Digital surveillance, facial recognition, privacy and security

[Touring Mars]

It's an (obvious) example of a company over-stepping the mark on what users are consenting to and/or aware of - how many people do you think would install the app if there was a clear warning before installation that 'La Liga reserve the right to remotely activate the microphone on your phone and to record and analyse audio captured from your device in order to monitor your surrounding environment for rights infringements'...? I wonder if anything like that even appears in the user agreement - it might, but then that raises the question of whether it is fair or reasonable to expect users to read the small print of every app they install, just in case there is something weird in there like this.

 

[Touring Mars]

I suppose this article could belong in any number of threads but it fits here too...

https://www.theguardian.com/technol...ge-of-surveillance-capitalism-google-facebook

The BBC did a brief piece on their technology programme 'Click' about Shoshana Zuboff and her work on 'Surveillance Capitalism', an idea/theory that has gained much attention in the last couple of years.

What was striking to me was that it even piqued the interest of my nephew, because it mentioned Pokemon Go... albeit not in a flattering way.

Many believe that Pokemon Go, while a massively successful game in its own right, was also intended as a global-scale experiment on how a digital platform can be used to direct physical human behaviour, under the guise of a game with additional 'health benefits' (such as getting kids to get out more); while in reality it was also being used as a means for companies to like McDonald's and Starbucks to increase footfall, who pay Niantic (the creators of Pokemon Go) handsomely in return for substantially more customers arriving at their stores.

In the context of this thread, and my own (extremely limited) experience with Pokemon Go, the most concerning aspect is the fact that the people who downloaded and used the game (my sister downloaded it and pays for the mobile device it runs on, my nephew (aged 9 at the time) was the end user) saw and knew it only as a benign game, but were/still are totally oblivious to the other purposes of the game. Pokemon Go was phenomenally successful, and yet I would imagine that the vast majority of its millions of users are not aware of the fact that the makers of the game are making millions from it for its ability to be used by third parties to increase their business...

 

[baldgye]

I suppose this article could belong in any number of threads but it fits here too...

https://www.theguardian.com/technol...ge-of-surveillance-capitalism-google-facebook

The BBC did a brief piece on their technology programme 'Click' about Shoshana Zuboff and her work on 'Surveillance Capitalism', an idea/theory that has gained much attention in the last couple of years.

What was striking to me was that even piqued the interest of my nephew, because it mentioned Pokemon Go... albeit not in a flattering way.

Many believe that Pokemon Go, while a massively successful game in its own right, was also intended as a global-scale experiment on how a digital platform can be used to direct physical human behaviour, under the guise of a game with additional 'health benefits' (such as getting kids to get out more); while in reality it was also being used as a means for companies to like McDonald's and Starbucks to increase footfall, who pay Niantic (the creators of Pokemon Go) handsomely in return for substantially more customers arriving at their stores.

In the context of this thread, and my own (extremely limited) experience with Pokemon Go, the most concerning aspect is the fact that the people who downloaded and used the game (my sister downloaded it and pays for the mobile device it runs on, my nephew (aged 9 at the time) was the end user) saw and knew it only as a benign game, but were/still are totally oblivious to the other purposes of the game. Pokemon Go was phenomenally successful, and yet I would imagine that the vast majority of its millions of users are not aware of the fact that the makers of the game are making millions from it for its ability to be used by third parties to increase their business...

Some parents are so ignorant to reality it really is staggering. The number of people (who are parents) I spoke to during that whole Momo thing, thought that any old Pepper Pig video or anything re-uploaded like that was 'official' because its on YouTube... and couldn't understand that what they were doing was pirating content.
The 'free' market for things like app's, subscriptions and illegally downloading things has created so much confusion over so many people that they are unable to see the value of anything and so can't even make the next logical step "how does this company make it's money?".

It's the same with Facebook, the number of people I speak to just generally who know what Facebook sells their info for advertising, but when you break it down and explain that they literally sell your 'private' messages to other companies they're suddenly horrified... There is such a disconnect between the general public and the tech companies that it's no wonder laws can't keep up with them

 

[Touring Mars]

I enjoyed a very pleasant weekend showing @Sage around the pubs city of Glasgow this weekend and we talked for many hours, not least about the differences between American and Scottish drinking culture. We are friends on FB, but neither of us are particularly active on it... but I also have a second FB account (for music) where neither myself or Sage are connected to directly.

