|
| ▲ | haagch 40 minutes ago | parent | next [-] |
| It really doesn't matter. When you power on an android smartphone with google play installed for the first time you are presented with a gate screen that asks you to consent to google's privacy policy. You can't use the phone without accepting. (for example https://forum.fairphone.com/t/finalising-the-setup-wizard-wi...) Using smartphones with such a setup should not become required by a European government on a fundamental level. |
|
| ▲ | fsflover 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| So please tell us what the difference is. |
| |
| ▲ | charcircuit an hour ago | parent [-] | | With surveillance a person gets surveilled with telemetry a person doesn't. Telemetry is collecting information about the operation of the device. The goal of telemetry is to understand how the device is operating where with surveillance it is about seeing what a person is doing. | | |
| ▲ | tavavex an hour ago | parent [-] | | The types of data that's collected for these two purposes have a significant overlap. Sufficiently detailed telemetry is indistinguishable from surveillance because even if the goal isn't to target you right now, they will still have the secondary option of going back and inspecting all that data you sent them if they ever are interested in you. Another secondary use of telemetry is selling it to someone else to squeeze out a bit more money. There's no downside to doing this, so any business that collects a lot of varied telemetry and likes making money might as well do it. And once the data is in the hands of adtech businesses, it becomes a whole lot more like tracking you personally than just collecting some data for development. In Google's case, you don't even need to hand it over to anyone else, everything stays in-house. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | AJ007 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Are you a lobbyist for Google, Apple, Meta, or the adtech industry? Because if you aren't, you are parroting their bullshit. |
