Is this an Android issue I am too iOS faithful to understand?
Never seen a calculator ask my location. Most apps will ask nothing besides notification privileges, and will generally explain themselves fairly well before even attempt to ask for anything else. Walled gardens DO have some advantages, it seems.
It seems to me that convincing yourself that suffering constant and persistent attempts at data harvesting, malware infection, and other forms of exploits is a small price to pay NOT to be part of an alleged brainwashing cult is just as much of a cult as you believe me to be part of.
Default iOS is leagues ahead of android in regards to privacy and security. Massively so.
You need to install a third party OS to get something comparable on Android. Those are mainly limited to Pixels phones made by an advertising company for the purpose of generating more advertising opportunities.
Sure, as long as you're not an idiot and at least somewhat computer literate of course.
But the problem is that it appears that Android has fostered an entire ecosystem in which even asking for ludicrous levels of permission is totally acceptable, whereas doing anything like that on the App Store is a bannable offense. You're simply not going to get your app through the review process unless you provide a clear and reasonable explanation for why each permission is necessary, and state your privacy policy openly so as not to mislead users.
Like it or not, Apple does actually take these things seriously, and it sure does help cut down on the level of unnecessary frustrations I have to deal with when using my phone.
I don't know man. Putting the word "privacy" on a billboard doesn't mean that you take it seriously. Marketing agencies basically listen to every conversation you have and there's at least one application that accesses your location all the time on each platform. I used to go crazy thinking about these topics but there is simply no avoiding it, so I gave up.
To me iPhones are 🤏 this close to being a feature phone so I will keep my Android. You give the same data to Google by using their services anyway. 🤷♂️
Android apps are much more likely to ask for permission. There is very little moderation involved on the all store. Apps asking for unnecessary permission is very common.
@MacNCheezus@Interstellar_1 Earnest question - do you read the ToS on the apps on your phone? I know Apple recently has gotten on a pseudo-privacy kick as of late (they were having a bit of a public-facing slapfight with Facebook over it) but the apps may be collecting usage data and using the ToS to say they can. Apps like Spotify and GMaps are bad about this.
Does anyone really ever have the time for that? I'll leave it to the journos who being paid to look for a juicy scoop to tell me when they put something utterly egregious in there.
And yes, Google IS notoriously bad, but you know what, I don't HAVE to use their apps on my phone because Apple Maps is actually fairly good these days (and far more privacy focused, supposedly they process your data in a way that makes it impossible for them to create a comprehensive location profile, but I digress).
But you know, if you're worried about such things, I literally can't thing of a worse thing to do than to run an entire OS that is literally made by an advertising-based spyware company. If you run stock Android, you're basically trusting Google with root access to your entire digital life. If you think Google Maps is bad, handing them your entire phone on a silver platter is definitely far worse.
@MacNCheezus I'm not denying this, just figured I'd bring up that there's a lot that can go towards failing you, privacy-wise.
Apple has it's own host of problems (third-party repair lockouts being high on the list of them when I think about it) but if privacy is the primary concern they seem pretty good.
Sure, the OS is closed source and so is the review process, you kinda have to trust them to actually do what they promise. For everyday normal life stuff, it's likely safe enough though. Obviously, if you're a spy or a whistleblower operating in some high stakes scenarios, you'll probably want something else, but you also probably don't want Android unless it's been seriously hardened (i.e. something like Graphene).
I used to be the kind that would have downvoted this comment, but every android update has me eyeing apple more and more. If there were an equivalent to Tasker, I'd switch in a heartbeat.
Since I don't use Android and never have in the past, I'm obviously not familiar with the app and only took a quick look at its Play Store page, but it looks like Apple's Shortcuts appmight be at least somewhat similar to that (but likely a bit more limited).
If there's anyone here that cares about their privacy and doesn't know this already:
If you have a choice between accessing the website through a browser and installing an app, use the browser. Browsers (typically) at least try to protect the types of information that gets sent, whereas there are much fewer restrictions (again, typically) for apps.
Everyone wants you to install apps because apps (typically) get access to much more data.
In what fucking universe is this even remotely true? I don't know about you guys, but around those places, in early 2000's, internet access was extremely fucking expensive, so most software was peer-to-peer shared, not even by torrent, but on CD's or floppys, or local neighborhood ad-hoc and internal ISP networks. And the way it got there was mostly from shady CD stores around the corner, where owners paid fortune to download shit and made it back selling it, or PC journals with CDs where they were just filled it up to a brim with whatever garbage they had to boost value.
