Andy Burns wrote on Mon, 3 Jun 2024 08:34:21 +0100 :

> The auto turning back on is only present in Android 15, which isn't out
> of beta yet, things could change.
>
> If people want to disable these new features, that's fine, but it should
> prevent them from benefitting from the new features. If you don't want
> to contribute to the findmydevice network that's OK, but don't expect to
> be able to use the findmydevice network when/if you lose your own phone ...

<RANT>

I think the many Android open source developers will likely find a way to
keep the bluetooth radio off in Android 15, but I wanted to respond here
specifically to your post saying that "things could change" for the better.

I doubt it.

Google, just last August made "precise location" a requirement, even though
Wi-Fi/Bluetooth are both superfluous for GPS positioning, to use many apps.

They did this by modifying the Google system framework APIs, I believe,
which is a set of APIs that many apps incorporate into their APK code.

You'll note that GSF is prevalent in mapping apps more so than many others.
<https://i.postimg.cc/0jkC05C6/gsf.jpg>

I complained about it but one person can't battle Google, as you well know
<https://xdaforums.com/t/privacy-do-you-know-a-way-to-permanently-disable-google-location-accuracy-precise-location-wi-fi-scanning-while-keeping-only-the-gps-radio-on.4543135/>

It's not clear if Google is following Apple's lead by lying about
everything except in court, or if Apple is following Google's lead,
but the end result is that Google has been successful in not being sued
(AFAIK) when Google lied about why they made precise location a mandatory
requirement, and as a result of Google getting away with that last year,
we're all now stuck with the fact that apps built with the GSF API
therefore also require precise location to be turned on, even if the app
itself has absolutely no need for precise location.

My point only is that this doesn't portend an ability to turn off bluetooth
in later releases because Google & Apple make too much $ off tracking us.

</RANT>

Andrew wrote:

> A phone is a commodity, which most of us get for free or for extremely low
> costs (e.g., T-Mobile gave everyone in the USA on their postpaid plan a
> free phone who wanted it - see my note below copied in the sig proving it).
>
> If we lose it, big deal. We lose a free phone. There's no real loss there.

They may give you a cheap/free phone when it suits them, but if you
lose/break it, will they replace it cheaply when you need it?

Andrew wrote:

> My point only is that this doesn't portend an ability to turn off bluetooth
> in later releases because Google & Apple make too much $ off tracking us.

But do they really make money from knowing where I am?

If I actively search for a supermarket or petrol station, usually I want
results near me, occasionally I'm interested in a remote location and
can let it know.

I'd be more convinced if every time I came with 50 ft of a
Starbucks/McDonalds/Wetherspoons, my phone got bombarded with special
offers to lure me in ...

Andy Burns wrote on Mon, 3 Jun 2024 10:36:10 +0100 :

>> If we lose it, big deal. We lose a free phone. There's no real loss there.
>
> They may give you a cheap/free phone when it suits them, but if you
> lose/break it, will they replace it cheaply when you need it?

All phones are the same. A phone is merely a commodity.
It makes calls, snaps pictures, and runs apps.

They're all the same.
Even so, let's say you lose it.

How much does a good phone cost nowadays?
About $200 to $300, right?

At most.

Yes, you can spend more (and you can spend less) but a phone is a mature
commodity, where a $1000 phone doesn't do much a $200/$300 phone can't.

To back up that point, allow me to ask the community at large a question.

Q: What does your expensive phone do that my free/$200 phone does not do?
<https://deviceguides.ee.co.uk/samsung/galaxy-a32-5g-android-11-0/specifications/>
<https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_a32_5g-10648.php>
<https://www.samsung.com/us/smartphones/galaxy-a32-5g/>

Note: I'm expecting stuff like more pixels and more memory and faster CPUs
and a bit more RAM perhaps, etc., but my point is that there isn't going to
be all that much of actual day-to-day import that cheap phones don't do.

Andy Burns wrote on Mon, 3 Jun 2024 10:45:39 +0100 :

>> My point only is that this doesn't portend an ability to turn off bluetooth
>> in later releases because Google & Apple make too much $ off tracking us.
>
> But do they really make money from knowing where I am?