On Monday, I got some interesting 'sponsored' ads... one on my main account and one on my other account. I've never seen ads for either of these things, but both were things that we had physically discussed on Saturday. One was so specific to our conversation that I was really quite shocked to see it.

There has been a recent study to show that our mobile phones are very likely not secretly listening in to our conversations - but that raises an arguably scarier prospect... that FB, Google etc. don't even need to listen to our conversations in order to generate ultra-specific adverts, simply based on who we physically hang out with. There is only two possibilities... either my phone was secretly listening to our conversations at the weekend (which I doubt) or FB knows that Sage and I were in each other's company on Saturday, and that it knows Sage's interests well enough to know that an advert about something he was talking about on Saturday might interest me too. Either way, it's pretty scary.

 

[Dennisch]

either my phone was secretly listening to our conversations at the weekend (which I doubt) or FB knows that Sage and I were in each other's company on Saturday

Your phone is just like a Google Home, an Alexa, Siri of whatever. It listens all the time. You need to turn off permissions for each app you don't want to have access to your microphone.

Start talking about stuff you normally don't talk about, let say a fishing licence and watch what happens.

And it would not surprise me if FB knows how to connect the dots too.

Edit.

The same goes for so called end to end encrypted chats in WhatsApp (Facebook owned). Chatting there will also build up a nice ad campaign for you.

 

[Liquid]

Especially if you have Google on your phone and are connected to the internet, it's going to keep track of your location via your Wi-Fi access point, your proximity to other Wi-Fi access points or your telephone network whether you want it to or not.

The last one applies to those who live near international borders; I disable as many permissions as I can (that don't interfere with my work which often is with telecomms and mobile apps) but Google always knows when I have crossed the Austria-Slovakia border and the ads are adjusted as such, as well as the default search engine.

 

[MatskiMonk]

Especially if you have Google on your phone and are connected to the internet, it's going to keep track of your location via your Wi-Fi access point, your proximity to other Wi-Fi access points or your telephone network whether you want it to or not.

The last one applies to those who live near international borders; I disable as many permissions as I can (that don't interfere with my work which often is with telecomms and mobile apps) but Google always knows when I have crossed the Austria-Slovakia border and the ads are adjusted as such, as well as the default search engine.

From Google...

You can stop sharing your location with Google by changing your settings, but Google may still suggest a location based on your IP address, recent locations, or Location History . If you don’t want any location history shared, see your Google Maps Timeline.

When you use the internet, you share your network provider address, which can be near your location. Google uses this information to show you results you may be interested in. There isn’t a way to stop sharing your network provider address.




edit:

On the topic of digital surveillance and advertising, I let google track pretty much whatever it wants, and I actively share information with it, because actually I find a lot of its services really effective and useful. I don't shop online (if at all possible) on principle, so most ads shown to me are a waste of pixels anyway.

I also use Google Rewards, by far the most common questions it asks me is where I've been, and how I've spent money there. What's weird at the moment, is for a couple of weeks, it's suggesting places that I've been nowhere near. Since I let google track me it's normally spot on. I'm guessing it's because I've recently been using a VPN on my desktop, and it's confusing the IP tracking of my google account, but the location services on my mobile are on, as is GPS. I'd have thought that would trump IP locales, but it seems not. In any case, I still get between 6p and 17p for saying "none of the above", and so far Google Rewards as paid for my entire collection of Star Wars Comics!

 

[Dotini]

Your phone is just like a Google Home, an Alexa, Siri of whatever. It listens all the time. You need to turn off permissions for each app you don't want to have access to your microphone.

Based on my experience, this is entirely true; you are chattel.

 

[Touring Mars]

What has happened several times now is that I've received a very specific (indeed, exact) advert for a product that someone else has spoken about to me. In one recent case, it was a product that was mentioned by my physiotherapist (a pillow for between your knees), with whom I have no personal contact. It doesn't seem to work so well when I deliberately mention random products (like a fish license for example), as clearly 'The Beast' must already know that it's a red herring.

