Skip to content

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

Technology
415 217 156
  • I don't want to share my location nor have anyone else's shared with me.

    Friends and partners can text "I'll be there in 5"

    My friend shares her location with her mother. Her mother then nags her with like "Are you seeing someone new? You're spending a lot of time in north brooklyn now." Like, who needs that, or even the temptation of that?

    A tech solution is not going to fix a social/mental problem like fear of cheating.

    Hell, my wife generally knows where I'm going when I go out but only because I want to tell her and usually invite her. I'd hate for her to be able to ask why I'm at a restaurant instead of the bar I said I was going to, even if I'll tell her about it when I get home

  • because you are not sharing your location with each other. you are sharing your location with a greedy company that also lets your significant other, and then the highest bidder access this information. they are doing whatever they please with it to make (even more) money.
    see, I was so into google's timeline feature years ago. but soon after I realized privacy is a thing I was disgusted of it and turned it off. if you run nextcloud and that addon I don't remember, or reitti, at home and use that, and you keep is somewhat safe*, then it's fine, and I could imagine using that, even just for myself.

    I should have explained that. for some reason I tend to assume that lemmy users are privacy conscious, but that's probably not true.

    * don't expose the services because your data will get stolen and you'll get hacked by automated systems. run a VPN on the server, only expose the port of that. then you can access the services through a VPN. wireguard is relatively simple, and it's secure.

    I get that it’s not privacy focused; so much these days isn’t, but I’m still not understanding how two adults knowingly enabling location sharing via a 3rd party service is “a major breach of privacy, for both parties, and also of trust”.

    I’m gathering that your intent was more along the lines of “it’s not very privacy conscious since you have no control over how the 3rd party uses that data or any way to control it”, would that be accurate?

  • It's only vile when you project insecurities or bad intent...

    We both know each other's passwords for everything. We use a shared database for it. We both know each other's phone, unlock codes and often through laziness will just use each other's phones for shit. We shared the same bank accounts, we don't have separate money. We share the same vehicles....etc

    What's mine is hers, what's hers is mine. Except literally.

    We also both have each other's location. What do we use this for? Essentially nothing except when one of us is traveling, or someone is feeling neurotic/worried. The peace of mind knowing that your significant other didn't just die in a car crash part way to their destination and are still making progress is significant.

    We don't hide things from each other, we've explicitly built a relationship of openness and trust, brought on by us actually_not_ trusting each other for a long time. We are completely transparent, and you know what this has helped build? Trust. Know what it has torn down? Insecurities. It's been great.

    Would recommend.

    I’m in the same place as you with my spouse, but we didn’t start with not trusting each other. I just never worry about my spouse knowing things about me—I cannot imagine what I wouldn’t tell her anyway.

    My spouse has (multiple) physical journals lying around the house. I would never read them—she doesn’t worry about hiding them.

  • Yep. This is one of those hard lines for me. And I feel like it's a red flag for anyone who demands it from a partner.

    I trust my partner and they trust me. I actively encourage them to do things without me, because I want them to be an independent person. I want them to have friends that I don't hang out with.

    I comment in a different part of this thread how my spouse and just share everything, but I complete get what you are saying.

  • For one, it wrecks your battery life.

    Secondly, everyone I know my age keeps GPS off unless using a mapping program.

    Finally regarding app privacy, people do care about that which is why grapheneos and other privacy focused OS's exist.

    The fact that you don't care about privacy and want the government and corporations to have every sext you've ever received or sent doesn't mean that others don't care as well.

    Google map's location sharing does not even impact battery life.

  • The main reason my wife and I don't have location sharing set up isn't because of trust or lack thereof between each other, but because I don't trust proprietary/commercial location-sharing services.

    I've been meaning to set up a self-hosted system (mainly because it seems like Home Assistant could do some neat automations with that info), but haven't gotten around to it yet.

    You don't need anything other than home assistant though, right? the companion apps already just do that

  • Starting this by saying: Using tracking apps to see what someone's doing 24/7 or worrying about them cheating is insane and is a solid NO, full stop.