I appreciate that you're asking good questions, where I think in this very
thread we saw an article that Mayayana cited that says yes.

Apple & Google make money off of keeping track of our location.

A. Which, I posit, is why Google made "precise location" almost mandatory.
B. And which, I posit, is why Google is making Bluetooth almost mandatory.

> If I actively search for a supermarket or petrol station, usually I want
> results near me, occasionally I'm interested in a remote location and
> can let it know.

I do not understand that sentence, unfortunately.
a. What does the bluetooth radio being on have to do with that search?
b. And besides, you can always search "near" anywhere.

So you don't need "precise location" to run a search.
Nor bluetooth.

Right?

> I'd be more convinced if every time I came with 50 ft of a
> Starbucks/McDonalds/Wetherspoons, my phone got bombarded with special
> offers to lure me in ...

It's selling your location that makes the money for them.

Whether or not you get bombarded with the results is how you set up the
phone, as you're well aware, I've never seen an ad on my phone, even though
some of the apps I've installed have ads (but my phone is set up right).

Also I have notifications set to judicious levels, so apps don't bombard me
with spurious notifications; and I don't use crappy apps either.

My point of the rant is both Google and Apple are making money by tracking
us, where what the rant is about are the lies that claim they're doing it
for our own good (but where they won't let us turn off tracking radios).

bad sector wrote:

> I would edit shutdown to a full reset+tweakathon once a month
My phone gets a security update (and hence restart) every month, also
unused apps lose their privileges.

On 6/2/2024 10:42 PM, Peter wrote:

> Google's "Find My Debvice Network" by Stan Brown (4 days ago)
> https://comp.mobile.android.narkive.com/5eS53TT8/google-s-find-my-debvice-network
>
> One relevant post with a cite showing the phones never turn off being this.
>
> "thanks to specialized Pixel hardware, Pixel 8 and 8 Pro owners
> will also be able to find their devices if they're powered off
> or the battery is dead"
> <https://blog.google/products/android/android-find-my-device/>
>

That's an interesting one. Thanks. It sounds like it could only
be a self-powered transmitter. Or a long-range RFID tag. The
author doesn't explain. He doesn't even call it a feature or a
hardware gizmo. It's an "experience". Experience seems to have
become the established tech jargon for "product". Microsoft uses
the same jargon.

The tags for items sound like RFID-ish hardware. But RFID is
short-range. I realize now that I have no idea how Apple "cootie
tags" work.

> In that same thread is another cite about bluetooth turning back on.
>
> "Android 15 will add a new feature that can automatically turn
> on Bluetooth the day after you've disabled it.
> Your phone's Bluetooth radio is used for several key Android features,
> such as Quick Share and Find My Device.
> Disabling Bluetooth will slightly improve battery, but the trade-off
> is that your device won't be able to contribute to Google's Find My
> Device network."
> <https://www.androidauthority.com/android-15-bluetooth-auto-on-3431445/>
>

That one is vague. It CAN turn back on. You SHOULD be able to disable
it... The author doesn't seem to actually know what he's talking about.
That article seems to explain part of the function, though: Each Android
phone
talking to others and also calling home. But I thought bluetooth had a
short range, like a few feet. Do you happen to know the range of this
function?
If it's bluetooth-only then how do people trace the location of things like
stolen power tools kept in storage lockers? (There was an article about
such a case this past week.)

It's certainly very creepy. Though I suspect that most Apple devotees
see it more like the child who likes to be tucked in at night. Holy Lord
Jobs and the Most Saintly Timmy Cook are watching over them. I suppose
that's how authoritarian regimes get established. Whether it's Trump or
Hitler,
they succeed because enough people view them as protectors. So Apple
and Google are facing a dual situation. On the one hand, it's a great spying
opportunity. On the other hand, many of their customers actually want this
functionality.

It's actually reminiscient of 1984. There's an implication that you
now have
a social duty to be tracked so that your neighbor can find his stolen
bicycle.
"Mr. Smith? We can't see your cellphone, Mr. Smith. Please turn on
monitoring
and be identified."

