The Secret Service has used a technology called Locate X which uses location data harvested from ordinary apps installed on phones. Because users agreed to an opaque terms of service page, the Secret Service believes it doesn't need a warrant.
You must log in or register to comment.
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn’t great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don’t promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
- 0 users online
- 57 users / day
- 383 users / week
- 1.5K users / month
- 5.7K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 3K Posts
- 75.4K Comments
- Modlog
Agreeing to location services for the purpose of performing the apps intended use, is not the same as agreeing that the government can track your location on a whim. Where the fuck are the constitutional lawyers who fight this kind of egregious constitutional violation?
The trick that the Government has learned is that it’s easier and cheaper to buy your location data from a third party.
No warrant necessarily since the data is available to anyone who wants to buy it.
It shouldn’t be though. Nothing a company gleans from your use of a product should be available for purchase by any third party. This should have been legislated two decades ago.
That’s the best part, all our legislators were bought decades ago.
Reminds me of that disney case where they claimed agreeing to the terms on disney+ meant they could kill that guys wife.
what???
Disney say man can’t sue over wife’s death because he agreed to Disney+ terms of service
That’s insane
Welcome to Post Sarire Reality.
*Satire
There should be an edit function on a comment. Of course clients and federation vary.
Apologies, those last two sentences were unnecessary and rude.
There is but I didn’t want to visibly edit the comment 14 hours (or however long) after I made it.
Hope that’s ok with you and a good enough reason for my choice. Or do you have more ‘advice’?We live in a post sanity world