[i_plod_an_dr_void]

Perhaps the old classic needs an update..... signs signs everywhere......nowadays....google-only long-haired freaky people need apply........to spies, spies everywhere Google spies...... not by the 5man electrical band, but the 7 shielded blackberry security band....lol.... whoooooo!

[i_plod_an_dr_void]

The first IOT device Blackberry should market, is one that stops Alexa or Google Home from surrupticiously listening in to all activity occuring in your home, by blocking unnecessary data transmissions from the device. - like the mute button on the remote, so your family can continue to confidently enjoy the privacy it has had since the dawn of time, and is just now being invaded upon.
The Blackberry "Cone of Silence" - Get Smart.

[i_plod_an_dr_void]

Maybe Blackberry can market an IOT personal jammer so that guests in a house aren't being 'secretly recorded' through Alexa or Google home as well.

[Chuck Finley69]

Imagine World War II vets after getting brand new bell telephones in their houses finding out that the operator or neighbours were spying on their party-line calls, and jotting down all that information for later use or resale. World War III would have started right there and then. But instead private lines became the standard......and so....that just about puts us there on the map....

Hasn't the Internet always been a party line since the consumer jumped on board in the 90s? I mean, I remember targeted pop-up ads with the ability to pay extra if you didn't want to see them in some browsers. Wasn't that an ISP thing back then?

I think we as consumers are part of the problem. Even with physical retail, we consumers are cheap. We complain about cheaply made products and foreign imports but who's the largest retailer on the planet? How many stores do consumers pass to shop there?

Back on topic. We've seen the enemy and it's ourselves.

[Chuck Finley69]

Perhaps the old classic needs an update..... signs signs everywhere......nowadays....google-only long-haired freaky people need apply........to spies, spies everywhere Google spies...... not by the 5man electrical band, but the 7 shielded blackberry security band....lol.... whoooooo!

I prefer Tesla version from the 80s, but that's just me IPA...

[notovinar]

Maybe Blackberry can market an IOT personal jammer so that guests in a house aren't being 'secretly recorded' through Alexa or Google home as well.

I don't know about you, but if I had a guest who insisted on carrying a device that would break into my wifi network, sniff packets on my wifi network, and actively interfere with packets the guest didn't approve of, I probably would not invite that guest back to my home again.

[sorinv]

Guardian should just shush.

https://order-order.com/2018/03/29/g...facebook-data/

Basically any site/org that enables login via Facebook like Guardian are in cahoots in terms of information scraping of Facebook users.

Yes. They all do it. Hopefully, the new data collection laws EU have come up and Canada apparently plans to adopt will be truly enforced.


Posted via CB10

[sorinv]

Back on topic. We've seen the enemy and it's ourselves.

It's not as simple as that.
In the days when your contacts' information was in your head (and your head was not in the cloud like in the case of most people today) it was normal to expect that nobody would copy that contact data elsewhere.
It can easily be implemented even today with all services on the Internet if the political will existed to do so.

Posted via CB10

[Chuck Finley69]

It's not as simple as that.
In the days when your contacts' information was in your head (and your head was not in the cloud like in the case of most people today) it was normal to expect that nobody would copy that contact data elsewhere.
It can easily be implemented even today with all services on the Internet if the political will existed to do so.

Posted via CB10

My point is that if someone is offered to sell you out for monetary gain, they'll sell you out every time.

[i_plod_an_dr_void]

My point is that if someone is offered to sell you out for monetary gain, they'll sell you out every time.

What a timely topic for today....apparently only 1 in 12 would sell you out....Good Friday and all...and even that one seemed to have some kind of regret or demon about doing it.

[i_plod_an_dr_void]

I don't know about you, but if I had a guest who insisted on carrying a device that would break into my wifi network, sniff packets on my wifi network, and actively interfere with packets the guest didn't approve of, I probably would not invite that guest back to my home again.

Correspondingly would you like to have a host through his google home or alexa sip (like wiretap) any personal verbal data including conversation and store it for later potential weaponizing with that excellent voice recognition AI? Or must we all now establish a monkish existence with no conversation whatsoever in front of those devilish children who can't keep secrets (Alexa, Siri and all) , since we can never be confident that they aren't listening and soaking it all in.

