
European consumer groups want regulators to act against Google tracking - _of
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-google-privacy/european-consumer-groups-want-regulators-to-act-against-google-tracking-idUSKCN1NW0BS
======
DanielleMolloy
People around me expressed concerns about Google Location History more
frequently than about any other privacy topic in recent years (including
Snowden). The visualisation of their personal data suddenly seems to make
always-logged on Facebook users concerned about their privacy.

But they don't seem to connect the dots and only see Google here. Yet many
other parties already have the same data about them, e.g. mobile carriers.

In 2011 a delegate of the German green party asked his wireless carriers for
his location data and made a decent visualisation from it, provoking a
discussion about metadata: [https://www.zeit.de/datenschutz/malte-spitz-
vorratsdaten](https://www.zeit.de/datenschutz/malte-spitz-vorratsdaten)

Given that location history is turned off by default and that they, unlike
e.g. mobile carriers allow you to delete or download your own data in raw
format any time with a button click I am less concerned about it than about
other current internet privacy topics. I may be wrong.

~~~
javajosh
You musn't throw the baby out with the bath water! Carriers require knowledge
of where you are to give you service - it is a physical limitation of cell
technology. And carriers can and should be limited as to how they use that
data (in my view they should not _store_ it at all, only using it for your
benefit, but I digress). But to argue that if one company has your location
data, then it doesn't matter if ALL companies have your location data, well,
this is clearly false.

~~~
ian0
>> Carriers require knowledge of where you are to give you service - it is a
physical limitation of cell technology.

Quick nitpick. Carriers don't need to know where you are. They just need to
know which cells handsets are moving in and out of. To find out where you
actually are takes a bit of work. Unfortunately they are more willing to put
in the work since personal data has become more valuable.

~~~
SamReidHughes
It's useful to track location to figure out which locations have spotty
cellular coverage.

~~~
ian0
Useful maybe but expensive (at least in the older networks). Handset reported
cell-tower signal strength information (what you need to triangulate) was only
accessible to non-core parts of the network to reduce data load on regional
links.

Typically you can find out which areas have spotty coverage by looking at the
dropped call and load stats of base stations (which use directional antennas),
looking at osm maps of roads and developments, collecting complaints, as well
as occasionally calling out and taking field measurements.

------
ian0
Heres one for you. Years ago, when realtime traffic data was released on maps,
I had an argument with a friend. I claimed that the only way they could get
that accuracy was by recording the cell data of every single android user and
validate the (ever changing) coverage maps through those users with GPS
enabled (say while using maps for directions). What had me convinced was that
around that time in my city nobody used google maps, most were on low-end
androids and few phones had GPS enabled as it would eat your battery. Yet the
traffic stats were realtime and accurate. My friend refused to believe they
would be brazen enough to do that.

I remain convinced I was right. But strangely enough - it didn't annoy me
much. Because out of all the things they could have used that data, they went
ahead and built an incredibly useful product by solving a difficult technical
data-related problem and then made it public and free. Compare that with what
your bank and telco are doing.

That said, Im not commenting on the ethics. Even with the opt in, people are
not really aware their locations are being tracked. We don't know what the
data is used for or who it's shared with (looking at you - NSA). It's a breech
of trust. Though it will be a shame to see realtime traffic stats go down :P

~~~
philipodonnell
I think if Google Maps was an optional download and said "when you use Google
Maps we are tracking where you are so we can show you things and know what
kind of traffic is around", and when Google Maps was off or uninstalled they
didn't track you, then they could offer the exact service you as talking about
without causing GDPR problems. I believe Waze managed to do it like this
without needing always-on OS-level triangulated coverage maps, but I could be
wrong.

This seems like one of those things that is a huge thing A that they do with
the data that no one likes, but in response Google says "but we do B with it
so A is fine" and the response is "you could easily do B without doing A so
just do B" and Google says "well we don't make as much money just from B so we
will do A and since we also own the OS you'll just have to be ok with it".

------
Mikeb85
I can't help but think that there's some competitors' money behind these
attacks on Google... They provide location services which you can turn off or
delete yourself, which is anonymous to anyone else, and there's no evidence
they sell your data (they just anonymously connect you to businesses you
search for). Versus carriers which track you without an option to opt-in or
out and actually do sell your data to 3rd parties.

------
GraemeL
More detail on the practices being complained about here:
[https://www.forbrukerradet.no/side/google-manipulates-
users-...](https://www.forbrukerradet.no/side/google-manipulates-users-into-
constant-tracking/)

------
sbhn
Google can track everything I do, and present much of that to me in a pretty
easy to use interface. But it’s unable to show me how much money my clicks
generated. Many of the links presented to me are brokered by google, they know
how much a click is worth, because it accounts for it when it charges the
advertiser, but it can’t tell me how much money was transferred from my click.

~~~
mda
Can you know how much money other parties make in any of your transactions?

~~~
swebs
If you host ads through Adsense, Google tells you how many clicks,
impressions, and dollars you've received, but they don't say "Joe Nobody
clicked at 4:00pm, earning you $0.34".

~~~
sbhn
Joe Nobody’s tracking history will show him the click, I think it should also
show him how much money his attention and action was sold for.

~~~
mda
And an army of Joe Nobody bots would attack to this information immediately.
Please be realistic and why twist words..

------
llcoolv
I have a few questions:

1\. A company is offering services in exchange of personal information.

2\. Clients are perfectly voluntarily and most of them knowingly using those
services, volunteering their personal information.

3\. Why in hell should a third party forbid the above mentioned two parties to
conduct business under the treat of physical retaliation (being thrown to jail
or shot in case you resist arrest)? Isn't it yet another "crime" without a
victim? Don't we have way too many of those "crimes" already? How exactly are
those regulators better than Shariah "politicians"?

~~~
buboard
your questions are either rhetorical or too harshly worded to have a chance of
being answered before getting flagged

