The British government tracked the location of millions of UK citizens without their knowledge or consent

[Redaktion]

The United Kingdom released a report stating that it tracked the location of 10% of cell phone users without notifying them or receiving their consent. The tracking was used to determine how willing citizens were to spend time away from home after the distribution of COVID-19 vaccines.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/The-British-government-tracked-the-location-of-millions-of-UK-citizens-without-their-knowledge-or-consent.540805.0.html

[frogg]

Why they didn't just ask Google? Google is doing just that, 100% of the time for 100% of its users..

[S.Yu]

Desensitized tracking is pretty common, AFAIK generally acceptable if individuals can't be identified. If they simultaneously track enough metrics that people can be identified, then that becomes an issue, and there's no clear line there.

[Abc]

Probably my phone record audio and waches what I by in shop to.
I hate supermārkets everywher data colection and surveliance.

[_MT_]

Desensitized tracking is pretty common, AFAIK generally acceptable if individuals can't be identified. If they simultaneously track enough metrics that people can be identified, then that becomes an issue, and there's no clear line there.

You don't even need multiple metrics, all you need is accuracy. You do go home at some point, don't you. You probably sleep there. If you live in a house in a rural area, even primitive tracking is sensitive enough. Not to mention that patterns are very useful for identification. So, even if you switch electronic identities, they can be linked. Your behaviour links them.

[S.Yu]

Desensitized tracking is pretty common, AFAIK generally acceptable if individuals can't be identified. If they simultaneously track enough metrics that people can be identified, then that becomes an issue, and there's no clear line there.

You don't even need multiple metrics, all you need is accuracy. You do go home at some point, don't you. You probably sleep there. If you live in a house in a rural area, even primitive tracking is sensitive enough. Not to mention that patterns are very useful for identification. So, even if you switch electronic identities, they can be linked. Your behaviour links them.

IIRC desensitized tracking doesn't allow very high precision, besides triangulation using cell towers is inherently inaccurate. And in rural regions they can't even triangulate, you need to be in the vicinity of at least 3 cell towers after all, nobody builds them that dense where there's nobody to use them.

[it's not me]

If the government/s are not using the data nefariously then why the (attempted) secrecy, why not tell us if it's for our own benefit, only very naive or very stupid people do not see this as a problem.

Even if it were just selling the data for ads again, why the secrecy, why was I not givrn the option to opt out (and before anyone says "you can opt out on google etc,this does not stop any tracking), to even get close to any sort of privacy/anonymity these days takes a lot of hard work and technical knowledge that the vast majority can't/won't/don't understand and are incapable of learning.

The only way to avoid this is to go off grid, and even then your voice is still being monitored through every other smart phone you go anywhere near.

Sadly, I saw this coming, it was inevitable with the invention of mobile phones, and if anyone thinks they can rely on any gov to "do the right thing" I can't help you.....

[it's not me]

I said the same thing about cookies when they came out and I was told I'm mad/paranoid etc etc.

The gov only cares about 2 things, money, and control.....you may have even fallen for the whole "democracy" thang, here's how that works....."we choose which parties you pick from, but hey, you get to pick which lump of dogshit you tread in".....that is not a democracy, that is rich people controlling everything as usual!

Do you know how much it costs to get a political party together and run for gov, a lot, coincidence, or is it really a barrier to entry that nobody except the prescribed aforementioned rich people can overcome, ensuring that power can be retained by the few.

People need to wake up, and I hate that overused cliché saying.

I object to it because I was never asked, told, or given the option to opt out, did anyone ask us if we wanted these ads? And who are these mysterious advertisers who can do whatever they want without asking?

In no other form of life would you accept this, imagine going to the cornershop/711 for a packet of cigarettes and when you go in the guy behind the counter starts trying to sell you stuff you're not interested in, it wouldnlt take long for you to object or start using a different shop.

Another analogy for you.....if your neighbour had a glass up against the wall and was listening to your conversations you would flip/freak out, so why is it ok for google and/or other corp's to do this via your phone? This double standard infuriates me.

[NikoB]

The gov only cares about 2 things, money, and control....

You are confusing organized crime groups with the government, which is the representative body of the population.

The whole world is a network of skillfully organized criminal groups that skillfully masquerade as a "government" with the connivance of the incompetent, stupid majority of the planet's population, including "developed" countries.

[it's not me]

The gov only cares about 2 things, money, and control....

You are confusing organized crime groups with the government, which is the representative body of the population.

The whole world is a network of skillfully organized criminal groups that skillfully masquerade as a "government" with the connivance of the incompetent, stupid majority of the planet's population, including "developed" countries.

I absolutely agree with you, apologies, I simply mispelled Organised Crime Racket, with the monopoly on violence... 😃