 

[Dotini]

What has happened several times now is that I've received a very specific (indeed, exact) advert for a product that someone else has spoken about to me. In one recent case, it was a product that was mentioned by my physiotherapist (a pillow for between your knees), with whom I have no personal contact. It doesn't seem to work so well when I deliberately mention random products (like a fish license for example), as clearly 'The Beast' must already know that it's a red herring.

In other words, in order to avoid being listened to, both ends of the conversation must turn off permissions on all apps. Even that may not be entirely effective.

 

[MatskiMonk]

In one recent case, it was a product that was mentioned by my physiotherapist (a pillow for between your knees), with whom I have no personal contact.

A number of people who may have previously searched for Physiotherapy and have visited Joe Bloggs Physiotherapy, have bought the same pillow that's recommended by that physiotherapist (because he recommends it to a number of people)

You visit that therapist, google thinks you might be interested in that product.

I mean, I don't know how that's how it works, but it doesn't seem a stretch at all, and all it's doing is piecing together what it knows. If a device at the Physio is also picking up on things being said, then that's only going to increase the probability.

 

[Liquid]

I have my bank's app on my phone and it never has pop ups of any kinds and I rarely get messages from the bank other than my monthly statement. The other day my friend and I were talking about mortgages of people I know and personal finance options because it's something I am considering.

Two days later I get this pop up when I go to log in:

For what it's worth, I have a zero credit history; I've never had a loan, never had an overdraft, never had a credit card, never bought something on finance, never bought something on credit. Ever. And like I said, my bank never harasses or inundates me with anything.

I also almost never get concerned by personalised ads due to a combination of adblocks and annoyed apathy to advertisements in general but this one really stands out.

Coincidence or surveillance?

 

[Joey D]

As much as companies say they aren't spying, I'm convinced they are. I had the Facebook app on my phone and was talking to a co-worker about a Toyota Highlander. I have no interest in the car nor did I search for it to look up something about it. Next thing you know, Facebook is flooded with ads for the Toyota Highlander. That caused me to delete the Facebook app because I don't need that kind of spying in my life.

With that said though, the profile that these companies can build on you based on the data you provide them is ridiculous. I remember reading a story about Target being able to tell someone was pregnant before they even knew based on the stuff they were buying.

Given your financial situation, you do sound like a good candidate to target for a loan...especially one with an interest rate of up to 9% (which is crazy high, in the US it's around 4%). Basically you presumably have an income, something your bank more than likely knows and you probably have a decent saving's account and checking account that's never had an overdraft. You're also probably right around the age of many first time home buyers in your area based on your bank's data. Finally, as we are approaching the end of the year, people are starting to set goals for 2020, one of which might be getting their own place.

Still, it's really unsettling.

 

[Dennisch]

Edit your phone's permissions, start using Firefox as browser, Linux if you can on your computers.
Combined with Adblock and scriptblockers you can shield yourself reasonably well.

And if course, don't buy something like an Alexa or Google Home.

 

[Danoff]

It's interesting how ubiquitous this particular phenomenon has become. Some of it for sure is just spotting coincidence. I actually just thought of something random the other day and then spotted it highlighted in a news story. Unless there's an Alexa is in my head (it's possible, I'm not ruling it out), there's no way that one was snooping. But others have been harder to dismiss.

 

[PocketZeven]

Edit your phone's permissions, start using Firefox as browser, Linux if you can on your computers.
Combined with Adblock and scriptblockers you can shield yourself reasonably well.

And if course, don't buy something like an Alexa or Google Home.

Unless a person has nothing to hide.

 

[Carbonox]

Edit your phone's permissions, start using Firefox as browser, Linux if you can on your computers.
Combined with Adblock and scriptblockers you can shield yourself reasonably well.

And if course, don't buy something like an Alexa or Google Home.

Ublock Origin, not Adblock, guys.

Adblock has allowed paid ads through the filter for years now.

 

[Joey D]

Unless a person has nothing to hide.