On 6/3/2024 2:21 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
> Newyana2 wrote:
>
>> If it's really true that phones
>> are now being made that can't be powered down, that's
>> shocking and nonsensical.
>
> To be clear, certain parts of them can remain on while the majority of
> the phone is definitely off.

By which you mean a homing beacon to enable the cootie
tag function? Then again, if there's only a homing beacon
the phones turned off can't function as part of the network
of cootie tag trackers. This has got me curious to look up
how it actually works. The media seem to be specculating as
much as we are.

Larry Wolff, 2024-05-31 23:20:

> In a document detailing several mobile device best practices, the NSA
> recommends users turn their devices off and then back on once every week to
> protect against zero-click exploits, which attackers often use to eavesdrop
> on and collect data from phones.
>
> https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21018353-nsa-mobile-device-best-practices
> Does this advice hold true for PC's also?

Turning the device completely off will kill all running programs
including malware which an attacker managed to start. If the malware
could not install a service which starts automatically, this will
mitigate *some* possible attacks.

However, when you this only once a week, you still give an attacker up
to one week to abuse your device. So I am not sure, if this is really
that useful. Also if there may be security issues which allow malware to
gain root access and then a device reboot won't help you either.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

micky, 2024-06-02 06:00:

> In comp.mobile.android, on Sat, 1 Jun 2024 14:18:49 +0100, Andy Burns
> <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
[...]
>> <https://media.defense.gov/2021/Sep/16/2002855921/-1/-1/0/MOBILE_DEVICE_BEST_PRACTICES_FINAL_V3%20-%20COPY.PDF>
>
> very intesting. Especially:
>
> Unexpected pop-ups like [the one shown] are
> usually malicious. If one appears,
> forcibly close all applications
> (i.e., iPhone®2: double tap the
> Home button* or Android®3:
> click “recent apps” soft key
>
> I guess Android®3 is from long ago, but perhaps it's still true, that
> tapping the “recent apps” soft key will close all applications!!! ?????
>
> And the “recent apps” soft key is the square symbol at the bottom, is
> that right?

Right. However, the document is from October 2020, so not that old. And
it does not refer to "Android 3" but the footnote number 3 below.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

On 6/3/2024 5:45 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
> Andrew wrote:
>
>> My point only is that this doesn't portend an ability to turn off
>> bluetooth
>> in later releases because Google & Apple make too much $ off tracking us.
>
> But do they really make money from knowing where I am?
>
Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. You need to remember that Google
and Apple are both running their own ad systems. For Google,
spyware and ad middlemanning is essentially their whole business.
Google operates by vast, comprehensive data collection. Apple
operates via spyware combined with control over devices.

Google have deals with credit card companies to know your
purchases. They have deals with stores to track you location
in stores. They track and sell geofencing data to police... Google
maps. GMail. Google analytics on websites. Google fonts. Doorbell
cameras. All of that has one basic purpose, which is to track every
personal detail possible in order to sell that knowledge to people
paying for ad placement; and increasingly selling it to anyone who
will pay.

Remember when Google was caught "slurping" wifi data with their
streetview vans? That gives an indication of just how useful data
is to them. Any data. Even the tiniest fact about you is gold because
it can be instantly added to other data and cross referenced. They're
collecting City Hall records, police blotters, media reports, credit
card usage data, your personal movements and actions... whatever
involves digital functionality, Google has their hands on. I wouldn't
be surprised if they're getting data from "smart" devices, from
washing machines to dildoes.

( Don't laugh:
https://www.theregister.com/2017/03/13/internet_of_dildos_firm_3_75m_privacy_lawsuit/
)

Google has not been a search engine company for a long time.
Nearly everything they do is free tools and services to enable
tracking, which makes them $10s of billions per quarter. It's really
the ONLY thing they make money from, aside from some money
from commercial map usage and so on. And that's not even getting
into their spyware contracts with others: Retail spying. Spying
in concert with credit card companies. They may do deals with
the likes of Lexis Nexus to use car tracking data. Though they
probably don't need to. Their maps and driving directions are
already tracking a large percentage of people who no longer dare
to drive anywhere without a computer telling them how to do it.
Google also recently contracted with Reddit to rifle through their
posts at will and use them in their own business.