[stlabrat]

subscription model are coming back now... however, that does not fix the problem. demographically, there are group of people "prefer" to be sold - the one appear to be "know it all" - consume latest drama at all the time, either on fashion, or politics alike... Just look at the TV viewing of latest 18 million chaps were geographically concentrated in some of neck of the woods... if you get rid of facebook/google... chaps still want free cheap stuff, like wifi in coffee shop... one way or the other, they will fall to the next scheme. Apple charge one time fee (hardware) and cloud fee... good for them to band into user head it is Superior service... BB fail to convince its user group to fork over 5.00 (and carrier refuse to collect it.. under the assumption of lost revenue to itself... rather than a selling feature of security). Shame on BB. I see enough chaps on this board want Whatsapp, facebook, etc. must all click the 30 more pages of user agreement and believe it is small price to pay and willingly to be in the different degree to be "used" exchange for low cost... If need to fix things, chaps need to exam their brain 1st IMHO (including mine.. although I don't have FB, no tweet, not linkedin... but sure googled enough to be on the list).

[Chuck Finley69]

subscription model are coming back now... however, that does not fix the problem. demographically, there are group of people "prefer" to be sold - the one appear to be "know it all" - consume latest drama at all the time, either on fashion, or politics alike... Just look at the TV viewing of latest 18 million chaps were geographically concentrated in some of neck of the woods... if you get rid of facebook/google... chaps still want free cheap stuff, like wifi in coffee shop... one way or the other, they will fall to the next scheme. Apple charge one time fee (hardware) and cloud fee... good for them to band into user head it is Superior service... BB fail to convince its user group to fork over 5.00 (and carrier refuse to collect it.. under the assumption of lost revenue to itself... rather than a selling feature of security). Shame on BB. I see enough chaps on this board want Whatsapp, facebook, etc. must all click the 30 more pages of user agreement and believe it is small price to pay and willingly to be in the different degree to be "used" exchange for low cost... If need to fix things, chaps need to exam their brain 1st IMHO (including mine.. although I don't have FB, no tweet, not linkedin... but sure googled enough to be on the list).

Ah, not to be facetious, but you do have Mobile Nations and CrackBerry too...

[maltesh]

(Bah, for some reason my previous post came up as "notovinar." Guess I used the wrong sign-in option.)

Correspondingly would you like to have a host through his google home or alexa sip (like wiretap) any personal verbal data including conversation and store it for later potential weaponizing with that excellent voice recognition AI? Or must we all now establish a monkish existence with no conversation whatsoever in front of those devilish children who can't keep secrets (Alexa, Siri and all) , since we can never be confident that they aren't listening and soaking it all in.

No, what happens is that you have an actual adult conversation with the person who invited you over, voice your misgivings if you have them, and come to an arrangement like normal human beings. You don't bring in some (probably not legal) device to hack his network.

Maybe that arrangement is that your host turns off his devices for the duration of your stay. Maybe that arrangement is that you decide to stay elsewhere. Maybe that arrangement is that you decide your relationship with your host is worth the price of being in his home with his devices. Maybe you decide it isn't.

That's up to you and your host.

[sorinv]

A good discussion on this topic here:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3cswkcw

Posted via CB10

[i_plod_an_dr_void]

(Bah, for some reason my previous post came up as "notovinar." Guess I used the wrong sign-in option.)



No, what happens is that you have an actual adult conversation with the person who invited you over, voice your misgivings if you have them, and come to an arrangement like normal human beings. You don't bring in some (probably not legal) device to hack his network.

Maybe that arrangement is that your host turns off his devices for the duration of your stay. Maybe that arrangement is that you decide to stay elsewhere. Maybe that arrangement is that you decide your relationship with your host is worth the price of being in his home with his devices. Maybe you decide it isn't.

That's up to you and your host.

Well actually, the guest has a reasonable right under the law in most non-police states (real democracies adhering to traditional western wisdom, who haven't trashed those rights quite yet) to not have his conversations recorded without consent, and he doesn't have to ask beforehand. So I guess the homeowner may be required to provide a legal waiver for the guest to sign before she crosses the threshold of the house, (either that or unplug alexa or google home) to avoid liability down the road for having one of his/her devices recording the 3rd party guest. What a legal bonanza for lawyers, similiar to the last one where party-hosts were held liable for overdrinking guests! (is this part of the legal exemption the google et-al were seeking in nafta?)

[sorinv]

Well, in the meantime, according to this CBC. Radio program, ‎Google has stored on average 1-5Gbyte of data for each of the 2.2 billion people on the Internet.
Every click, every location, everything they have done for the past 10 years, including any private browsing they have done.

And, as the person who did the research mentioned, how do we know what will happen in the future with that data? What if Google is forced to give it to the US military? Or if the Russians and the Chinese get hold of it? (my addition).

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/day6/episode...more-1.4597061

Posted via CB10

[howarmat]

Well, in the meantime, according to this CBC. Radio program, ‎Google has stored on average 1-5Gbyte of data for each of the 2.2 billion people on the Internet.
Every click, every location, everything they have done for the past 10 years, including any private browsing they have done.

