Oh, I am much more interesting than you can possibly imagine. If I wasn't, malls wouldn't be installing equipment with the sole purpose to track me.
The death of the PC (from a different POV)
- Thread starter YellowSubmarine
- Start date
Oh, I am much more interesting than you can possibly imagine. If I wasn't, malls wouldn't be installing equipment with the sole purpose to track me.
They're not tracking you specifically. They were looking at traffic patterns in the mall. Tracking you specifically wouldn't reveal the patterns they were hoping to uncover. It says so right in the article you linked.
Bottom line: you really aren't that interesting.
Only the masses are interesting. But the masses are anonymous. It's rather like psychohistory in that regard.
Bottom line: you really aren't that interesting.
Only the masses are interesting. But the masses are anonymous. It's rather like psychohistory in that regard.
The example of the mall given in the article noted that shoppers were notified with signs posted around the mall, and could opt out of tracking by shutting off their cells. Of course, it is rather inconvenient to do that, but it is an option.
My argument is simply that individual shoppers weren't being tracked. They wanted to know about traffic patterns in the mall. I suppose instead of tracking cell phones, they could have posted people around the mall to follow shoppers in person. Would that be less creepy?
My argument is simply that individual shoppers weren't being tracked. They wanted to know about traffic patterns in the mall. I suppose instead of tracking cell phones, they could have posted people around the mall to follow shoppers in person. Would that be less creepy?
Not exactly. That would imply they were tracking individuals and simply disregarding any identifying information, which probably isn't the case.
I don't know the particular software used, but I think it's very likely they were tracking cell signals without any identifying information attached in the first place.
It would be like pointing an infrared-only sattelite at a city and mapping hotspots.
Correlation can be enough to identify a person sometimes. If you know a bit of that person's movements you can correlate them to the rest of the information and discover much more, imagine how useful that alone could be during a crime investigation.
I don't think that the shopping tracking is the worst – they are after all just listening for radio broadcasts. Anyone can do that. I don't think they should, and they should be discouraged, but if you don't want to have your radio signals picked by anyone, switch your phone off. The carriers are tracking you anyway, and they also know who you are, so unless we create a difficult to track cell phone system (which nobody would want to adopt), we're stuck with that.
I don't think that the shopping tracking is the worst – they are after all just listening for radio broadcasts. Anyone can do that. I don't think they should, and they should be discouraged, but if you don't want to have your radio signals picked by anyone, switch your phone off. The carriers are tracking you anyway, and they also know who you are, so unless we create a difficult to track cell phone system (which nobody would want to adopt), we're stuck with that.
People are probably watching you on camera walking around the mall, do you have a problem with that? The cell-phone tracking is even less personal, in fact.
Anyone who uses credit cards or debit cards is giving away FAR more personal information to people who ultimately use it for marketing and financial trending purposes, than some mall who tracks anonymous cell phone signals.
Anyone who uses credit cards or debit cards is giving away FAR more personal information to people who ultimately use it for marketing and financial trending purposes, than some mall who tracks anonymous cell phone signals.
It's harder to dig for information from the cameras. Yes, face recognition is trying to change that, but there better be some kind of outcry in relation to that as well.
And no, you are not interesting just because you're part of a huge dataset of “patterns”. You're always interesting to somebody – ex-girlfriend, police, employer, fans (if you are famous), your family, organised crime living near you and who knows who else. The data exists, which means that it can be acquired by any interested parties, legally or illegally. The police can always get it, it can leak after the security is compromised, it can be bought...
And no, you are not interesting just because you're part of a huge dataset of “patterns”. You're always interesting to somebody – ex-girlfriend, police, employer, fans (if you are famous), your family, organised crime living near you and who knows who else. The data exists, which means that it can be acquired by any interested parties, legally or illegally. The police can always get it, it can leak after the security is compromised, it can be bought...
You can't really dig for information from your phone either.