Geofencing:

https://techcrunch.com/2021/08/19/google-geofence-warrants/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2019/12/11/google-gives-feds-1500-leads-to-arsonist-smartphones-in-unprecedented-geofence-search/

Obviously that would be merely a side hustle compared to ads, but
it all adds up. And it has very real implications beyond ads. The
Cambridge Analytica/Brexit scandal is one example, which a movie
was made about.

Even more brazen was Eric Schmidt's attempt to sell the 2016
presidential election to Hillary Clinton by selling her access to
Google's database:

https://web.archive.org/web/20170110050350/http://www.itwire.com/government-tech-policy/75531-google-s-schmidt-drew-up-draft-plan-for-clinton-in-2014.html

She didn't go for the idea... Because she thought it was dishonest
or because she thought it was too expensive or because she simply
didn't understand Google's power? I don't know. I would suspect the
latter. Schmidt was suggesting a $1.5 billion project. Interestingly,
he had also calculated how they could use low-paid lackeys that
they'd dump like hot potatoes as soon as the campaign was over.
Hardly the strategy of a political liberal:

"Key is the development of a single record for a voter that aggregates
all that is known about them... New tools should be developed to measure
reach and impact of paid, earned and social media. The impact of press
coverage should be measurable in reach and impact, and TV effectiveness
measured by attention and other surveys."

"Build tools that measure the rate and spread of stories and rumours,
and model how it works and who has the biggest impact. Tools can tell us
about the origin of stories and the impact of any venue, person or theme."

"Analytics can model demographics, social factors and many other
attributes of the needed voters," he wrote. "It should be possible to
link the voter records in Van (a database) with upcoming databases from
companies like Comcast and others for media measurement purposes."

Schmidt was proposing a comprehensive propaganda campaign,
targetted at the level of individuals, to ensure that as many people
as possible were getting Schmidt's engineered misinformation to
turn them toward Clinton. This is not ambiguous. It was an attempt
to short-circuit democracy. Some might say that Trump justified
the effort, but it's still anti-democratic.

Interestingly, Schmidt insisted that all involved must work without
profit. So he was proposing a commercial enterprise, to steal a public
election, orchestrated by partisans. A kind of propaganda coup. While
the Brexit scenario was exploiting data to identify and talk to
disillusioned voters, the Google/Schmidt deal would have been a
vast, targetted disinformation campaign.

Part of Schmidt's motive may have been sheer Napoleonic
vanity. But the overall enterprise would have constituted the
ultimate lobbying success -- not only bribing the President but actually
selling the election to her, at least in Schmidt's eyes. (And we shouldn't
assume that tech will support progressive, humane ideals. Those
billionaires are getting older. When they were young they wanted
social progress. Now they favor tax breaks and deregulation.)

Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
> Andy Burns wrote on Mon, 3 Jun 2024 10:45:39 +0100 :
>
>>> My point only is that this doesn't portend an ability to turn off bluetooth
>>> in later releases because Google & Apple make too much $ off tracking us.
>>
>> But do they really make money from knowing where I am?
>
> I appreciate that you're asking good questions, where I think in this very
> thread we saw an article that Mayayana cited that says yes.
>
> Apple & Google make money off of keeping track of our location.

Is this another of your unsubstantiated claims?

Newyana2 wrote:

> Interesting link.

Just to make you aware, that every(?) time you reply to this group,
you're also cc:ing individuals by email, it doesn't bother me, I wasn't
sure if you're aware you're doing it?

If you use the reply button in TB's main toolbar it won't happen, I
think it's the follow-up button in the message header toolbar that does
do it ... Or maybe TB78 behaves differently?

Chris, 2024-06-03 16:52:

> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>> Andy Burns wrote on Mon, 3 Jun 2024 10:45:39 +0100 :
>>
>>>> My point only is that this doesn't portend an ability to turn off bluetooth
>>>> in later releases because Google & Apple make too much $ off tracking us.
>>>
>>> But do they really make money from knowing where I am?
>>
>> I appreciate that you're asking good questions, where I think in this very
>> thread we saw an article that Mayayana cited that says yes.
>>
>> Apple & Google make money off of keeping track of our location.
>
> Is this another of your unsubstantiated claims?