And, as the person who did the research mentioned, how do we know what will happen in the future with that data? What if Google is forced to give it to the US military? Or if the Russians and the Chinese get a gold of it? (my addition).

Episode 383: What Google knows about you, Naloxone for libraries, the sound of the Jays, Easter Island & more | CBC Radio

Posted via CB10

no surprised, facebook had 323mbs when i downloaded my data the other day and im sure google has 1gb alone in photos i have taken in the last 10 years with them

[HabsFan9860]

Lots of people sign for mortgages and car loans and insurance coverage without reading any of the contract - and they're still liable for what they sign. This is no different.

Google has never made any secret about what they collect and what they use it for, and you have to agree to those terms in several places when setting up a new Android phone. And you've always been informed of the permissions that Android apps use, and as of the last several versions, you have the ability to turn many of those off (sure, the app in some cases won't run, but you can still deny the access).

The fact is that most people realize that Google is collecting their data, but they don't mind for one major reason: this allows Google to offer them world-class services with tight integration for little or no monetary cost. People actually WANT and VALUE those services, and while most data collection by Google could be stopped by simply subscribing to Google G Suite for $60/year (Google doesn't track most services [other than services you specifically request] when used by a paid account) - but most people prefer to save the money and let Google collect their data.

That's a choice people make, and IMO, they're allowed to make it, just as they're allowed to sign a stupid car loan or a credit card with 29.99% interest, or whatever.

Google also gives you an out - something no other company does - you can delete all of your past account history - or just download all that information so you can see it for yourself - at anytime, from a simple web page. Google's transparency is second to none, despite a few mistakes they've made along the way.

Show me the website where Facebook or Amazon or Microsoft or BlackBerry lets you download all the data they have on you, and lets you delete it if you want! Good luck with that!

....'World Class'?...not particularly...but OK...and if you buy into that bit in the last part of your post I have the usual bit of land in Florida etc...etc...

Posted on my Powerful Passport

[Zidentia]

The problem with the digital native generations is that they have a warped reality of what a profit and loss economy really is. They were offered free for a payment of what they deemed to be a non important use of personal data. Now it is becoming quite apparent to this generation that the price paid was more invasive than they thought. In addition this shift has changed the model for almost everyone who wants the use of a modern smartphone or certain browsers.

The shift for gaming is mostly stagnant as mobile gaming embraces this model but console and PC gaming is still mixed. The irony is that most of these free games end up costing more than a traditional software model when they use the add on process.

I know that some of my data is tracked but I make a conscious effort to avoid these free models and I purchase physical goods that I own forever. Any social media sites I frequent, including this one are accessed through an anonymous IP address on a vpn that is location randomized so any collection data is useless and any search and private data is not mine.




Posted via CB10

[sorinv]

The problem with the digital native generations is that they have a warped reality of what a profit and loss economy really is. They were offered free for a payment of what they deemed to be a non important use of personal data. Now it is becoming quite apparent to this generation that the price paid was more invasive than they thought. In addition this shift has changed the model for almost everyone who wants the use of a modern smartphone or certain browsers.

The shift for gaming is mostly stagnant as mobile gaming embraces this model but console and PC gaming is still mixed. The irony is that most of these free games end up costing more than a traditional software model when they use the add on process.

I know that some of my data is tracked but I make a conscious effort to avoid these free models and I purchase physical goods that I own forever. Any social media sites I frequent, including this one are accessed through an anonymous IP address on a vpn that is location randomized so any collection data is useless and any search and private data is not mine.




Posted via CB10

Yes, but if private browsing was not private, what makes you think that VPN offers true protection?
I was always suspicious about duck.duck.go and First Page...Google is everywhere. It has highjacked the Internet and BlackBerry, of course...

Posted via CB10

[Emaderton3]

I prefer Tesla version from the 80s, but that's just me IPA...

Love that album.

Why do we inherently trust BlackBerry when everything used to go through their servers?

[Soulstream]

Yes, but if private browsing was not private, what makes you think that VPN offers true protection?
I was always suspicious about duck.duck.go and First Page...Google is everywhere. It has highjacked the Internet and BlackBerry, of course...

Posted via CB10

There is no such thing as 100% private browsing. Trust is always required. You must trust your ISP and even if you use a VPN service, you must then trust the VPN provider.

You can never be 100% sure your browsing is secure.

[Zidentia]

If it is your VPN then you can be sure. There are ways but you need to do some work first.

Posted via CB10

[bakron1]

As I have said a thousand times before, anytime your on the grid, you’re vulnerable. No matter what software you use.

Common sense and strong passwords go a long way and you would be surprised how many folks fail to use both when they are online.