Do you really give a shit that the mall knows that "Anonymous Person 15423B43C2 walked from the Sears to the Toys R Us to the lingerie store and then left"? Look how popular a website like Amazon is, and consider the amount of information they capture about your purchasing decisions, and consider that they use that information and also sell that information to other companies. Credit card companies do the same thing.
I'm opposed to automatic face recognition software in public places as well, unless it's an emergency situation like a lost child or a crime was committed and the tapes have to be looked at. I don't believe that there should be cameras that scan crowds looking for people the police can arrest for misdemeanours. I just don't expect absolute privacy in public places, and I could care less what data people get about "me" and where I shop if they don't know who I am.
You can correlate anonymous information with another information it might reveal information that's not obvious. So it's not as harmless as it appears.
However, when it comes to phone tracking, what really matters is the tracking done by carriers, which includes phone personally identifiable information (alongside phone activity tracking by malware, of course). The shops are just an example that this information is more useful than one thinks. Not that it matters so much on its own – although minimising additional information sources is never a bad thing, even if they are insignificant.
P. 15423B43C2 doing X on day Y doesn't matter.
But if:
The same p. 15423B43C2 does X1 on day Y1, X2 on day Y2, X3 on day Y3...
...then p. 172726182 does X1 on day Y1, X3 on day Y3, and X4 on Y4, X5 on Y5
...then Rofl Dofl posts a Facebook status update that they did X4 on Y4 and X5 on Y5...
They might not realize that people might find out that Rofl Dofl did X2 on day Y2.
But if:
The same p. 15423B43C2 does X1 on day Y1, X2 on day Y2, X3 on day Y3...
...then p. 172726182 does X1 on day Y1, X3 on day Y3, and X4 on Y4, X5 on Y5
...then Rofl Dofl posts a Facebook status update that they did X4 on Y4 and X5 on Y5...
They might not realize that people might find out that Rofl Dofl did X2 on day Y2.
However, when it comes to phone tracking, what really matters is the tracking done by carriers, which includes phone personally identifiable information (alongside phone activity tracking by malware, of course). The shops are just an example that this information is more useful than one thinks. Not that it matters so much on its own – although minimising additional information sources is never a bad thing, even if they are insignificant.
Last edited:
I honestly do not care whether or not Apple keeps a tight rein on apps via the App Store. As long as users get apps they can use, why the hell should they care where these apps come from? Hobbyists and ultra-nerds might, but they do not control the market. If all apps are vetted by Apple, yet some of those apps fit my needs, I'd call that even. 
As for things like the cloud: Meh. The only cloud-like method I use daily is DropBox. And I find it massively useful.
Tracking? Another meh. Trevor Eckhart's massive paranoia notwithstanding, it's now been settled that Carrier IQ does NOT actually read your texts or emails. As long as it's all anonymous, and it helps the companies improve their services, I say, let them track.
As for things like the cloud: Meh. The only cloud-like method I use daily is DropBox. And I find it massively useful.
Tracking? Another meh. Trevor Eckhart's massive paranoia notwithstanding, it's now been settled that Carrier IQ does NOT actually read your texts or emails. As long as it's all anonymous, and it helps the companies improve their services, I say, let them track.
They are giving me what I think I need, so why should I care that it is censored, controlled and hostile to a minority of users that I don't belong to? Sucks to be them. I really don't care if they are the ones writing software and improvements for the platform – the platform seems fine to me, never had any issues with it, so I don't see how I'm affected.I honestly do not care whether or not Apple keeps a tight rein on apps via the App Store. As long as users get apps they can use, why the hell should they care where these apps come from? Hobbyists and ultra-nerds might, but they do not control the market. If all apps are vetted by Apple, yet some of those apps fit my needs, I'd call that even.
And, I repeat, Carrier IQ does NOT actually read your texts and emails, so why should I care if the community distros don't have it?
P.S. A while ago a friend of mine complained that 1984 got deleted from his Kindle, and I got really angry and told him, “Dude, get real, do you know how many books I list in the house fire? Good books, not the crap that you're reading! How can you even complain about that?”
Similar threads