No, it is called "location based service". This was already a business
model way before smartphones existed. In the past phone companies sold
location based services based on triangulation of the base stations
connected to the phone.

BTDT - I have written software using this to locate the next available
pharmacy with emergency services in Germany when a user requests this by
either sending an SMS to a specific number and he will then get the list
of pharmacies as response or by using a WAP browser and visiting a
specific WAP site which offers this as a service.

Of course the phone company asked for money for every location request.
And this had to be paid by the company providing that pharmacy location
service and not by the users.

Nowadays location based services are of course more often used to
distribute advertisements or to determine good locations to open the
next fast food restaurant etc..

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

Andy Burns, 2024-06-03 11:45:

> Andrew wrote:
>
>> My point only is that this doesn't portend an ability to turn off bluetooth
>> in later releases because Google & Apple make too much $ off tracking us.
>
> But do they really make money from knowing where I am?

Yes. Location based services where already a business model before we
had smartphones.

--
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

On 6/3/2024 2:19 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
> Your Name wrote:
>
>> Wishy-washy "gestures" with zero visual guidance are incredibly silly
>> and user-UNfriendly. An actual button (whether physical or on-screen)
>> that you can see will always be a far far better method.
>
> Depends on the device, I won't be buying a car that requires use of a
> touch screen, let alone gestures, give me physical buttons.
>
> But for a phone/tablet that is handheld, and already uses a touch
> screen, I have no problems with gestures.

But cars without buttons usually allow verbal commands so one can keep
your eyes on the road.

On 03/06/2024 16:25, Andy Burns wrote:
> Newyana2 wrote:
>
>> Interesting link.
>
> Just to make you aware, that every(?) time you reply to this group,
> you're also cc:ing individuals by email, it doesn't bother me, I wasn't
> sure if you're aware you're doing it?
>
> If you use the reply button in TB's main toolbar it won't happen, I
> think it's the follow-up button in the message header toolbar that does
> do it ... Or maybe TB78 behaves differently?

I don't think so. In Thunderbird, usually I <rt-click> the post to
which I intend to reply and choose 'Followup to newsgroup', but on this
occasion I also tried the 'Followup' button in the post header in the
Message Pane, and the resulting post had exactly the same addressing as
my usual method, whereas clicking 'Reply' in the post header created a
PM to your given email address.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
> Chris, 2024-06-03 16:52:
>
>> Andrew <andrew@spam.net> wrote:
>>> Andy Burns wrote on Mon, 3 Jun 2024 10:45:39 +0100 :
>>>
>>>>> My point only is that this doesn't portend an ability to turn off bluetooth
>>>>> in later releases because Google & Apple make too much $ off tracking us.
>>>>
>>>> But do they really make money from knowing where I am?
>>>
>>> I appreciate that you're asking good questions, where I think in this very
>>> thread we saw an article that Mayayana cited that says yes.
>>>
>>> Apple & Google make money off of keeping track of our location.
>>
>> Is this another of your unsubstantiated claims?
>
> No, it is called "location based service". This was already a business
> model way before smartphones existed. In the past phone companies sold
> location based services based on triangulation of the base stations
> connected to the phone.
>
> BTDT - I have written software using this to locate the next available
> pharmacy with emergency services in Germany when a user requests this by
> either sending an SMS to a specific number and he will then get the list
> of pharmacies as response or by using a WAP browser and visiting a
> specific WAP site which offers this as a service.
>
> Of course the phone company asked for money for every location request.
> And this had to be paid by the company providing that pharmacy location
> service and not by the users.
>
> Nowadays location based services are of course more often used to
> distribute advertisements or to determine good locations to open the
> next fast food restaurant etc..

Which are reasonable and acceptable use cases. "Andrew "is insinuating more
nefarious data capture.