And there was no access control whatsoever. A literal spyware with full access to your system, that only puts a purple fucking gorilla on your screen, that runs around and does absolutely fucking nothing? Sign me the fuck in. If your virus did something even something remotely useful, like show weather and currency rates, then you could rest assured that it would infect every single computer in the country.
If you were savvy, though, what you'd do is forever sacrifice 50% of your CPU and RAM to the anti-virus and pray to fucking gods you don't touch anything newer than the last version of it you have. Because anything uncaught can and will infect absolutely everything and anything the computer has access to. And your only option would be to just nuke the entire system with all of your data because because any backups you make would also get infected.
Even later, when broadband got cheap and widely available, the internet was for a long time a complete shit show. Remember Flash? Every single ad and every other site used Flash. That shit, along with java applets, was equivalent to automatically downloading and executing any app you see, before you actually even see it. It was also filled with shit like rapidshare and depositfiles, with questionable content and ads on ads over ads, as there was a financial incentive to spam that garbage everywhere and bury anything half-legit under it.
Kids these days really got it easy. See an app requesting something you don't think it needs? Just say no. Us, boomers, didn't have such a luxury. By the time you suspect anything shady going on, it was already too late. There is a downside, though, that manufacturers control what you can and cannot do. It took, like, almost a decade for trivial things like screen recording to even be possible on Android, and things like CheatEngine are straight up impossible. But hey, I'd say that's a reasonable price to pay for not being completely paranoid.
in early 2000’s, internet access was extremely fucking expensive, so most software was peer-to-peer shared, not even by torrent, but on CD’s or floppys, or local neighborhood ad-hoc and internal ISP networks
Uh no. I was there. In 1995 or 1996, I may have still used a shareware CD-ROM, or some less-legal compilation CD-ROM, but in the 2000s the most common way to install software by far was to download it over the internet.
And there was no access control whatsoever. A literal spyware with full access to your system, that only puts a purple fucking gorilla on your screen, that runs around and does absolutely fucking nothing? Sign me the fuck in. If your virus did something even something remotely useful, like show weather and currency rates, then you could rest assured that it would infect every single computer in the country.
I think the point of the post is that back then people were warned against installing bonzi buddy and such, and we were told to install software only from trustworthy sources. Spyware software rightfully flagged such software as malware too. Nowadays, there are appstores full of banal apps which harvest much more personal information about you than bonzi buddy ever did and we're not batting an eye about it, and even though we have "Access control" we just happily click accept when our calculator wants to read our emails, and we've accepted it as a normal way of doing things.
Uh no. I was there. In 1995 or 1996, I may have still used a shareware CD-ROM, or some less-legal compilation CD-ROM, but in the 2000s the most common way to install software by far was to download it over the internet
I've pulled up some historic data and it looks you're right and I've underestimated how much "my place" lagged behind the world at a time. Of course, if you've had unlimited access in 1996 that makes sense. For me, I have an artifact from the past right in front of me - a router manufactured in 2008, still chugging along, which I've bought when the first truly unlimited plans hit the market, so it made sense to share a connection rather than having a separate account with ISP for every family member. It was only 64k, though, so not downloading a car movie or a game at those speeds. The gray networks persisted all the way into mid 2010s as far as I know.
I think the point of the post is that back then people were warned against installing bonzi buddy and such, and we were told to install software only from trustworthy sources. Spyware software rightfully flagged such software as malware too
Might be another cultural difference, but this is not at all the experience I've had. In fact, just the other day I myself had to spin up a VM to launch a some random-ass app from, of all things, a CD that was handed to me, though this is quite a bit out of the ordinary. But I'd say the attitude didn't change, people are still just as likely and to launch random shit from a USB drive as they were to insert random CD's. And while AV software has improved, people are now less likely to use it. Defaulting to windows defender, which, in personal experience, is only good at catching pirated copies of microsoft software and nothing more. Or relying on google/apple, which is also problematic.
Just out of curiosity, by the way, how many people from your circle do you think have the "Allow app installs from Unknown Sources" checked? For me, that'd be at least a third of them.
