Skip to content

‘If I switch it off, my girlfriend might think I’m cheating’: inside the rise of couples location sharing

Technology
415 217 160
  • If you just see this and, like 20 others, blindly say "you should trust your partner" then you haven't thought about it at all. If you trust your partner completely, then you trust them to use your location information responsibly, right? So trust does not have any bearing on whether to use it or not.

    The issue for me is that we should try to avoid normalising behaviour which enables coercive control in relationships, even if it is practical. That means that even if you trust your partner not to spy on your every move and use the information against you, you shouldn't enable it because it makes it harder for everyone who can't trust their partner to that extent to justify not using it.

    On a more practical level, controlling behaviour doesn't always manifest straight away. What's safe now may not be safe in two years, and if it does start ramping up later, it may be much, much harder to back out of agreements made today which end up impacting your safety.

    My mom the other day sent me like 5 texts in a row because I didn't see them while working.
    Had to stop and tell her "For the past century, if most people wanted to contact their kids they waited months for letters to go back and forth. No need to panic over not talking for a day."

  • I appreciate the sentiment here, but I disagree with the premise in the first paragraph. It sounds like the age-old "nothing to hide" argument.

    I trust my SO with my location information and I have nothing to hide, but I don't provide it because they don't need it. That's it. Why should I compromise my privacy and potentially security just because I trust someone? That's dumb. They don't need it so I don't provide it, that's my primary reason and that should be enough.

    I have other reasons too, such as:

    • I don't trust my or my SO's phone manufacturer to keep that data confidential, and I don't want them selling that to someone
    • I don't trust my government to steal that information en masse, and I'd really rather not trigger some alarm somewhere
    • I don't trust most of the apps on my phone with location information, and I'd really rather not trust my phone's app security to prevent them from getting it
    • breaches happen, and I'd really rather my location information not end up in criminals' hands

    And so on. There's no upside and tons of potential downsides, so why do it?

    There's no upside

    • Know when they come home or if they are stuck in traffic
    • "oh you are still in the store can you get me ..."
    • security if they get kidnapped

    It is insanely useful to know where your partner is. It is not necessary. It is still useful. I would not allow my partner 24/7 location information. It is still useful. I don't trust any app/manufacturer that allows such a feature. It is still useful.

  • oh good lord no. years, decades, centuries even couples have trusted each other WITHOUT the need to tracking their where abouts. suddenly this is something we need? no it isn't. but sure, you go ahead and slap a tag on your "loved one" so you know where they are at all times and so will whatever company is selling your data from said tag.

    I didn't say it's something you need. Read the rest of my comment.

  • I appreciate the sentiment here, but I disagree with the premise in the first paragraph. It sounds like the age-old "nothing to hide" argument.

    I trust my SO with my location information and I have nothing to hide, but I don't provide it because they don't need it. That's it. Why should I compromise my privacy and potentially security just because I trust someone? That's dumb. They don't need it so I don't provide it, that's my primary reason and that should be enough.

    I have other reasons too, such as:

    • I don't trust my or my SO's phone manufacturer to keep that data confidential, and I don't want them selling that to someone
    • I don't trust my government to steal that information en masse, and I'd really rather not trigger some alarm somewhere
    • I don't trust most of the apps on my phone with location information, and I'd really rather not trust my phone's app security to prevent them from getting it
    • breaches happen, and I'd really rather my location information not end up in criminals' hands

    And so on. There's no upside and tons of potential downsides, so why do it?

    They don’t need it so I don’t provide it, that’s my primary reason and that should be enough.

    It is enough. In fact, it's better than the "you should trust your SO" argument which doesn't make any sense.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    This is a huge no from me. My SO doesn't need my location, and sharing it has a lot of potential downsides, like:

    • phone manufacturer selling it to advertisers
    • gov't getting it and I accidentally trust trigger some alarm
    • data getting exposed in a breach
    • apps without location access getting it through some means

    There's a lot of potential downside and the upside is... my SO knows when I'm almost home?

    Yeah, no. Maybe I'll share if I'm doing something risky like hiking alone, but that's never staying on constantly.

  • It's nothing about trust issues- privacy is just a foreign concept to that generation. It was dead and gone before they were born. They take for granted that eveyone has their phone on them at all times and is never unreachable, so knowing where all your friends are is just a matter of convenience.

    I've actually done a little to combat this, in my personal life (apart from ordinary privacy stuff like librewolf und Linux). I got so sick of the majority of my friends expecting me to reply to every text message within 30 minutes, and then getting extremely offended when I didn't (simply because I don't look at my phone that often), that I turned off read-receipts on all my messaging apps, and set my notifications to only arrive in groups at specific times of day.

    Then I made a habit of not answering unimportant messages for a few days, until I got the reputation that I pretty much don't use my phone (I also don't use conventional social media, and none of my friends even know I'm in lemmy). This worked like a charm! My social life much, much less stressful.