I don't really have anything to hide, but it doesn't mean I want Google of Amazon listening to my every word.

I do have a Google Home, but I use it solely as a wireless speaker and only plug it in when I want to use it. Otherwise, it stays unplugged.

 

[BobK]

Unless a person has nothing to hide.

Some of us value our privacy. My life is not an open book for the rest of the world to read.

 

[Northstar]

Unless a person has nothing to hide.

Just because someone wants to hide something, doesn't mean they are hiding something illegal. It could be something as simple as worrying about someone stealing their identity, which is a rather common crime (and they can do it with a simple recording of you saying "yes").

 

[Dennisch]

Unless a person has nothing to hide.

Bull****

 

[Imari]

Unless a person has nothing to hide.

You don't think that in this modern age of technology some piece of your life could be used against you if it was given to a truly bad actor? We're none of us perfect, and I don't think making everyone walk around with a laundry list of every stupid thing that they ever did dragging at their heels is particularly productive.

It's not about having things to hide, it's about not giving away ammunition to people who might have legitimate purpose to use it against you.

 

[PocketZeven]

Bull****

You don't think that in this modern age of technology some piece of your life could be used against you if it was given to a truly bad actor? We're none of us perfect, and I don't think making everyone walk around with a laundry list of every stupid thing that they ever did dragging at their heels is particularly productive.

It's not about having things to hide, it's about not giving away ammunition to people who might have legitimate purpose to use it against you.

Just because someone wants to hide something, doesn't mean they are hiding something illegal. It could be something as simple as worrying about someone stealing their identity, which is a rather common crime (and they can do it with a simple recording of you saying "yes").

Some of us value our privacy. My life is not an open book for the rest of the world to read.

I don't really have anything to hide, but it doesn't mean I want Google of Amazon listening to my every word.

I do have a Google Home, but I use it solely as a wireless speaker and only plug it in when I want to use it. Otherwise, it stays unplugged.

@Dennisch you probably have lots to hide?

If you want privacy from internet stop posting dickpics, nude photographs, sensitive information etc. Or even better dont use it. If you are a criminal doing illegal acts, its only a good thing.

That said, the trade of using peoples personal information as a commodity should be fought against. But recommending moving towards linux using private browsers and not buying alexa or other similar products is kind of taking it far.

 

[Dennisch]

If you want privacy from internet stop posting dickpics, nude photographs, sensitive information etc. Or even better dont use it. If you are a criminal doing illegal acts, its only a good thing.

It's clear that you have no idea what other people see as privacy. If you think that privacy is about that what you say, you're not the sharpest tool in the shed.

Do you really think that nothing happens with your information, legal or illegal? How about when you're banging the missus on the couch while Google, Amazon and Apple are tuning in to her screams of joy?

Why would you want to share private information with an open mic in your house? What good does it do if the big companies know that your kid is dying of cancer? Or if they pick up a phone call when you get fired?

Would you like personalised ads for that? Kiddie size coffins?

 

[PocketZeven]

It's clear that you have no idea what other people see as privacy.

If you read byond that quote, I adressed that personal information should remain private and not a commodity. If you want to opt out of receiving ads, dont use google, facebook etc. They have every right to provide their (free) service on an adbased revenue model. What do you mean with privacy?

 

[Northstar]

@Dennisch you probably have lots to hide?

If you want privacy from internet stop posting dickpics, nude photographs, sensitive information etc. Or even better dont use it. If you are a criminal doing illegal acts, its only a good thing.

That said, the trade of using peoples personal information as a commodity should be fought against. But recommending moving towards linux using private browsers and not buying alexa or other similar products is kind of taking it far.

I'm curious, do you lock your doors at night? And if so, why since you have nothing to hide?

 

[PocketZeven]

I'm curious, do you lock your doors at night? And if so, why since you have nothing to hide?

Those are not comparable are they.

 

[Northstar]

Those are not comparable are they.

Oh they very much are.

 

[PocketZeven]

Oh they very much are.

Nope. In your world it might. But not for me.

 

[Northstar]

Nope. In your world it might. But not for me.

Do go on about how protecting your assets is not comparable to protecting your assets.