Nowadays, there are appstores full of banal apps which harvest much more personal information about you than bonzi buddy ever did and we’re not batting an eye about it, and even though we have “Access control” we just happily click accept when our calculator wants to read our emails, and we’ve accepted it as a normal way of doing things.
To me it sounded like the initial post was glorifying how good it was then versus how bad it is now, while missing on all of the technical progress that happened. Sure, apps collect much more data than they ever did. But on the other hand, bonzi buddy was more than capable of stealing all of your money and nuking your device. In my eyes, it is more important than people giving away their personal info by being careless.
As for the carelessness, though, I don't think that's a tech nor a new problem. People just never ask "why?" and "what for?" nearly as often as they should. Even if sometimes this is literally a question of life and death, most people don't even care to ask...
I have a theory that this is the next iteration of Internet. A private internet linked by vpn over the public Internet. Probably already exists in some form over Tor or in dusty Pirate communities. All we need is a no-commercial-entities clause and a Yahoo clone and we could rock like it's 1994!
I got a new phone for the first time in a decade and Android keeps cheerfully telling me I'm opted-in to new horrifying layers of surveillance. 'We're gonna look at the first thing you click every time you install anything! Isn't that great?' Fuck off and die. 'But you'll get less relevant recommendations...' Don't recommend anything. 'Wow, you're gonna get such generic ads.' Where else did you hide ads, Google?!
For context: my previous phone is an LG. LG does not make phones anymore. That's how long I clung to something I'd largely unfucked. And every time it boots, to this day, it reminds me I need to agree to some licensing horseshit.
The damn weather app demands to know my location. Asking makes sense. Demanding is a failure to understand why people check the weather. I don't need it where I am. I need it where I'm going to be. You have no trouble showing me it's cloudy in the default location, five thousand miles north. Let me enter a city name and mind your damn business.
In winter I want to know if it's going to be good enough to go out on the bike or if it's going to be cold and wet in which case I'll drive instead (yeah I know better clothing blah blah). There is a case for knowing the weather forecast for my current location.
Yes, of course - some people need very local predictions. But I live in Florida. Snow is not an issue. I want to know if this afternoon's thunderstorm is going to cross where I'm driving, and I want to know what's up with cloud formation in the eastern Atlantic. The temperature's gonna be the same in all three places: Too Damn Hot.
Not that Florida's smart enough to limit Amber Alerts to relevant portions of the state. I'm down in the dick-tip. I've been rudely awoken by blaring alarms about a kidnapping up in the grundle.
I hope they send those alerts to people in Nashville, because they're all closer to Tallahassee than I am.
Weather apps being able to use GPS data is great. Weather apps shitting the bed if you don't give it permissions, when it fucking knows it has to ask for permissions, are failed products.
I will give it a location. It can tell me the weather there.
Yeah, when I was setting up my first smartphone there was a very weird moment where I had to go against a lifetime of training on laptops and desktop PCs and just immediately invite every single app to fuck me up the arse if I wanted it to function as anything more than an expensive telephone with a fancy screen. But invite them up my arse I did.
Aggressive capitalism coupled with user ignorance is the main issue. The advice still remains don't install all this shit, but people growing uo with smartphones have bought in to this idea that it's reasonable for Google to spy on your every move, so why not every other app?
So many users have no idea how their devices work - even an inkling - now what apps do, how to keep devices secure and private, and what happens with their data. Business has taken advantage of that - people want things to "just work" so business use that as a way to abuse users and make every app a trojan horse for data mining.
Even Google, Apple etc privacy settings are bullshit - they're just figleafs of psuedo privacy that enable them as the platform makers to dictate the terms.
I switched away from Windows to Linux on PC, and I use FOSS alternatives on my Android device (even considering replacing android with FOSS system - difficult with some work essential apps unfortunately). But even if you stay on windows/android there are plenty of things users can do to protect themselves - they just don't know how or worse can't be bothered by the whole issue.
That's why Foss will always be better, and we need to support these developers. They also need to protect their software better from capitalist ghouls that will profit from it for free
What I mean is better licenses that make sure you get paid if companies profit from it, and harsher penalties for those that get caught infringing the license
Such a license wouldn't fit the free software or the open source definitions, but I find it interesting that there has been a small, yet apparently growing, group of people unsatisfied with our current open licensing, for different reasons, and proposing new ideas and concepts that wouldn't fit these definitions.