    I've broken the absurd contract that so many people seem to think they have a right to. My time is now my own. I can highly recommend this system! Of course, I can't do it for work-related stuff, but it still really has reduced my stress by a lot.

  • If you trust your partner completely, then you trust them to use your location information responsibly, right?

    No. But it isn't about that, anyway. Those apps sell your location data to advertisers and governments, and I'm not installing that bullshit on my phone after I kicked google off of it with grapheneOS.

    Apple absolutely doesn’t sell that information. The way they implemented it, they can’t even collect the information to sell.

  • There's no upside

    • Know when they come home or if they are stuck in traffic
    • "oh you are still in the store can you get me ..."
    • security if they get kidnapped

    It is insanely useful to know where your partner is. It is not necessary. It is still useful. I would not allow my partner 24/7 location information. It is still useful. I don't trust any app/manufacturer that allows such a feature. It is still useful.

    My SO can just call me, and they do about every other day when I'm inevitably stuck in traffic due to some accident during rush hour.

    My SO and I call each other very frequently. It takes 10s to call and ask me if I'm stuck in traffic or something. Maybe it takes 5 to check an app, but saving a few seconds isn't worth the unlikely but possible downsides.

    Where's the upside vs alternatives that don't have those extra issues?

  • Well then that's just too bad for me, isn't it?

    Obviously I have my phone on me so I could just dial 911. If your phone breaks when whatever occurs to you, then your spouse or whatever isn't going to be able to track your location and you're not going to be able to call 911 either. So either way you're fucked.

    Don't be silly, you'll obviously have your hands full defending your spleen from chipmunks, no time to dial 911

  • Of all the dystopian things, this is probably the most dystopian thing I’ve read lately.

    This is horrible.

    Most people my age that I know have location tracking shared with SO’s. It’s considered a step in the relationship.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    This kind of shit is pretty common for younger people. I work as a teacher, and I hear students talk about this all the time. I tell them how unhealthy it is blah, blah, blah. My SO tells the younger people at her work "If I had PumpkinSkink's location sharing on he couldn't surprise me with cake from the bakery". She has had more success than I getting people to stop.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Jesus fuck, what did people do with their spouses and kids before phones? Trust them?

    Sounds unlikely.

  • Witch your age group. Do you mind giving examples where it's been helpful and maybe examples when it's not been so helpful?

    Like 16-17, I don't talk to the people that do that too much because they're not the type of person I like hanging out with, so I don't really know why they do it.

    It's like an extension of their group chats, on snapchat.

  • Legally and practically, prenups are anything but passive. They’re proactive tools. They’re usually dormant, but they’re ready to be called into action.

    Marriage is different things to different people. Some have every intention to make it work, no matter what. To them, a prenup is an anti-“burn the ship”. It’s a statement.

    Also, tools like “find my” are not major breaches of privacy if both parties jointly agree to use them. For me and my family, it’s the ultimate expression of trust. I’m never somewhere I shouldn’t be, and I like my family knowing where I am, for a multitude of reasons.

    There are two types of people who a tracker wouldn’t be effective for: those who are in an inappropriate location, and those who are constantly questioning why someone is in an innocent place, regardless of where it may be. However, at that point, the issue isn’t the trackers; it’s the people.

    Legally and practically, prenups are anything but passive. They’re proactive tools. They’re usually dormant, but they’re ready to be called into action.

    that's what I meant by passive. they don't do anything until invoked, once.

    It's like comparing a personal forcefield with an always worn camera and mic that streams your life to google's personal security subsidiary, if I want to magnify the differences.

    I don't see why what you said makes it not passive. maybe we understand that term differently.

    Some have every intention to make it work, no matter what.

    that's how abusers learn they can do whatever they want

    Also, tools like “find my” are not major breaches of privacy if both parties jointly agree to use them. For me and my family, it’s the ultimate expression of trust.

    I don't necessarily mean breach of privacy that way. if everyone voluntarily agrees, without "problems", that's good. but more that the service provider has access to a fuckton of sensitive data! I can imagine people who accept that.. and then who also condemn others for wanting to escape shit privacy invading services

  • Exactly. My girlfriend will disappear for an entire day and not come home until 10pm. I usually have no idea where she is or what she's doing (mainly because I forget due to having ADHD), but I don't worry about it because I know she'll never cheat. How can a person even be with someone who they don't trust? Without trust, there is no relationship IMO.

    There is the case of the worriers. People who, when not given positive confirmation otherwise, assume the worst. I'm not talking cheating, but like accidents. "He's 5 minutes late, maybe he got in a car accident and died!" It's not healthy, but it is common and isn't a trust issue.That said, my partner doesn't get to track me, and I have no interest in tracking them.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    My wife and I have each other's locations. We trust each other. We just like having that information available. It's really not that hard to understand.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Guys hi, just looking for some support share, a Fantasy Adventure Story, for all ages and just some entertain with some storyes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mVIvQ1wsgg - maybe you are curious

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Guys hi, just looking for some support share, a Fantasy Adventure Story, for all ages and just some entertain with some storyes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mVIvQ1wsgg - maybe you are curious

  • I appreciate the sentiment here, but I disagree with the premise in the first paragraph. It sounds like the age-old "nothing to hide" argument.

