Why, thank you. I work hard at it.
Why, thank you. I work hard at it.
Curmudgeon wrote: Why, thank you. I work hard at it.
Glad to hear you work hard at your rhetorical masturbation skills as opposed to making any sense. The work is really paying off.
The accusations of 'straw man' and 'rhetorical masturbation' are the refuge of those who cannot refute a fact. Sorry you could not see the point of that.
I do not believe in flame wars. Therefore my last post in this thread.
The good:
happens more often than people know. Accident victim, lost hunter, hiker, rafters, kids, elderly etc. get pinged for location. To me in these cases it's just another tool in Rescue Squad's tool box. Oh, and then there's that OnStar crash notification and vehicle locator thing too.
The bad:
leave your phone at home before you pull that armed robbery or home invasion
Curmudgeon wrote: The accusations of 'straw man' and 'rhetorical masturbation' are the refuge of those who cannot refute a fact. Sorry you could not see the point of that. I do not believe in flame wars. Therefore my last post in this thread.
No, the misuse of straw man claim is such a refuge. When you actually create one, being called on it is perfectly reasonable. Your facts do not need to be refuted because they don't have any bearing on what I said. You used your facts (some of which were ridiculously stupid made up ones, I might add) to knock down the straw man you created. As that straw man in no way represented my position, I have no need to refute the facts you used to attack your own imaginary position.
As a straw man is a logical fallacy, there is little else to be gained in discussion unless the other person decides to actually post something rational.
You declined, hell you were downright proud that you made no logical sense and were perfectly content with an argument between yourself and a fictional idea in your head and then somehow miffed that I didn't step up to defend the fictional idea in your own head. Thus rhetorical masturbation: playing with ones self via rhetoric.
fasted58 wrote: leave your phone at home before you pull that armed robbery or home invasion
Hey Mr Whacker, we noticed you have stopped at the liquor store for the second bottle of tequila in 48hrs, we have seen this pattern before in other addict identifed targets. We suggest our vendor: Sobriety Manor for a consultation. Your employer has registered for "Employee Wherabouts". That little swing by the grocery store when you were supposed to be working raised an alert!
We have observed your pattern of purchasing Snacky S'Mores after visiting the park and visiting in close proximity of phone number 555-555-1212. The local authorities are investigating - Have a nice day!
In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker:
write your congressman, start a movement
fasted58 wrote: In reply to Giant Purple Snorklewacker: write your congressman, start a movement
I start a movement every day after coffee. 
Why do you think I post all these articles? I really think people need to know how much of their lives are exposed to marketing at best, future oppression at worst. I'm not really a paranoid lunatic hiding in a shack - I am pretty well informed about what is and isn't visible about my life - and I can control some of what gets out there. Everyone should know what their exposure is. It's a one way looking glass right now.
For every person who says "I am not doing anything wrong why should I care" I bet there are more who say "Really? No berkeleying way - that is outrageous and I plan to do some.... hold on" before they go back to stalking ex-girlfriends on the FB app.
It's a start.
I'm a little late. I'm not sure we have a reasonable expectation of privacy when it comes to where we are physically located, given that we interact with the world while getting there in some way, even if only silently moving through it. What we do when we are there and how and under what circumstances, sure, but I'm not seeing it as far as location is concerned.
keethrax wrote: Your facts do not need to be refuted because they don't have any bearing on what I said. You used your facts (some of which were ridiculously stupid made up ones, I might add) to knock down the straw man *you* created. As that straw man in no way represented *my* position, I have no need to refute the facts you used to attack your own imaginary position.
Can you clarify your position then? As a third party I take from your comments that you feel that having your location tracked by your cell phone (which is the point of this thread) as some violation of your rights and when people say they are not worried because they are not a criminal that you feel they are being shortsighted about their rights and therefore allowing further erosion of Your rights. If that isn't correct please clarify your position.
I personally do not like that as much information either is or is capable of being collected about me through my involvement with the economy. I'm not sure if there is anything that can really he done though. Most of what is being done is made possible by decisions I have made to enter into agreements with various private companies. Most of the tracking is made possible by banking, credit, comunication and transportation. All of those are assumed to be necessary to function in modern society but optional in individual involvement. If you don't want to use these things you don't have to. If you don't want your cell phone to have GPS tracking abilities don't own one. If you feel that the wool is being pulled over your eyes and you want to stop it start a movement and try to get gps tracking disabled by law. I have a feeling with this most people just aren't concerned about it that much. Now if these somewhat outlandish orwellian situations begin to occur them people will get irrate but it doesn't seem like there is really any attempt by the government to actually use this data for anything proactively. I'm sure they are using it for establishing information for criminal activities. The cell phone companies sure they can use it for all kinds of stuff and I'm sure marketing organizations pay good money for data but that's just part of having a cellphone.
