Fearing Data Privacy Issues, Google Cuts Some Android Phone Data For Wireless Carriers (reuters.com) 24
Alphabet' Google has shut down a service it provided to wireless carriers globally that showed them weak spots in their network coverage, Reuters reported Monday, citing people familiar with the matter, because of Google's concerns that sharing data from users of its Android phone system might attract the scrutiny of users and regulators. From the report: The withdrawal of the service, which has not been previously reported, has disappointed wireless carriers that used the data as part of their decision-making process on where to extend or upgrade their coverage. Even though the data were anonymous and the sharing of it has become commonplace, Google's move illustrates how concerned the company has become about drawing attention amid a heightened focus in much of the world on data privacy. Google's Mobile Network Insights service, which had launched in March 2017, was essentially a map showing carriers signal strengths and connection speeds they were delivering in each area. The service was provided free to carriers and vendors that helped them manage operations. The data came from devices running Google's Android operating system, which is on about 75% of the world's smartphones, making it a valuable resource for the industry. [...] Nevertheless, Google shut down the service in April due to concerns about data privacy, four people with direct knowledge of the matter told Reuters. Some of them said secondary reasons likely included challenges ensuring data quality and connectivity upgrades among carriers being slow to materialize.
ok (Score:3)
Re:ok (Score:4, Insightful)
So I guess this is a marketing ploy? Usually Google doesn't seem too interested in privacy and protecting users data.
They are, if they're not the ones benefiting from it...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
What info do the carriers need? (Score:1)
Shouldn't the carriers, providers etc. know by themselves how much traffic went over their routers, how many % thereof went towards google+back, how many packets were dropped etc? Except for the precise GPS location and connection attempts at locations without any network, I don't see anything that google might tell the providers that they don't already know.
Re: (Score:1)
A sale resulted?
Thats what needs to be protected.
Weak spot (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Actually they do. Buddy of mine use to drive around in a company car decked out with all kinds of equipment for finding coverage spots. Nice job if one can get it.
One thing the Android sampling might do is showing what inside coverage is like.
they cut service, not data gathering (Score:4, Insightful)
Notice how Google cuts the service they provide to Carriers (they stopped giving them the conputed signal maps) they did not stop gathering the data itself
Kind of shows you what their business practices are (in case you haven't already read about it enough)
Also should prompt you wether it is good idea to keep running the proprietary Google Play Service blib, or whether to run some open-source alternative reimplementation (such as microG, e.g.)
Re: (Score:3)
About the only business that doesn't gather any data at all is the kid on the corner selling lemonade.
While Google's data collection is kind of disturbing overall, is gathering and not sharing data on signal quality all that bad? I mean it could result in actual improvement of handset performance.
I'm wondering what the border line you think exists between corporations gathering data necessary to run the business and data that's being hoarded that's a threat to privacy.
there's gathering and there's obsessively stalking (Score:2)
I'm on a smartphone, so I can't quickly link the proper sources, but check the infographics at /e/ foundation [e.foundation] and, even more so, follow the link to the actual study (if you're more into passively listening instead of reading, I remember that Bryan Lunduke had a podcast on YouTube about this study):
- leave your phone idling
- google still pings the mothership 40times per hour.
That's every 1-2 minutes.
That's a good enough resolution to even track when you go pee.
There is a point when it stops being "just some.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:they cut service, not data gathering (Score:4, Insightful)
Wonder if they will next announce that the data are available to carries, but for a small fee. Would fit with their general business model.
Actually, that would be a divergence from their usual business model. Google doesn't generally sell data. Google sells services (primarily advertising) based on clever utilization of data, but not the data itself.
Re: (Score:3)
Notice how Google cuts the service they provide to Carriers (they stopped giving them the conputed signal maps) they did not stop gathering the data itself
How do you know that?
Google's privacy policies bar the collection of data that doesn't have a specific, articulated use. Google teams are not allowed to collect data on a speculative basis, because it might serve some purpose in the future. So, unless there's some other reason to collect data on signal strengths, they will have ceased collecting it when they turned this service down. The same goes for retention of already-collected data; if there's not a specific and well-justified reason for retaining
Re: (Score:2)
Notice how Google cuts the service they provide to Carriers (they stopped giving them the conputed signal maps) they did not stop gathering the data itself
How do you know that?
Google's privacy policies bar the collection of data that doesn't have a specific, articulated use.
This is an extremely low bar that can only place limitations on the inept, as the use doesn't have to be reasonable, and the judgment of what is specific, articulated, or reasonable is solely self-determined.
Re: (Score:2)
Notice how Google cuts the service they provide to Carriers (they stopped giving them the conputed signal maps) they did not stop gathering the data itself
How do you know that?
Google's privacy policies bar the collection of data that doesn't have a specific, articulated use.
This is an extremely low bar that can only place limitations on the inept, as the use doesn't have to be reasonable, and the judgment of what is specific, articulated, or reasonable is solely self-determined.
Yes, it does have to be reasonable, and to pass several reviews including the privacy team. I don't expect you to find this convincing, because your confirmation bias will prevent it. You will always try to find some loophole in anything I say, and if you can't find it you'll simply assume I'm lying, or mistaken.
Re: (Score:2)
Notice how Google cuts the service they provide to Carriers (they stopped giving them the conputed signal maps) they did not stop gathering the data itself
How do you know that?
Google's privacy policies bar the collection of data that doesn't have a specific, articulated use.
This is an extremely low bar that can only place limitations on the inept, as the use doesn't have to be reasonable, and the judgment of what is specific, articulated, or reasonable is solely self-determined.
Yes, it does have to be reasonable, and to pass several reviews including the privacy team. I don't expect you to find this convincing, because your confirmation bias will prevent it. You will always try to find some loophole in anything I say, and if you can't find it you'll simply assume I'm lying, or mistaken.
It's not a matter of confirmation bias but acknowledged lack of information. Google doesn't care about me and won't give me the information to confirm reasonableness in any way. I understand the business motivation for withholding that information (including the fact that I'm a nobody, and it would be a waste of their time and money), but nonetheless, it's entirely unreasonable to expect an uninformed public to simply accept the self-certification of privacy conformity or non-evilness. It has nothing to
Yeah, they used it to better their service (Score:2)
I'm sorry, but we had AT&T for 3 years in a suburban area in CA that has next to zero service. We had to get a pico-cell (AT&T calls them micro-cells because they think their customers are stupid) to have service in our own house. This is a large subdivision with several hundred homes right off the highway in a very densely populated area. And no service unless
Re: (Score:2)
Guess the FCC wasn't a subscriber either.
BTW There are apps in the store that show coverage if one's interested in driving around.
Re: (Score:2)
OpenSignal has been mapping this data for, what, about a decade? Run it if your radio is compatible.
Re: (Score:2)
> But this type of thing calls into question what these carriers actually used the data for. It isn't likely it was to improve their service.
To improve profitability. Maybe they can remove a tower. Maybe they can put another transponder in a tourist area.
That your village doesn't get service is [phenomenologically] of no concerned to AT&T.
Not because they can't make slightly more money by having you as a customer, but because they can make more money by investing those funds elsewhere. I had a Ver
Hey Google, this isn't a yes/no thing (Score:2)