- cross-posted to:
- ecorp
- cross-posted to:
- ecorp
You must log in or register to comment.
And here’s the realistic explanation for why and why now:
"…Orin Kerr, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, wrote on X on Wednesday that “from a public policy standpoint, that seems like a bummer.”
“Geofencing has solved a bunch of really major cases that were otherwise totally cold,” he wrote.
“And there are lots of ways of doing the legal process (including Google’s warrant policy, although that’s just one way) that are a lot more privacy protective than ordinary warrants. But I can see why this might be in Google’s business interest. If there isn’t a lot of economic value to Google in keeping the data, and having it means you need to get embroiled in privacy debates over what you do with it, better for Google to drop it.”
It’s a good thing! It never should have been allowed in the first place. But, Google didn’t give a fuck until it caused them enough hassle. Doing this is just a way to avoid something more expensive later, it isn’t a strong principled stand. And I’d bet small amounts that they’ll still have a way to use the data anyway. It won’t be some magic wand that means Google can’t make money off of it.
Exactly!
making it impossible for the company to access it
Sure. They won’t be able to access the data itself, but they’ll have already used the data as it was being generated to add metrics to your profile. So they don’t need it anymore if it’s already been utilized.
Liars always find a way to phrase things to misdirect.
Yes, they still can build a targeted profile per user, but no longer store a database of who was in an area that the police can issue a broad warrant to find out. So they get to have their cake and eat it too!
“Geofencing has solved a bunch of really major cases that were otherwise totally cold,” he wrote.
Citation needed. Solving a case for a police officer means finding a person who looks guilty, not that they’re actually guilty. Even if they’re convicted they could’ve just been convicted by being at the wrong place at the wrong time.
Google’s blog (linked in the article) offers more info on the changes. https://blog.google/products/maps/updates-to-location-history-and-new-controls-coming-soon-to-maps/
The key points are that Google Maps location history will be stored on-device, with an option to back it up (encrypted) to the cloud so if you switch devices you can keep the history. The default auto-delete will be three months, and you can increase or disable that limit.
I guess that means location history will no longer be accessible via the web site.
I don’t think Google has implemented any E2EE system for backups before (correct me if I’m wrong). I wonder how exactly this will work.
Yes, this seems designed to target the broad “who was in this area” warrants. Must have been a big enough headache for them that they came up with this new system. For me, I keep this location on indefinitely. Has been handy for me in a couple situations: I’m a scientist and helped me reconstruct my field work locations when I lost some field notes, and it helped me contact trace when I caught covid!
arstechnica has a pretty good writeup about this.
As with all things Google the only way to win is to not play.
about goddamn time
Wayyyy overdue. I havent been using google maps because of this total infringement on rights and the staggering number of criminal cases that you can become a suspect for just by being in the area
