Google software for tracking mobile users coming to iPhone

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by perrin21 View Post


    Yeah, it would also cripple the already suffering car industry some more as not everybody buys a car to go from A to B, some actually like driving.



    Well, drivers being what they are I realise this is not going to happen (that's what the "Just Sayin was about).



    That being said, it's still a great idea IMO and your assertion that it would "ruin" the auto industry is just wild speculation based on nothing at all, whilst at least my thoughts were based on some long established realities. Unfortunately people who "like to drive" or consider themselves "a drivers driver" or some such, are actually a big part of the problem.
  • Reply 22 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post


    On the other hand, a chip in every car that forced the driver to obey the speed limit would end more than half of all accidents and save thousands and thousands of lives a year, around the world.



    Just Sayin.



    Where do you get that statistic? I don't believe speeding causes deaths. It's VARIATION in speed and direction that does. If I'm driving 80 MPH on Highway 5, I'm safer than the guy going 65 on Highway 580 but weaving in and out of traffic.
  • Reply 23 of 42
    irnchrizirnchriz Posts: 1,609member
    Seeing as all those terrorists apparently use google maps this will be great for them. Whilst at their training camps in Syria they can set their location to LA.

  • Reply 24 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ascii View Post


    How would it work on the iPhone since it doesn't allow background processes? It could not automatically keep the Google server up to date, you would have to manually touch the icon to send an update.



    Funny you should ask that. :-) Check out this link:



    apple_rumored_allowing_real_background_apps_on_iph one



    .
  • Reply 25 of 42
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    If this can be enabled as a setting that can be set by an administrator (i.e. parent) so that it can't be turned off, this (and a cheaper model and plan) will result in the iPhone my kid wants.

    Only those with kids they worry about may flame me as a fascist on this.
  • Reply 26 of 42
    irnchrizirnchriz Posts: 1,609member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by GQB View Post


    If this can be enabled as a setting that can be set by an administrator (i.e. parent) so that it can't be turned off, this (and a cheaper model and plan) will result in the iPhone my kid wants.

    Only those with kids they worry about may flame me as a fascist on this.



    I agree with you, lojacking your kids is the way to go. Plus if their phone get stolen you can hunt down the thieving scum and do them in.
  • Reply 27 of 42
    ivladivlad Posts: 742member
    I applaud Google for taking this step further. If this is spread across all phones it will be much easier to find missing people or for parents to know where their teenage kid is.



    I know people automatically think of negative of this, but how much positive usefulness this brings. For example if your friend is lost, he/she can find your faster if you're around the next block.

  • Reply 28 of 42
    cubertcubert Posts: 728member
    Devastating news for those girlfriend/wife cheaters out there.

  • Reply 29 of 42
    lafelafe Posts: 252member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by irnchriz View Post


    I agree with you, lojacking your kids is the way to go. Plus if their phone get stolen you can hunt down the thieving scum and do them in.



    Yes, yes, and yes! This app is not a negative. If you don't need it, don't activate it.

    If you're like me, though, you'd activate it for a select group of about five people,

    and you'd save yourself from dozens or hundreds of text messages a month asking,

    "Where are you?" -- or even worse, "Whr u at".



    It would also be nice to know where your kids are. Even if they have a phone, and

    COULD call you and tell you that the pick-up location after practice has changed, they

    will "forget" to call, and be at the restaurant down the street, or a friend's house, etc.



    Then there's the teenage daughter favorite: "Can I get a ride to the church with

    Larry's mom?" which secretly means, "Can I be taken to Larry's house for some

    unsupervised time alone with him two hours before church, and then dropped off

    there later so it looks like I was there the whole time?"



    We need this technology.
  • Reply 30 of 42
    blah64blah64 Posts: 993member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post


    I guess, in a few years, this will seem normal, but it seems a little freaky to me...



    Let's hope that it NEVER seems normal.



    I'm happy to see that people are thinking more critically about this type of "service" than in the recent past. Is it possible that there are specific cases where this might be useful? Sure. But in general, this stuff is leading down a very scary path if it becomes "normal".