Newyana2 wrote on Mon, 3 Jun 2024 09:08:20 -0400 :

>>> My point only is that this doesn't portend an ability to turn off
>>> bluetooth
>>> in later releases because Google & Apple make too much $ off tracking us.
>>
>> But do they really make money from knowing where I am?
>>
> Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. You need to remember that Google
> and Apple are both running their own ad systems. For Google,
> spyware and ad middlemanning is essentially their whole business.
> Google operates by vast, comprehensive data collection. Apple
> operates via spyware combined with control over devices.

Keeping with the main point of the rant, and in accordance with what
Mayayana said above (and which Andy rightfully questioned), there is no
doubt in my mind that the reason Google & Apple are doing this is to make
money off of tracking us...

a. That's why, I posit, they added the mandatory precise location
b. And now, they're adding bluetooth that can't be kept turned off
c. And they've added phones which can't even be fully turned off

My only goal, really, is to be able to turn that stuff off.
That's it.

As long as they make it so intelligent people can turn it off, I'm OK.
Let the proletariat masses be led to slaughter by marketing - but not me.

An example of the masses being led to slaughter, but not me... is this:
<https://xdaforums.com/t/privacy-do-you-have-3-brand-new-default-on-advertising-switches-recently-inserted-into-your-android-for-brand-new-android-13-targeted-advertising.4639991/>

Another example of the masses led to slaughter, but not me, is this.
<https://xdaforums.com/t/app-6-0-app-finder-the-most-advanced-search-engine-for-android-apps-50-free-plans-here.4578809/post-89024201>

Notice that developers allow us to divorce ourselves from Google and Apple
tracking, where in the case of Apple the tracking on app installations is
tremendously intrusive since Apple inserts a unique ID that only you have
into every app you install on the iPhone from their app store.

Even if Google tried to do that, they couldn't - but they don't (only Apple
tracks every single app IPA you install - Google can't track every APK).

My main point is simply that as long as I can turn the Apple/Google
tracking, I'm fine with that.

It's when they make tracking mandatory (and lie about why) that bothers me.

<well-informed fact-based evidence-based rant>

I am always logically sensible as I make assessments based on fact.
In cases of lies though, you have to infer them based on actions.

The rant is that they lie about why they're doing this, since you can see
in my article on the precise location that their lies are brazenly told.
<https://xdaforums.com/t/privacy-do-you-know-a-way-to-permanently-disable-google-location-accuracy-precise-location-wi-fi-scanning-while-keeping-only-the-gps-radio-on.4543135/>

Being intelligent and resourceful myself, I actually don't care so much
that the hoi polloi do everything that the marketing people tell them to do
(like sheep led to slaughter); but what I deplore is that they're making it
almost impossible for even the intelligent people to keep the radios off.

Let's be clear that a subtle portion of my rant against Apple's and
Google's brazen lies as to *why* they're preventing us from turning off our
tracking radios is partly that the morons (who outnumber the intelligentsia
1000 to 1) are also tracking us - which is easy to prove with Wi-APs.

The end result is we're literally being tracked by the main entities,
Google & Apple, and, perhaps worse, by every single moron out there.

That bothers me when Google/Apple make it so that we can't turn it off.

</rant>

On 6/3/2024 11:25 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
> Newyana2 wrote:
>
>> Interesting link.
>
> Just to make you aware, that every(?) time you reply to this group,
> you're also cc:ing individuals by email, it doesn't bother me, I wasn't
> sure if you're aware you're doing it?
>
> If you use the reply button in TB's main toolbar it won't happen, I
> think it's the follow-up button in the message header toolbar that does
> do it ... Or maybe TB78 behaves differently?
>
Thanks. I was trying to remember to remove the direct
replies, thinking it was a quirk of newer TBird. In OE I used
to have to use Reply All or it wouldn't go through. I'm trying
your advice now.

Arno Welzel wrote on Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:43:39 +0200 :

>>> My point only is that this doesn't portend an ability to turn off bluetooth
>>> in later releases because Google & Apple make too much $ off tracking us.
>>
>> But do they really make money from knowing where I am?
>
> Yes. Location based services where already a business model before we
> had smartphones.

I agree that it's widely known that Google/Apple make money off of tracking
us - which - I posit - is their motive for making it such that they are
suddenly turning radios on that we turned off (and worse - both Apple &
Google are brazenly lying about why they're turning our radios back on).

