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
  • This post did not contain any content.

    a common way to keep tabs on friends, family and romantic partners
    so I allow the app to alert him each time I reach my front door. In a disappointingly heteronormative and retrograde move, I’m more interested in knowing when he goes out – where’s he off to now? – and set up my own notifications accordingly.
    Having grown up with the internet, gen Z are, generally, more comfortable sharing their data online; Snapchat, the social media platform notoriously most popular with younger users, has long incorporated location sharing with its Snap Maps feature.

    Does anyone even have a private moment at all?
    Also if I were to cheat I'd leave my phone in a very specific spot if I can. Faux location services may work, but mostly switching to a feature phone seems to be secret trick that shuts down these app fueled nightmare.

    Oh, sorry, the battery is down I had to switch to my old phone for a moment!
    When did we stop having private moments and thoughts?
    I like tech when it aides me, but recently it has been feeding off my personal time and even some order of thoughts in ways it didn't do before. It almost feels like it tries to fix and set up human emotions in ways that are forced.

    Do you want technology to replace normal communication and socialisation skills? Or does it even matter to you that it is what happens now. Remember that only a few years before nobody followed you all the day, and even the internet access was relegated to a computer room. How far have we come from that?

  • Then brake up with her!
    Why you stay with partner that do not trust you?
    Yea not everything works perfect inba relationship, but people should allow some space.

    Why you stay with partner that do not trust you?

    Because the dating scene sucks.

    That's sort of the irony of it all. People are terrified of being cheated on, because it implies their partner has an attractive alternative they found with mysterious ease. Meanwhile, they're stuck trawling for singles in the gutter.

    But it's illusionary. Hot MILFs are not, in fact, In Your Area Waiting To Fuck. Being single, particularly when you're older, is miserable for a lot of people.

  • Yes we're teenagers. We've been married 15 years, ceremony was when we were three.

    Privacy is important, have you never kept a diary? Do you film therapy sessions lest your partner not know what you discussed? Shit with the door open? You don't need justification for wanting privacy, you need privacy so when you have a good reason for it nothing looks different.

    What if there’s an emergency?

    What if there is? Get help, that's an insane fear to live with. If I am unconscious there's nothing to do anyway, the hospital or whatever will find her details in my purse and call. What the fuck am I going to do, sit there watching the dot on the map and calling 000 if it stops moving? You are a lunatic, we have society to take care of us while we're out and about and emergency beacons if you're like camping beyond the black stump or sailing the Pacific.

    If there's an emergency it will be known regardless. Levels of paranoia that are not justified; how many emergencies have you been in where an Internet connected device is so important in the shortest amount of time? Or at all. No. You might need a phone. But not an app in particular.

    And for long term emergencies an fm/am radio is a better tool than the Internet.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Do we all really think this is a great idea when fascism and toxic masculinity are catastrophically growing globally like a late stage mestastized cancer?

    Do you think enabling all those men to abusively control their spouses is just the forward march of technological progress?

  • Its definitely a huge issue at hand.

    I don't disagree, but it's not the issue being discussed? 🤷♂

  • they have control over giving that information to the 3rd party, but they don't have any control after that, over how the information is used. with that in mind, do you think they have control over their information?

    they are choosing to allow a 3rd party access to that information

    that's right, allowing that 3rd party. but did they choose to share it with the business partners of that 3rd party too? are they aware of what is happening in the background? even if they didn't just register-accept-next-next-finish it, most people have no idea about it, because there's so little discourse about it.

    like, when I registered to facebook many years ago I had no idea what I was doing. I was using their services a lot for years, blissfully unaware that facebook is a shit company. and what control did I have at the end? the illusion of deletion.

    with that in mind, do you think they have control over their information?

    It’s not about what I think, they have control over whether to share their location data with a 3rd party or not. By definition that is control. They also have control to stop sharing that data at any time.

    Do you have anything to support that the specific system used by the original commenter is using that data in a manner not agreed to when they shared it or in a way that the original commenter doesn’t agree to?

    Or are you applying your own personal preferences and beliefs to someone else’s situation?

  • Further most people don't know they are in abusive relationships even if it is obvious to others around them so the casually dismissive argument "well abusive couples shouldn't use it" is a trash argument.

    Whether you know it or not does not change the message. Abusive couples shouldn't not use this app, they shouldn't be couples.

  • If my partner could check my location at any time, how would I keep bday and anniversary gifts secret? The places where I go to buy things for her are not places I would normally go. She only has to randomly check one time when I'm at an unusual location for her to ask why and then I have to lie. Not worth it.

    We use temporary sharing (can limit to one hour) when meeting somewhere. Beyond that, it's a potential liability.

    Example: she once got upset that I wanted to go to the mail room (apt building) alone and didn't want her to go with me. She wanted to know what I was hiding. Turned out to be her bday gift and it was just in the commercial packaging with a shipping label. I let her go get it and she's never been suspicious of my motives since (this was at the very start of our relationship and we hadn't established the level of trust that we have now).