    Couple things to consider:



    1) Fine-grained privacy controls are okay to keep out the casual dude perusing the internet. But at the end of the day you're giving detailed information about your exact whereabouts to Google (or whatever other companies may offer these services). That alone is scary, and the start of going down a slippery slope. When I can run my own server to manage the location information, then I might consider it for certain purposes, such as kid-tracking (with consent), spousal coordination, etc.



    2) When "everyone" partakes in certain activities, those who don't begin to stand out. These days many people don't seem to mind being tracked, disaggregated, and basically watched over day and night. From their purchases to their whereabouts. Sophisticated profiles are made of millions of people every day. From a privacy advocacy standpoint that's troubling, and it gets harder and harder to avoid because there's a ton of money to be made from such data.



    It's not all evil stuff, but in general, making sure everyone is aware of what's happening with their personal information on a daily basis will help folks make better, critical decisions about what kind of information they share, especially with businesses.
  • Reply 31 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post


    I love it, but I must admit the part about "hiding" kind of bothers me. If you can be in Rome but have Google maps tell everyone you are in New York that kind of puts a giant flaw in the reliability of geo-location it seems to me. I think you should be able to either be located or not and that's it.



    Yeah, what's the point or where's the trust if your location can be falsified, so to speak? What kind of disclaimers are they going to have to put on this if people (a parent) are going to use this to keep tabs on someone (their child)? I mean are they going to be selling this with a big *wink, wink, nudge, nudge*?



  • Reply 32 of 42
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,528member
    Come on people. We all know AT&T would never share privacy information

    with the government.
  • Reply 33 of 42
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,528member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JupiterOne View Post


    Yeah, what's the point or where's the trust if your location can be falsified, so to speak? What kind of disclaimers are they going to have to put on this if people (a parent) are going to use this to keep tabs on someone (their child)? I mean are they going to be selling this with a big *wink, wink, nudge, nudge*?







    "Wherever you go, there you aren't"
  • Reply 34 of 42
    webmailwebmail Posts: 639member
    So it won't run in the background on the iphone (totally useless, who wants to wait for it to find your location, vs. timed automatic updates)



    And it doesn't have nearly as many features as Yahoo's fireeagle, which has been out for longer.



    Totally bleeping lame.
  • Reply 35 of 42
    hosshoss Posts: 69member
    Soon, it will be physically impossible to break any law. Or to lie and cheat.
  • Reply 36 of 42
    virgil-tb2virgil-tb2 Posts: 1,416member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wealthychef View Post


    Where do you get that statistic? I don't believe speeding causes deaths. It's VARIATION in speed and direction that does. If I'm driving 80 MPH on Highway 5, I'm safer than the guy going 65 on Highway 580 but weaving in and out of traffic.



    Well this whole thing is driving the thread off topic and it was originally just a humorous remark so I won't be defending this other than this last post, but .... you are wrong.



    Interesting how a little remark like this that was just meant in fun totally gets under some people's skin though.



    I didn't quote any "statistics" (I don't have any handy right now and I am hardly a giant expert on the subject), but it's been a well known thing for years and years that "speeding kills" and that speeding is a major factor in most accidents. Not slowing down *below* the speed limit (as you are actually required by law to do), in foggy or wet situations also counts as "speeding" in that you are overdriving or going too fast for the road conditions. In my country I am treated to commercials daily telling me that it's a factor in something like 75% or all accidents, but I don't really believe it's a big factor in some so I dialed it back so as to not be so over the top.



    Drivers always think that they can drive any speed they want and that this doesn't affect accident rates or make it more likely for an accident to occur. This is just a popular misconception though and has no basis in fact. The driver "feels" in control and thus it's not a problem, but that feeling is really only ... well, a feeling.



    My favourite advice on this topic is from actual race car drivers. I don't remember the guy's name but I saw a documentary on the misconceptions of the everyday driver once and a very famous racing icon was asked what he thinks contributes to accidents or what makes someone a bad driver. His answer?