    I trust my SO with my location information and I have nothing to hide, but I don't provide it because they don't need it. That's it. Why should I compromise my privacy and potentially security just because I trust someone? That's dumb. They don't need it so I don't provide it, that's my primary reason and that should be enough.

    I have other reasons too, such as:

    • I don't trust my or my SO's phone manufacturer to keep that data confidential, and I don't want them selling that to someone
    • I don't trust my government to steal that information en masse, and I'd really rather not trigger some alarm somewhere
    • I don't trust most of the apps on my phone with location information, and I'd really rather not trust my phone's app security to prevent them from getting it
    • breaches happen, and I'd really rather my location information not end up in criminals' hands

    And so on. There's no upside and tons of potential downsides, so why do it?

    It sounds like the age-old “nothing to hide” argument.

    It's really not, though. For many couples (including my own relationship), this is something we talked about before implementing. We both decided that since we have the technology, we should use it to our advantage....so we do. Right now we're using Life360, but I've already implemented Traccar (self-hosted and accessed via Home Assistant) for our older kids who have phones (Pinwheel), and I plan on extending that capability to my wife as well, so we can dump Life360.

  • Apple absolutely doesn’t sell that information. The way they implemented it, they can’t even collect the information to sell.

    X to doubt, and that doesn't help people who don't use walledgardenOS

  • YouTube's Latest Update Shows That Online Monoculture Is Dead

    Technology technology
    124
    1
    263 Stimmen
    124 Beiträge
    900 Aufrufe
    S
    Then all hope is lost and there is absolutely no point in fighting, all it will do is annoy people who try to read your messages. If writing weird can have an impact on the world, I'm sure a lot of other things can too.
  • Former and current Microsofties react to the latest layoffs

    Technology technology
    20
    1
    85 Stimmen
    20 Beiträge
    127 Aufrufe
    eightbitblood@lemmy.worldE
    Incredibly well said. And couldn't agree more! Especially after working as a game dev for Apple Arcade. We spent months proving to them their saving architecture was faulty and would lead to people losing their save file for each Apple Arcade game they play. We were ignored, and then told it was a dev problem. Cut to the launch of Arcade: every single game has several 1 star reviews about players losing their save files. This cannot be fixed by devs as it's an Apple problem, so devs have to figure out novel ways to prevent the issue from happening using their own time and resources. 1.5 years later, Apple finishes restructuring the entire backend of Arcade, fixing the problem. They tell all their devs to reimplement the saving architecture of their games to be compliant with Apples new backend or get booted from Arcade. This costs devs months of time to complete for literally zero return (Apple Arcade deals are upfront - little to no revenue is seen after launch). Apple used their trillions of dollars to ignore a massive backend issue that affected every player and developer on Apple Arcade. They then forced every dev to make an update to their game at their own expense just to keep it listed on Arcade. All while directing user frustration over the issue towards developers instead of taking accountability for launching a faulty product. Literally, these companies are run by sociopaths that have egos bigger than their paychecks. Issues like this are ignored as it's easier to place the blame on someone down the line. People like your manager end up getting promoted to the top of an office heirachy of bullshit, and everything the company makes just gets worse until whatever corpse is left is sold for parts to whatever bigger dumb company hasn't collapsed yet. It's really painful to watch, and even more painful to work with these idiots.
  • 103 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    58 Aufrufe
    D
    They stopped sending to me when I replied that every text message after would cost them $500 each. That's an actual thing. They got scared.
  • Patreon will increase the cut it takes from new creators

    Technology technology
    29
    151 Stimmen
    29 Beiträge
    149 Aufrufe
    F
    Not growing at an absurd rate doesn’t mean their business model is stagnating.
  • 51 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    22 Aufrufe
    baronvonj@lemmy.worldB
    So glad I never got on WhatsApp
  • Apple announces iOS 26 with Liquid Glass redesign

    Technology technology
    83
    1
    117 Stimmen
    83 Beiträge
    412 Aufrufe
    S
    you guys are weird
  • 4 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    14 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 32 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    46 Aufrufe
    J
    Apparently, it was required to be allowed in that state: Reading a bit more, during the sentencing phase in that state people making victim impact statements can choose their format for expression, and it's entirely allowed to make statements about what other people would say. So the judge didn't actually have grounds to deny it. No jury during that phase, so it's just the judge listening to free form requests in both directions. It's gross, but the rules very much allow the sister to make a statement about what she believes her brother would have wanted to say, in whatever format she wanted. From: https://sh.itjust.works/comment/18471175 influence the sentence From what I've seen, to be fair, judges' decisions have varied wildly regardless, sadly, and sentences should be more standardized. I wonder what it would've been otherwise.