    Anyway, again, the one-hour sharing is all we need.

    Sounds like you guys have some serious trust issues. If sharing your location with each other devolves that quickly, it ain’t the tech making problems.

  • a common way to keep tabs on friends, family and romantic partners
    so I allow the app to alert him each time I reach my front door. In a disappointingly heteronormative and retrograde move, I’m more interested in knowing when he goes out – where’s he off to now? – and set up my own notifications accordingly.
    Having grown up with the internet, gen Z are, generally, more comfortable sharing their data online; Snapchat, the social media platform notoriously most popular with younger users, has long incorporated location sharing with its Snap Maps feature.

    Does anyone even have a private moment at all?
    Also if I were to cheat I'd leave my phone in a very specific spot if I can. Faux location services may work, but mostly switching to a feature phone seems to be secret trick that shuts down these app fueled nightmare.

    Oh, sorry, the battery is down I had to switch to my old phone for a moment!
    When did we stop having private moments and thoughts?
    I like tech when it aides me, but recently it has been feeding off my personal time and even some order of thoughts in ways it didn't do before. It almost feels like it tries to fix and set up human emotions in ways that are forced.

    Do you want technology to replace normal communication and socialisation skills? Or does it even matter to you that it is what happens now. Remember that only a few years before nobody followed you all the day, and even the internet access was relegated to a computer room. How far have we come from that?

    Snapchat, the social media platform notoriously most popular with younger users, has long incorporated location sharing with its Snap Maps feature

    Fuck me. I dont even share my first and last name with any social media site, much less my photo. My current location? The fuck is wrong with people?

  • Whether you know it or not does not change the message. Abusive couples shouldn't not use this app, they shouldn't be couples.

    My point is when people use this argument "Well abusive couples just shouldn't be couples!" it is a way to dismiss the danger of never ending surveillance that makes an INCREDIBLY problematic leap of condemning people falling into abusive relationships to simply suffer, tough luck... and it demonstrates a callous, ineffective and frankly worrying understanding of how abusive relationships formed in general.

  • My point is when people use this argument "Well abusive couples just shouldn't be couples!" it is a way to dismiss the danger of never ending surveillance that makes an INCREDIBLY problematic leap of condemning people falling into abusive relationships to simply suffer, tough luck... and it demonstrates a callous, ineffective and frankly worrying understanding of how abusive relationships formed in general.

    It doesn't dismiss anything. It's just a statement of fact. Certainly in certain contexts it could be interpreted that way.

  • Call me old fashioned, but I put it in the same bucket as a prenup

    I don't agree. Prenups are passive, they don't do anything until not needed. all the while this is a major breach of privacy, for both parties, and also of trust.

    My wife and I share our location. We both trust each other implicitly and neither of us consider it a breach of privacy, but rather a willing sharing of information. I think if this is demanded of someone unilaterally, it would be both a breach of privacy and trust, but it's just so damn convenient for our lives and makes us both feel safer. If I'm out late in the city to see a friend, my wife can easily see that I'm safe making it to my car and driving home. If my wife is working late and forgets to text, I can easily check and know she's still in the building. As two gay women, it was a no-brainer for us. I would never demand that of someone. It seems like a lot of people in the comments see sharing location as an intrinsically harmful or negative action, whereas it's far more context and consent dependent for me. Hell, I even share my location with a friend for a few hours if I'm doing something sketchy.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    My wife and I have location sharing enabled in case something happens to one of us. We usually don't use it, but its good to have when we need to meet up at an unfamiliar place after something goes sideways for one of us.

    But if your SO doesn't trust you enough to allow you private moments and would accuse you of cheating, your relationship isn't based on trust and thus is very weak.

  • This comment is just 'what do you have to worry about it you're not doing anything wrong' with extra words.

    Consensually choosing to share my location with my wife is not the same as not caring about my data being collected or sold. I don't have any intention to break her trust, but that has nothing to do with why we share location. It's all about safety and convenience. I know when she's working late. She knows when I made it back to my car safely after a night out. I know when she's on her way home, even when she forgets to text me, so I can start cooking. As two gay women in a conservative area, it just made sense.

  • My wife and I have our location shared with each other 24/7. Furthermore, my sister also has mine and my wife has her sister's. It has nothing to do with trust and everything to do with safety. Perhaps the real trust is not assuming your partner will use your location to control you.

    Being tracked is control enough for me. But I do understand it in dangerous situations, returning through forest at night etc.

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Install a ROM on your phone and claim it no longer works on there 🙂

  • If a partner demand they have it on to prove they're not cheating, then they should be looking for a different partner.

    I've already solved that by not finding a partner 😎👎

  • This post did not contain any content.

    Quit cheating or split up. It’s not complicated.

  • Third parties is plural. English kinda hard sometimes lowkey

    Apple’s built-in location sharing is not sent to advertisers.

