Intellectual Humility & the importance of knowing you might be wrong

[weavis]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

But the real privacy clowns are the US mobile operators. AT&T has been caught out selling real-time location data for pretty much every subscriber to pretty much anybody. They have just announced they will terminate these sales "real soon now" after an exposé by online media (Motherboard I think). So it's not just google/Facebook/Huawei we need to suspect.

My commentary is based on the simple reality that access is to be had from security forces of countries to all phones. Backdoors if you will. Whilst apps streamline WHAT they are looking for... the reality is that the OS is compromised for location and perhaps other things.

I travel a lot and within 2 hours, I am targetted for my preferences from within the country I'm visiting.. and my location is switched OFF. Right now I'm in Bangkok and yes........... all the ads are for Bangkok! This has to come from the cell towers and my phone communication.

In this case, I don't mind because I actually got the tripod I've been looking for... but then they got me as well.....

life

[crooks]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

If we all stopped using Google, it would change.

I am using duckduckgo as my default search engine. I still go to google because it simply works better at times.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by weavis

Even devices that had been reset to factory default settings, with location services disabled, were observed by Quartz sending nearby cell-tower addresses to Google. Devices with a cellular data or WiFi connection appear to send the data to Google each time they come within range of a new cell tower. When Android devices are connected to a WiFi network, they will send the tower addresses to Google even if they don’t have SIM cards installed.

Do you have a link to that? I'm questioning the meaning of "reset to factory default" - mainly cos the factory isn't often the one doing the software install. Now the default software installed by the telcos... we already know that's loaded up with nuisances.


Also, the actual nuts and bolts of phone-tower communication (the whole cell system) - they have to know of each other; that's how it works. Whether the telco stores all that is a different question, and not necessarily related to the phone OS.


I'm not fully up on cell over wifi, but I can see the point of, again, having to know where to route a call.

[weavis]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Do you have a link to that? I'm questioning the meaning of "reset to factory default" - mainly cos the factory isn't often the one doing the software install. Now the default software installed by the telcos... we already know that's loaded up with nuisances.


Also, the actual nuts and bolts of phone-tower communication (the whole cell system) - they have to know of each other; that's how it works. Whether the telco stores all that is a different question, and not necessarily related to the phone OS.


I'm not fully up on cell over wifi, but I can see the point of, again, having to know where to route a call.

I lost my reference but this is the same wording.. https://www.popularmechanics.com/tec...ower-tracking/

[weavis]

For me, there is nothing wrong with technology. Just the misuse of it.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by weavis

I lost my reference but this is the same wording.. https://www.popularmechanics.com/tec...ower-tracking/

Thanks. That article also has the link to the Quartz article. I have some reading to do...

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Exile

Understanding what science is and how it works doesn't help persuade when people believe (justified or not) that science has been politicized for the sake of other agendas. Or in the case of that topic we need not any longer discuss . . . that even if they believe in the science the overall problem is too overwhelming & complex for them or humanity at large to have any meaningful impact. So it's not just a question of people not believing in science, but maybe also about not trusting the motives of the people communicating what the science means.

Yes, there is a decline in trust. Without trust, no society can last.

Originally Posted by crooks

I am using duckduckgo as my default search engine. I still go to google because it simply works better at times.

Yes, I’ve been using Duck Duck for many years now. It’s one of the few little choices we could all make.

[chris in SG]

Originally Posted by Exile

They don't always tilt this way on every story -- that's just simple-minded labeling. But when it comes to opinion pieces or those involving hot-button issues, it's important to be aware of a general bias in one direction or another. I'm not suggesting a baby-out-with-the-bathwater approach here. But it's equally naive to simply take everything at face value because they may be publicly funded, or have a good rep, or whatever. We have an obligation as citizens to receive information with a critical eye, and one of the most important things to consider is the motivation of the source.

Agreed!

I've always been an avid BBC world service follower but not, I hope, without a critical ear. I think it was the USSR that described BBC as the most powerful form of propaganda because it's so subtle you don't realize it. I often note, by way of example, how the Beeb quietly starts reporting on a "regime" rather than a government, not because of any change in government but because someone has decided at senior editor's level that the government is behaving badly..

[boatman61]

For me they can target all they want I just dont look at the annoying ads.. I buy ignition coils for my bike and suddenly bike ads pop up, book a hotel, the same but in spite of all the targeted crap on here for me I've never clicked on one yet.. Wasted energy collecting my data, but I guess it suits the lazy shopper.

[heron237]

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”


― Upton Sinclair


All these "experts" they find to stir the pot and inject uncertainty into issues like global warming, wealth inequality, etc.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by heron237

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”


― Upton Sinclair


All these "experts" they find to stir the pot and inject uncertainty into issues like global warming, wealth inequality, etc.

I am an expert on wealth inequality..
Kenomac's got tons more than me..

[Exile]

Originally Posted by boatman61

I am an expert on wealth inequality..
Kenomac's got tons more than me..

That's why I've always appreciated CF -- on account of its expertise!

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by chris in SG

Agreed!

I've always been an avid BBC world service follower but not, I hope, without a critical ear. I think it was the USSR that described BBC as the most powerful form of propaganda because it's so subtle you don't realize it. I often note, by way of example, how the Beeb quietly starts reporting on a "regime" rather than a government, not because of any change in government but because someone has decided at senior editor's level that the government is behaving badly..

Of course we, as the end "consumer" of media, must make the final judgements about the information we receive. Caveat emptor still applies here as well. Nor am I saying that national arms-length broadcasters are always without bias.

But we all know that not all people will be that discerning. Then add to that the firehose of sh1te that is the totality of all the possible "information" one is inundated with constantly....

Chris - you correctly state that the BBC can sometimes show bias - but you also indicate that you still consider it trustworthy and your go-to source. That's basically my point about the national broadcasters. Whereas in the US, there are mainly just for-profit outlets; many, possibly the majority choosing to attract a specific audience sector, and of these many having an unapologetically biased stance. You can't really point to a US broadcaster that someone else won't dismiss out of hand because members of their tribe claim that it's biased. (or the general chant of "librul" bias levelled against all "mainstream" media).

I do know that a US "BBC" is not a possibility, it's not in their DNA. But once upon a time, people trusted CBS (eg Walter Cronkite) and/or NBC; those broadcasters were doing quality work, people trusted them, and they weren't making their money by setting themselves upon each other. Can that level of commercial journalism ever arise again?

It's arguable that maybe a few of the papers still are - eg NY Times, Washington Post. Maybe even the Wall St Journal. But because somebody once found an article or two too [left/right] for their tastes, these sources are now dismissed totally by the tribes as "biased".

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by weavis

I lost my reference but this is the same wording.. https://www.popularmechanics.com/tec...ower-tracking/

As a short followup to this, here's a pretty good explanation of how the cell system figures out where your phone is. In a nutshell, the phone and closest tower shake hands when the phone first turns on, AND when the phone changes location enough to be closer to another tower.

Your Quartz article (which was news to me, thanks) discusses how Android was, for a period, also sending that info to Google, ostensibly for some routing need. Nonetheless, even before smartphones, the telco has always, by necessity, known the location of your cellphone when on. Anybody's guess whether the telcos themselves have been retaining that info, and who they reveal it to. (cough-NSA-cough). Transmitter Dan already touched on this.

In other words, if you have a working cellphone (regardless of OS or smartness), someone always knows where you are.

[john61ct]

Anyone who's willing to pay a few bucks can get a live feed of where you are.