BTW, as evidence that we're not only tracked by Apple/Google, but we're
also tracked by every moron out there who doesn't know how to set up a
phone (which, let's face it, is 999 out of 1,000 smartphone owners)...

1. Apple just got caught with a severe privacy flaw which allows
anyone in the world to track your exact movements if they simply
know a single thing about you - which is your unique MAC address.
<https://misc.phone.mobile.iphone.narkive.com/hyRmC1x9/surveillance-risk-apple-s-wifi-based-positioning-system>

2. Apple has no plans to fix that extremely invasive privacy flaw,
(since Apple makes money on it existing most likely); so what
does Apple suggest as the workaround?
<https://misc.phone.mobile.iphone.narkive.com/c5ZfZyuW/new-vulnerability-in-apple-s-positioning-service-allows-troop-movements-to-be-tracked>

Yup. You guessed it. Apple suggests you add "_nomap" to the SSID.

3. Even if 1 out of 1000 people understood that and therefore did it,
what Apple doesn't tell you is that only 1 out of a million people
know that appending "_nomap" doesn't stop the morons out there from
*uploading* your private information to the Google/Apple databases!
<https://xdaforums.com/t/privacy-does-android-upload-your-home-ap-ssid-bssid-gps-if-the-home-ap-broadcast-beacon-is-hidden.4284897/>

Yes. You heard that right.
If you don't know this, then you're not the 1 out of a million
people who are not morons - which is the point of my recent rant.

People are incredibly stupid when it comes to doing what marketing tells
them to do - without even thinking about how it still allows tracking.

The only way (that I know of) to prevent that *upload* of your unique MAC
address into Google's & Apple's tracking databases by the morons who drive
by your house every day is to hide the broadcast of that BSSID package.

Note: Every moron out there who knows that hiding a broadcast for reasons
of security will scream it doesn't help with security - and guess what -
you think I don't know that. I didn't say a word about security.

I'm talking about privacy.

I don't mind, for example, that the contacts sqlite database is uploaded by
every prole out there who does exactly what marketing tells them to do, as
long as I can operate my phone independently of a contacts sqlite database.
<https://xdaforums.com/t/privacy-does-android-upload-your-home-ap-ssid-bssid-gps-if-the-home-ap-broadcast-beacon-is-hidden.4284897/>

It's when Google & Apple lie about why they're doing what they're doing,
and at the same time, those lies justify them turning on radios (like your
bluetooth radio) that you explicitly turned off... that gets me upset.

1. Apple/Google make money tracking us
2. As long as I can turn that off, I'm ok with morons led to slaughter
3. It's when Apple/Google turn my radios back on that I get upset
4. Especially when they lie about why they're turning my radios back on

In summary, my rant is that 1 out of a million people understand this
stuff, so most of the millions out there are actually joining with Apple
and with Google to track you every moment of the day everywhere you go.

Again, I accept that fact as long as I can be the one out of a million
people who knows the simple tricks for turning that tracking off.

It's when Apple & Google lie about why they're making tracking harder to
turn off (e.g., bluetooth radios that turn themselves back on) that I get
disturbed.

Let them lead the million sheep out there to slaughter; but not me.

The only two things I ask of Apple/Google in this regard are...
1. If I turn a radio off, I want that radio off until *I* turn it back on.
2. And... Don't lie about why they're turning my radios back on!

Andrew wrote on Mon, 3 Jun 2024 20:42:54 -0000 (UTC) :

> I don't mind, for example, that the contacts sqlite database is uploaded by
> every prole out there who does exactly what marketing tells them to do, as
> long as I can operate my phone independently of a contacts sqlite database.
> <https://xdaforums.com/t/privacy-does-android-upload-your-home-ap-ssid-bssid-gps-if-the-home-ap-broadcast-beacon-is-hidden.4284897/>

Ooops. Wrong reference.

This is the XDA Developers' forum reference to what intelligent people can
do to not upload the contacts of all their kids, friends, family and their
kids, to Apple & Google and developer databases - simply because only one
out of a million people is aware of why every app that can is grabbing your
contacts sqlite database (one obvious solution being to empty it out).

