So it turns out your phone is eavesdropping on you

I saw an article today that confirmed what I have suspected for years now - mobile phones have been monitoring us and using the info to sell to advertisers:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cr4rvr495rgo

Apple has agreed to pay $95m (£77m) to settle a court case alleging some of its devices were listening to people without their permission.

The tech giant was accused of eavesdropping on its customers through its virtual assistant Siri.

I remember testing this about 5 years ago to prove it to my wife as she was skeptical - I kept adding into our conversatons that we should got to Disneyland (I warned her I would do this as a test as it is somewhere we have no interest in going to) and sure enough we started to get adverts appearing after a week about the park.

I suspect the other big players (Microsoft, Google etc) are also up to this but are much better at hiding it or have added wording in their Terms and Conditions to allow it.

It is more than a little concerning.

Parents
  • I saw an article today that confirmed what I have suspected for years now - mobile phones have been monitoring us and using the info to sell to advertisers:

    Per the article, neither the action nor the settlement - in which Apple denies wrongdoing and the claims - confirms or proves anything. 

  • Per the article, neither the action nor the settlement - in which Apple denies wrongdoing and the claims - confirms or proves anything. 

    This is just standard legal practice in lawsuits - but if you think a company with the immense legal defence resources of Apple would base a $95 million settlement on unsubstantiated claims then you would be naive in the extreme.

    This is about as bad as it gets in lawsuit terms - the companies always settle so they can use NDAs to lock down any details and stop people talking about it.

  • This is just standard legal practice in lawsuits - but if you think a company with the immense legal defence resources of Apple would base a $95 million settlement on unsubstantiated claims then you would be naive in the extreme.

    Don’t patronise me. My point stands.

  • The UK security services have a "no apple" policy for some reason.

    Some also physically destroy the webcams on their none-apple laptops.

    Don't ask me how I know this, because I'd have to...

    ... Lie. (Or refuse to answer of course, which I'd probably choose)

  • OK.  All understood.  I respect your right to write what you write.  I also respect Iain to write what he writes.  I personally choose to trust the other members of this (dwindling) community to draw whatever conclusion they chose to settle upon with regard to this matter.....and moreover....won't think any less of them whether they a) choose to care at all b) or fall on one side of this matter - or the other! 

    Perhaps this is the difference between us Bunny?  I never need a right -v- wrong answer.  I think all answers and opinions are valid and worthy of air?  I am happy to leave matters hanging in the air, without fighting for a conclusion.

  • You can see why this led to me labelling you as naive - sorry if this hurts but is seems entirely justified by Apples own admission.

    No. Being disrespectful and insulting me by accusing me of being naive - and then doubling down on it here - is not justified, either by the historic facts (which relate to a very particular set of circumstances) that you’re referring to in a continuing effort to browbeat me, or morally.

    There are many different facets to this case, which both parties have agreed to settle.

    I won’t be engaging with any more of your bullying.

  • The EU had made a ruling that Apple has to pay 13 Billion to the Irish government in unpaid taxes and the Irish government (revenue commissioners) has to accept this money in a totally bizarre case running for several years now 

Reply Children
No Data