    But I do understand why people use tracking apps, and I wish we had good FOSS alternatives. A tracking/location sharing app where the trackee can turn it on/off anytime they want (after using a password/biometrics, to prevent others from messing with it), so loved ones can be sure you made it to your destination.

    I don't want people stalking their kids, judging their friends for the places they go, surveiling if someone's a cheater, or worst of all, having their data be sold by the shitty companies that run these services.

    I've read stories that have scared me and made me wish I could do something like that when I'm out late. I had to (unfortunately) use Live360 during a field trip in another country cause the teachers needed to keep track of us. I understand safety-wise that these apps are vital

    I wish there was one that didn't require nearly every phone permission all the time.

  • 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.

    I mean that's me to a T but I just suppress those thoughts.

  • 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.

    I don't think enabling it is a good idea though. Yeah, they might be worried, but they need to learn to handle those thoughts. Feeding them can only make it worse.

  • I'm assuming this is a young group, and they've grown up in the always-connected, always-surveilled modern world.

    I've met plenty of people that are surprised or even suspicious when I say that I try to avoid corporations and governments tracking me. I guess the Overton window has shifted so that people expect and accept constant surveillance.

    As a fairly privacy conscious person, I also expect and accept that it's happening too. I don't think you can be privacy conscious and not accept that. You have to be ignorant to think you can hide it all. I do my best to keep as much data out of their hands as possible though. I don't agree with it.

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

    It's be a step out of the relationship with me.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Routinely seen this cause drama between people with poor communication.

    Nosy friend with it? Get ready for I'm coming by or what are you doing there texts.

    know some people who use it to pick up drunk friends just in case. For emergencies. Do they use it like her? Noooooooopeeeee

    Most people lack the maturity for this. It skeeves me the fuck out.

  • Location sharing doesn't prevent any of that though?

    Like, no criminal who would want to rape/murder/abduct you knows whether you are sharing your location with anyone. They would do so regardless before anyone can arrive to help you.

    Also, no kidnapper on this planet is stupid enough to take your phone with them. You have a slightly higher chance for authorities to be alerted sooner but that's about it.

    Oh yeah, location sharing will have almost no effect those risks. Totally agree.

    Just disagreeing that low probability of occurrence automatically means the risk assessment should be low.

  • After 30 years of marriage, my wife floated the idea of turning this on. I looked at her like she had two heads.

    Why would anyone be willfully surveilled? You know its not just your partner that has access to that data when you have location services enabled.

    lol do you think your phone isn’t normally recording your your location data even without this feature turned on?

  • This post did not contain any content.

    I can’t believe the number of people in here with paranoia and shitty relationships that can’t communicate with their “partner”

  • Safety concerns aside, you should trust your partner enough to not need to track them

    There should also be enough trust for either side to never use it except for emergencies.

  • She could text you, no? It seems like getting her to be better at that is better than opening the can of worms involved with location sharing. For example, here's some bad stuff that could happen:

    • phone sells that data to advertisers
    • gov't gets that info and you trigger an alarm (maybe you went hiking a little too close to a sensitive area)
    • data breach happens and now crooks know when you're not home
    • SO's creepy friend sees your location and is secretly stalking you

    Etc. Those probably aren't super likely, but being able to avoid it all entirely with a little better communication sounds a lot better.

    Sometimes it's worth it, like you're going hiking alone or going to a bad part of town.

    Yes, clearly the solution is to make her change her behavior. Needing your SO to change themselves is definitely a sign of a healthy relationship.

  • if I take a coworker home, go out to lunch, etc w/o telling my SO, and they see that deviation in my routine, they could start doubting that trust

    This means there are still significant insecurities in the relationship that can bubble up and become problems, and you know about these.

    You do not trust your spouse to trust you and not misinterpret your intentions.

    Paradoxally You can defeat some of this insecurity by being transparent and welcoming misinterpretation if you believe you both have full trust in each other.

    As a high anxiety person myself, this works to defeat the anxiety which is often feared of the unknown. By proving that deviations to your routine are not something they should feel anxious about, then that anxiety can melt away.

    It honestly hasn't been a big problem, but my SO for some reason invents a bunch of unlikely stuff they have to consciously ignore.

    Do whatever works though.