<https://xdaforums.com/t/privacy-what-apps-methodology-do-you-use-to-isolate-your-default-android-contacts-sqlite-database-to-make-it-private-export-import-into-dialer.4636385/>

The point is this:
1. I don't mind Apple/Google wanting us to keep all our radios on
2. As long as I can turn them off

What I mind is when they unilaterally turn back on a radio I turned off.
And then both Apple & Google brazenly lie about why they're doing that.

As if we're all stupid.

Chris wrote on Mon, 3 Jun 2024 18:01:39 -0000 (UTC) :

>> Nowadays location based services are of course more often used to
>> distribute advertisements or to determine good locations to open the
>> next fast food restaurant etc..
>
> Which are reasonable and acceptable use cases. "Andrew "is insinuating more
> nefarious data capture.

Hi Chris,

Unfortunately, 999 out of 1,000 posters to this newsgroup don't know what
they're talking about - so let's test if you know what you're saying.

To do that is simple: *Answer this fundamental question*.

Why has Google unilaterally made it so that you can't do routing without
turning on the Wi-Fi "precise location" when GPS worked just fine for
decades?

Before you answer that, read this directly related reference please.
<https://xdaforums.com/t/privacy-do-you-know-a-way-to-permanently-disable-google-location-accuracy-precise-location-wi-fi-scanning-while-keeping-only-the-gps-radio-on.4543135/>

Then answer the basic and rather simple fundamental question please.

Andrew wrote on Mon, 3 Jun 2024 20:13:28 -0000 (UTC) :

> Let's be clear that a subtle portion of my rant against Apple's and
> Google's brazen lies as to *why* they're preventing us from turning off our
> tracking radios is partly that the morons (who outnumber the intelligentsia
> 1000 to 1) are also tracking us - which is easy to prove with Wi-APs.

I belatedly realized I hadn't backed up that claim, but since only 1 out of
a million people know this information, here's the backup reference cite.
<https://xdaforums.com/t/privacy-does-android-upload-your-home-ap-ssid-bssid-gps-if-the-home-ap-broadcast-beacon-is-hidden.4284897/>

If you don't read that reference, just know these two facts, that only one
out of a million people seem to understand (which will be you after this).

1. Even if you add "_nomap" to your SSID, all the phones of all the morons
driving by your house are already set up to *upload* your BSSID and your
exact GPS Location to the Google/Apple/Wigle/Netstumbler/Mozilla/etc
server farms.

In simpler terms... the "_nomap" does nothing to protect you from the
upload by all the cellphones which are set up to the default settings.

2. All the "_nomap" does, is it tells those server farms to eventually
scrub your unique BSSID & GPS location from their servers.

But only well-behaved companies will do that, right?

3. That's why you need to know what only one in a million people know,
which is you *also* have to check the router box to "hide broadcast".

This is not for security, as the packets can be sniffed for the SSID
and the GPS location can be ascertained and uploaded to, say, WiGLe.

It's for privacy.

By hiding the broadcast, you insulate yourself from all the morons out
there who have their phones set up in the default configuration.

I posit only 1 out of a million people know this information, which is why
I rant not only about Apple/Microsoft/Google - but about every moron out
there who does everything that the Apple/Google/Microsoft marketing tells
them to.

They're like sheep led to slaughter - but even worse - they're the ones
feeding the Apple/Google/Microsoft marketing machine our private details.

Newyana2 <newyana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>> If it's really true that phones
>>> are now being made that can't be powered down, that's
>>> shocking and nonsensical.
>>
>> To be clear, certain parts of them can remain on while the majority of
>> the phone is definitely off.
>
> By which you mean a homing beacon to enable the cootie
> tag function? Then again, if there's only a homing beacon
> the phones turned off can't function as part of the network
> of cootie tag trackers. This has got me curious to look up
> how it actually works. The media seem to be specculating as
> much as we are.

I don't know how they do it, but there's no way they can do it without
indicating that the phone is off, when it's not really off at all.

It's still tracking even long after you thought you had shut it off.