  • Very hinged lemmy comment.

    If my wife knows my location it’s an invasion of privacy

    I seriously doubt any of the losers in this thread have been in a loving relationship before.

  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Broadcom Eyes $2 Trillion Club as AI Chip Demand Explodes

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    39 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    26 Aufrufe
    I
    Selling shovels in a gold rush, can't say I blame them.
  • 37 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    21 Aufrufe
    P
    Idk if it’s content blocking on my end but I can’t tell you how upset I am that the article had no pictures of the contraption or a video of it in action.
  • 94 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    11 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Catbox.moe got screwed 😿

    Technology technology
    40
    55 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    257 Aufrufe
    archrecord@lemm.eeA
    I'll gladly give you a reason. I'm actually happy to articulate my stance on this, considering how much I tend to care about digital rights. Services that host files should not be held responsible for what users upload, unless: The service explicitly caters to illegal content by definition or practice (i.e. the if the website is literally titled uploadyourcsamhere[.]com then it's safe to assume they deliberately want to host illegal content) The service has a very easy mechanism to remove illegal content, either when asked, or through simple monitoring systems, but chooses not to do so (catbox does this, and quite quickly too) Because holding services responsible creates a whole host of negative effects. Here's some examples: Someone starts a CDN and some users upload CSAM. The creator of the CDN goes to jail now. Nobody ever wants to create a CDN because of the legal risk, and thus the only providers of CDNs become shady, expensive, anonymously-run services with no compliance mechanisms. You run a site that hosts images, and someone decides they want to harm you. They upload CSAM, then report the site to law enforcement. You go to jail. Anybody in the future who wants to run an image sharing site must now self-censor to try and not upset any human being that could be willing to harm them via their site. A social media site is hosting the posts and content of users. In order to be compliant and not go to jail, they must engage in extremely strict filtering, otherwise even one mistake could land them in jail. All users of the site are prohibited from posting any NSFW or even suggestive content, (including newsworthy media, such as an image of bodies in a warzone) and any violation leads to an instant ban, because any of those things could lead to a chance of actually illegal content being attached. This isn't just my opinion either. Digital rights organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation have talked at length about similar policies before. To quote them: "When social media platforms adopt heavy-handed moderation policies, the unintended consequences can be hard to predict. For example, Twitter’s policies on sexual material have resulted in posts on sexual health and condoms being taken down. YouTube’s bans on violent content have resulted in journalism on the Syrian war being pulled from the site. It can be tempting to attempt to “fix” certain attitudes and behaviors online by placing increased restrictions on users’ speech, but in practice, web platforms have had more success at silencing innocent people than at making online communities healthier." Now, to address the rest of your comment, since I don't just want to focus on the beginning: I think you have to actively moderate what is uploaded Catbox does, and as previously mentioned, often at a much higher rate than other services, and at a comparable rate to many services that have millions, if not billions of dollars in annual profits that could otherwise be spent on further moderation. there has to be swifter and stricter punishment for those that do upload things that are against TOS and/or illegal. The problem isn't necessarily the speed at which people can be reported and punished, but rather that the internet is fundamentally harder to track people on than real life. It's easy for cops to sit around at a spot they know someone will be physically distributing illegal content at in real life, but digitally, even if you can see the feed of all the information passing through the service, a VPN or Tor connection will anonymize your IP address in a manner that most police departments won't be able to track, and most three-letter agencies will simply have a relatively low success rate with. There's no good solution to this problem of identifying perpetrators, which is why platforms often focus on moderation over legal enforcement actions against users so frequently. It accomplishes the goal of preventing and removing the content without having to, for example, require every single user of the internet to scan an ID (and also magically prevent people from just stealing other people's access tokens and impersonating their ID) I do agree, however, that we should probably provide larger amounts of funding, training, and resources, to divisions who's sole goal is to go after online distribution of various illegal content, primarily that which harms children, because it's certainly still an issue of there being too many reports to go through, even if many of them will still lead to dead ends. I hope that explains why making file hosting services liable for user uploaded content probably isn't the best strategy. I hate to see people with good intentions support ideas that sound good in practice, but in the end just cause more untold harms, and I hope you can understand why I believe this to be the case.
  • 88 Stimmen
    21 Beiträge
    114 Aufrufe
    J
    The self hosted model has hard coded censored content.
  • 220 Stimmen
    99 Beiträge
    462 Aufrufe
    G
    In highrises with lots of stops and users, it uses some more advanced software to schedule the optimal stops, or distribute the load between multiple lifts. A similar concept exists for HDD controllers, where the read write arm must move to different positions to load data stored on different plates and sectors, and Repositioning the head is a slow and expensive process that cuts down the data transfer rate.
  • 0 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    22 Aufrufe
    A
    I bet that information was already available to business owners. In other words, they totally knew it was you complaining about the toilet paper they used for example.