  • Yes, clearly the solution is to make her change her behavior. Needing your SO to change themselves is definitely a sign of a healthy relationship.

    In a committed relationship, each side should be open to small changes.

  • This is like, the opposite of old-fashioned. Calling your wife when you're on the way home is old-fashioned.

    This article is the first time I'm actually hearing about this idea because it never even occurred to me as something people would actually want to do. I frankly don't see the point of this nonsense. I would much rather talk to my wife on the phone and communicate with her about plans. It's much more human and normal, and facilitates good communication habits. It takes 2 minutes to give my wife a call and, you know what, I get to talk to my wife! We don't need technology invading absolutely every aspect of our lives. We don't need to be constantly plugged in and attached to our phones at the hip.

    It also has other downsides, like making it hard to surprise your partner, constant battery drain from the constant location chatter, etc. In fact, it seems like all downside with no actual benefit (setting aside the trust stuff, because it's pretty irrelevant either way).

    We don't need technology invading absolutely every aspect of our lives.

    Calling each other is technology. It's simply a technology you've normalized

  • Writing is thinking

    Technology technology
    1
    20 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 311 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    207 Aufrufe
    S
    Same, especially when searching technical or niche topics. Since there aren't a ton of results specific to the topic, mostly semi-related results will appear in the first page or two of a regular (non-Gemini) Google search, just due to the higher popularity of those webpages compared to the relevant webpages. Even the relevant webpages will have lots of non-relevant or semi-relevant information surrounding the answer I'm looking for. I don't know enough about it to be sure, but Gemini is probably just scraping a handful of websites on the first page, and since most of those are only semi-related, the resulting summary is a classic example of garbage in, garbage out. I also think there's probably something in the code that looks for information that is shared across multiple sources and prioritizing that over something that's only on one particular page (possibly the sole result with the information you need). Then, it phrases the summary as a direct answer to your query, misrepresenting the actual information on the pages they scraped. At least Gemini gives sources, I guess. The thing that gets on my nerves the most is how often I see people quote the summary as proof of something without checking the sources. It was bad before the rollout of Gemini, but at least back then Google was mostly scraping text and presenting it with little modification, along with a direct link to the webpage. Now, it's an LLM generating text phrased as a direct answer to a question (that was also AI-generated from your search query) using AI-summarized data points scraped from multiple webpages. It's obfuscating the source material further, but I also can't help but feel like it exposes a little of the behind-the-scenes fuckery Google has been doing for years before Gemini. How it bastardizes your query by interpreting it into a question, and then prioritizes homogeneous results that agree on the "answer" to your "question". For years they've been doing this to a certain extent, they just didn't share how they interpreted your query.
  • 668 Stimmen
    122 Beiträge
    325 Aufrufe
    T
    It's something Americans say.
  • Is Google about to destroy the web?

    Technology technology
    65
    1
    192 Stimmen
    65 Beiträge
    346 Aufrufe
    S
    Or validating source, making sure it isn't AI content which usually regurgitates the same talking points. Homogenizing the entire query and removing actual information variance of personal experience.
  • 38 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    48 Aufrufe
    D
    Not easy but not hard actually really simple if you had the right energy. Just ignore this so I don't scare you.
  • 33 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    33 Aufrufe
    C
    AFAIK, you have the option to enable ads on your lock screen. It's not something that's forced upon you. Last time I took a look at the functionality, they "paid" you for the ads and you got to choose which charity to support with the money.
  • 0 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    39 Aufrufe
    L
    Divide and conquer. Non state-actors and special interest have a far easier time attacking a hundred small entities than one big one. Because people have much less bandwidth to track all this shit than it is to spread it around. See ALEC and the strategy behind state rights. In the end this is about economic power. The only way to curb it is through a democratic government. Lemmy servers too can be bought and sold and the communities captured that grew on them.
  • Audible unveils plans to use AI voices to narrate audiobooks

    Technology technology
    6
    1
    0 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    40 Aufrufe
    fancypantsfire@lemm.eeF
    Ah, I see what you’re saying, I misunderstood and thought you were taking about picking a different book. Indeed, for the worst case scenario a mediocre AI voice could be an improvement!