    Inattention and Overdriving. Speeding is overdriving by definition unless you have the reflexes and experience of a race car driver. I'm guessing that most of the people speeding *believe* they have these skills, but it's not likely is it?



    Speeding is a HUGE factor in accidents, and defenders of of it usually say something like "speeding doesn't cause accidents, poor driving and inattention causes accidents." But this makes no sense of course. This just redefines "going faster than my ability to control the car" (speeding), as "poor driving."



    It sure is poor driving. It's also known as "speeding."
  • Reply 37 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post


    On the other hand, a chip in every car that forced the driver to obey the speed limit would end more than half of all accidents and save thousands and thousands of lives a year, around the world.



    Just Sayin.



    I'd say the vast majority of accidents are down to idiocy rather than speed.

    In fact the UK Department Of Transport reports only 2% of accidents were caused by speeding in the UK.



    The top causes of accidents are:



    * Failed to look properly

    * Failed to judge other persons path/speed

    * Careless, reckless or in a hurry

    * Poor turn/maneuver

    * Loss of control

    * Going too fast for conditions (but under the posted limit)

    * Pedestrian failed to look properly

    * Following too close

    * Sudden braking
  • Reply 38 of 42
    lafelafe Posts: 252member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr Underhill View Post


    I'd say the vast majority of accidents are down to idiocy rather than speed.

    In fact the UK Department Of Transport reports only 2% of accidents were caused by speeding in the UK.



    The top causes of accidents are:



    * Failed to look properly

    * Failed to judge other persons path/speed

    * Careless, reckless or in a hurry

    * Poor turn/maneuver

    * Loss of control

    * Going too fast for conditions (but under the posted limit)

    * Pedestrian failed to look properly

    * Following too close

    * Sudden braking



    I'm sorry, but aren't a number of these really speeding, or involve speeding?



    * Failed to look properly - Could happen from a full-stop I guess.

    * Failed to judge other persons path/speed - In relation to my speed?

    * Careless, reckless or in a hurry - This means "speeding"

    * Poor turn/maneuver - While speeding?

    * Loss of control - Speeding can cause this.

    * Going too fast for conditions (but under the posted limit) - This mean "speeding".

    * Pedestrian failed to look properly - Ouch. Maybe he couldn't look quickly enough?

    * Following too close - This can mean "speeding". If the person in front of you is slowing down there's probably a reason. Your speed can be excessive for those conditions, even if you think you're under the limit.

    * Sudden braking - I'm on the fence for this one.



    2%? I don't believe that for a minute.



    Okay, we can get back to the actual thread now.
  • Reply 39 of 42
    wingswings Posts: 261member
    Only thing is, you'll have to have the app open and running on an iPhone before it will report anything. Might as well just place a phone call and ask the question.
  • Reply 40 of 42
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lafe View Post


    I'm sorry, but aren't a number of these really speeding, or involve speeding?



    * Failed to look properly - Could happen from a full-stop I guess.

    * Failed to judge other persons path/speed - In relation to my speed?

    * Careless, reckless or in a hurry - This means "speeding"

    * Poor turn/maneuver - While speeding?

    * Loss of control - Speeding can cause this.

    * Going too fast for conditions (but under the posted limit) - This mean "speeding".

    * Pedestrian failed to look properly - Ouch. Maybe he couldn't look quickly enough?

    * Following too close - This can mean "speeding". If the person in front of you is slowing down there's probably a reason. Your speed can be excessive for those conditions, even if you think you're under the limit.

    * Sudden braking - I'm on the fence for this one.



    2%? I don't believe that for a minute.



    Okay, we can get back to the actual thread now.



    Hey i was only responding to the debate. I'm cool about it all. You don't have to take my word for it see for yourself: http://www.dft.gov.uk/results?view=F...accidents&pg=1 look under "Contributory factors to road accidents"



    Ok back to the debate.
Sign In or Register to comment.