Speaking of phones, I am looking for an ATT smarttracking device running on Android or iPhone for reasonable $.
Anybody got one they are willing to sell shoot me a line.
Wow this thread turned into an attack thread quickly.
I understand that they can track your movements based on the GPS built into your phone, the tin foil hat part to me is that "they will use it to predict your future movements". Paa-lease. Like the feds really give a E36 M3 that I am going to work on Monday morning and stop by the gas station to get coffee. Oh no, maybe they will secretly switch the regular and decaf so I have a miserable morning.
This kind of tracing is mostly used for tracking someone's movements that is suspect for some criminal activity or missing person cases. Do you really think the feds just randomly pick out some person's GPS data just for E36 M3s and giggles? Hell, they can use bank info to trace most of my movements that don't require indoor plumbing(maybe even some of those, yikes).
nocones wrote: I personally do not like that as much information either is or is capable of being collected about me through my involvement with the economy. I'm not sure if there is anything that can really he done though. Most of what is being done is made possible by decisions I have made to enter into agreements with various private companies. Most of the tracking is made possible by banking, credit, comunication and transportation. All of those are assumed to be necessary to function in modern society but optional in individual involvement. If you don't want to use these things you don't have to. If you don't want your cell phone to have GPS tracking abilities don't own one.
I've got a problem with this line of thinking. In some parts of this country, owning a car is not really optional if you want to participate in society. If your employer requires you to have a cell phone, it's the same thing. So once we get to a place where phones, cars, and other technologies become expected of the mainstream, it becomes a bit ridiculous to say if you don't like one aspect of something, just opt out.
Second, we live in a democracy that has a mostly free market. We should be able to petition our government to do the things we want it to do. In a mostly free market economy, we also have the right to negotiate contracts and agreements that are in accordance with our way of thinking. Not being able to do that suggests collusion to me. It's one of the things that strikes me as anti-capitalist in our current era of mega corporations who wield tremendous influence in the political sphere.
I don't think it's at all wrong to disagree with the policies of companies one purchases services from. Nor is it wrong when they are unresponsive to have an expectation for a representative government to step in.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: Why do you think I post all these articles? I really think people need to know how much of their lives are exposed to marketing at best, future oppression at worst. I'm not really a paranoid lunatic hiding in a shack - I am pretty well informed about what is and isn't visible about my life - and I can control some of what gets out there. Everyone should know what their exposure is. It's a one way looking glass right now.
OK fine, but you need to understand that not everyone who disagrees with you on this is going through life with blinders on. Many of us are fully aware of how cell phones can be tracked and are willing to make that trade off for the convenience of having the device.
Anti-stance wrote: Hell, they can use bank info to trace most of my movements that don't require indoor plumbing(maybe even some of those, yikes).
I promised I would not repost in this thread, but I have to thank you for saying again what I was saying earlier. There is no big trick to tracking anyone and it's been that way for many many years. Remember, Al Capone was busted not for murder and trafficking etc but for not paying his taxes. How long ago was that? The point is,EVERYBODY leaves a trail and has for centuries.
For instance, in geneaology it's possible to trace your ancestor's movements and get a reasonable idea of their success through bank and land sale records, it's done all the time. I know this first hand because my dad got very interested in our family's movements over the years, he self published a book about it that's maybe 1 1/2 inches thick and references all those records. I have a copy in my possesion.
GPS in phones is only the latest technology applied to a really old situation.
Now I really AM done with this.
Curmudgeon wrote:Anti-stance wrote: Hell, they can use bank info to trace most of my movements that don't require indoor plumbing(maybe even some of those, yikes).For instance, in geneaology it's possible to trace your ancestor's movements and get a reasonable idea of their success through bank and land sale records, it's done all the time.
If anyone has had their credit or debit card suspended because of suspicious account activity while going out of state or out of country has experienced your movements being "traced". Big deal. It happened to me on a track weekend out of state before.
