most sway with them. Whether or not those tallies are in alignment with the general public is not relevant. So, when you contact them, you'll get a canned response tellin…

You have just described my experience to me.

> Whether or not those tallies are in alignment with the general public is not relevant.

Is this not grossly pathological?

Re: Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police

#200

Post by andrei_says_ » Tue, Apr 16, 2019, 12:22 AM UTC

godelski wrote: post #142

andrei_says_ wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In addition to this, if the data exists, at some point in the future it will be compromised. The only way to avoid this is to not collect it. And to anyone who says “I have nothing to hide” — imagine your worst enemy having all this information about you easily searchable with the intention to weaponize it for their purpose.

> And to anyone who says “I have nothing to hide” To anyone saying that, they need to stop quoting Nazi propaganda. Term is coined by (but not originating from) Goebbels. Note: The origin is from a fictional dystopia.

Thank you. A great way to address the sentiment.