Damn, I am breaking my 'won't post here again' rule once more. Yeah, I had a CC 'compromised' earlier this year, the CC company called me and asked if I had authorized a ~$12 charge to Eastern Europe. Nope. Turns out the snaky types do that, wait to see if you or your CC company notice, then hit your card hard.
How am I going to be able to believe anything you say now? How do I know that story's even true?
SVreX wrote: Sure, as long as we don't care about a little thing called "The Constitution". I'm not breaking any laws either (well, except for speed limits, but using these tracking tools without a warrant or probable cause is a direct violation of the 4th Amendment.
Umm... So you might want to study your Constitutional law a little more. Most of those locations that aren't your residence would be public places, where you have very little legal expectation of privacy.
In reply to Curmudgeon:
Do I win an award for getting you to break your rule twice? I can only except cash in face to face transactions that do not involve stopping to get gas on the way using any plastic.
Oh, and don't forget to turn off your phone. 
Tom_Spangler wrote:Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: Why do you think I post all these articles? I really think people need to know how much of their lives are exposed to marketing at best, future oppression at worst. I'm not really a paranoid lunatic hiding in a shack - I am pretty well informed about what is and isn't visible about my life - and I can control some of what gets out there. Everyone should know what their exposure is. It's a one way looking glass right now.OK fine, but you need to understand that not everyone who disagrees with you on this is going through life with blinders on. Many of us are fully aware of how cell phones can be tracked and are willing to make that trade off for the convenience of having the device.
Was I arguing to the contrary? I am merely posting links to things in the off topic section for the good of my fellow man. Should they already know this and choose to post bewbs in the hotlink thread instead... or wish to bleat on endlessly about not caring is not any of my concern 
LainfordExpress wrote:SVreX wrote: Sure, as long as we don't care about a little thing called "The Constitution". I'm not breaking any laws either (well, except for speed limits, but using these tracking tools without a warrant or probable cause is a direct violation of the 4th Amendment.Umm... So you might want to study your Constitutional law a little more. Most of those locations that aren't your residence would be public places, where you have very little legal expectation of privacy.
I couldn't disagree more.
My phone records are private. There is a reasonable expectation of privacy.
If the police can prove my location by eyewitnesses (and not access my private records), they are welcome to prove my whereabouts in a different manner.
Cell phone records require a warrant.
Wiki definition of "search" in the 4th Amendment said: A threshold question in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence is whether a search has occurred. If no search occurred, then the Fourth Amendment does not apply. In Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), the Supreme Court ruled that a search occurs when 1) a person expects privacy in the thing searched and 2) society believes that expectation is reasonable. In Katz, the Supreme Court ruled that a search had occurred when the government wiretapped a telephone booth.[22] The Court's reasoning was that 1) Charles Katz expected that his phonebooth conversation would not be broadcast to the wider world and 2) society believes that expectation is reasonable. In United States v. Jones, 565 U. S. ____ (2012), the Supreme Court ruled that, in addition to the Katz standard, a search occurs when law enforcement trespasses on the searched person's property. In Jones, law enforcement officers had attached a GPS device on a car's exterior without Antoine Jones's consent. The Court concluded that Jones was a bailee to the car, because the car's owner had regularly permitted him to use the car, and so had a property interest in the car.[23]
I think you are mistaken.
How many of you have loyalty cards like Air Miles, etc.?
You give up a E36 M3 load of private information everytime you use one of those things. You give it up to private companies too - not to bodies that are restricted to what they can use it for.
I have better things to worry about than this.
Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: Was I arguing to the contrary? I am merely posting links to things in the off topic section for the good of my fellow man. Should they already know this and choose to post bewbs in the hotlink thread instead... or wish to bleat on endlessly about not caring is not any of my concern
I believe that you have good intentions, but with all due respect, you do use some inflammatory language when you say that we should stop calling them phones or that Facebook regards it's customers as prey. All I'm saying is that it's pretty clear where you stand.
stuart in mn wrote:ALL cell phones within the last 4 (?) years have GPS built into them whether you think it does or doesn't.Not everyone has a newer phone.
Maybe.
Pretty much when all phones moved over to second generation digital services was about when GPS got integrated into most cellular phones. Which was 2005.
Even before then, phones quite frequently had GPS integrated into them. If your phone is over 7 years old, well then, it may, or may not have it.
You'll need to log in to post.
