Moves joins Facebook(moves-app.com) |
Moves joins Facebook(moves-app.com) |
I don't believe this for one second. Glad I have my Withings Pulse now so I can drop the Moves app.
Sure - the moment I read this, I deleted my account and the app, but who's to say that the data is really gone now and hasn't been copied to Facebook before this?
First they got all my WhatsApp messages and now my Moves data.
No longer can I chose to not share data with Facebook when they can just come in and purchase it after-the-fact. This will certainly make me even more careful whom I'm willing to create an account with.
Up until the WhatsApp and Moves deal, I had this rule that if I pay for it, it'll probably going to be independent because whoever's running it will be able to sustain it.
But now that this is out of the window, what's left as an indicator? How can I use a service if I don't want the data I create/store there to end up at Facebook?
The only way I can think of is if you can find a service that has a legally-binding promise to notify you with ample time to terminate your account and remove your data before merging with another company. But I'd be shocked if many/any companies do this, because they'd be hamstringing their value.
Even promisses to destroy in the contract wouldn’t be enough — because the entity that would promise to delete your data wouldn’t exist as soon as there is a legally binding event.
At the moment, the only thing protecting you from that are competition authorities. If you can file a request for consideration saying that this would harm their users overall (not just isolate case: Competition authorities deal with economic policy, not individual cases), then you might block the overall sale.
As someone who’s digged for years into current principles, I can say taht we are not even remotely close to having proper understanding by the lawyers of what kind of harm is at stake, let alone measuring it; from there, wait ten years and a couple of controversial cases to make it into effective policy.
Even if they weren't initially, they could have started storing them whenever they wanted without telling anybody or any other indication that they would.
Especially since the deal with Facebook, assume all messages to be kept around and linked with your profile.
Beyond privacy legislation (unlikely and probably draconian), there is only one solution to the problem that I see: help build the next generation of open web protocols so people can host their own private services and talk to one another without anyone having your data.
This would be the most private/open/free way to go, though the problem with that is there's basically no money in it yet. And no one has figured out how to make it a compelling user experience.
What exactly is your problem?
Facebook is a data company, I'm sure they'd LOVE an accurate source of where their users have been, how they're moving around, etc. And then to sell-on that data to third parties, offer targeted advertisements in real time.
It's not like Facebook is in need of new users and the app itself isn't especially novel from a technical POV.
If I was a competitor the first thing I'd do right now is to make a way to migrate users' data from Moves to my app.
http://www.quora.com/Gowalla/Where-did-my-Gowalla-data-go
A few weeks back I started playing with Moves' new export and TileMill, with some cool results:
Yes!
"Thank you for supporting us on this journey, and we’re looking forward to our future at Facebook!"
In other words, they're using PR-speak because they've started believing it.
Most of my friends, when I talk to them about how much information is being collected by FB/GOOGLE, just do not care all that much. Responses range from "I got nothing to hide from anybody" to "I think targeted ad is just fine". At that point I don't know what to say. Since in my case I just have a visceral hate toward company who attempt to collect all data about myself. Is it actually that bad?
I haven't tried it, but I already have a Runkeeper account and I think I'm going to give it a shot.
I've been using the Moves app to add important context to my "quantified self" data on zenobase.com. The Saga app is an alternative in case Moves languishes--at least until they get acquired by someone, too :-)
Anyone interested in maybe jamming on something like this should definitely drop me a line.
I very much doubt this will remain the case for long, otherwise why would they bother buying it?
> Sharing data with third parties
> We do not disclose an individual user’s data to third parties unless (1) you have given explicit consent to each such disclosure, (2) we are required to comply with a legal obligation or (3) if our business or assets, or parts of them, are acquired by a third party. [...]
Then goes on:
> Third parties will be bound by applicable data protection legislation and/or this privacy policy concerning the disclosed data.
Well, of course they will be bound by data protection legislation, which makes me feel the whole sentence is disingenuous and meant to give you the warm fuzzies while meaning nothing at all.
It would be easy to keep it working standalone while still allowing it to automatically integrate itself with facebook (whether you like it or not) if you are logged in to that in the same browser session.
Though I suppose anyone genuinely bothered by that (rather than just sounding off) won't be using facebook at all anyway.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/human-make-moving-fun-run/id...
http://form-d.findthebest.com/l/25508/Humanco-Inc
http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/sn...
Unfortunately, Humanco requires you to set up an account and store your data on their servers. Moves was great because you could store it all locally. I think the best option is to stick with Moves, and never update it again.
I'll be watching you
"Every breath you take" by Sting
I use iOS by the way. Still have a gmail account but that might not last long. Moving email is a bit harder than deleting an app off my home screen.
This week: Moves
Next week: Gmail... oh wait.
sigh
I tried to use it, but it killed my battery and couldn't catch things that my Nike Fuelband could, since I don't take my phone to the gym, to run, etc.
Still, good on them for getting a piece of the pie.
I fail to understand why companies keep acquiring mobile app businesses, but what do I know.
The battery consumption isn't a problem if I don't move around the city all day long, but if I do, I need a mobile battery charger.
Having worked with similar apps before, I can guarantee that the battery problem is hard to solve well, I know that Moves team did the best they could and their solution is world class.
I exported all my data and closed my account following this news as I feel I already give Facebook enough data by simply having a Facebook account.
Thankfully the exported data is in multiple formats and looks to be very complete. Hopefully I'll be able to do something with it someday.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/facebook-we-will-make-our-p...
These "oh crap I have to move my stuff, Facebook owns it" reactions baffle me. I can understand a desire for privacy, but using an online service by definition means you're at risk.
Hosting your own services on your own computers and communicating with open distributed protocols would be the most private way to go, though the problem with that is there's basically no money in building a social media system that works that way, so many attempts (Atompub/Atom, XMPP) have mostly remained niches.
Because that threat is likely, they try to purchase those when they appear.
My take remains that public intervention should be considered. There is no legal framework for that for the moment — therefore Facebook lawyers don’t see the issue; if there were, their lobbyists would be all over it.
History has shown that laws may target unpopular groups who have done nothing wrong, and well meaning governments can force well meaning companies to divulge information relevant to unjust laws.
Thing of it as your credit rating (if you live in the US) or you ability to lie to your plumber and say “I’ll just ask another one” when you have a leak, water up the knees and he asks for a month’s salary to fix the issue. Information matters when it allows to measure you willingness to pay for something — it’s basic micro-economics.
You can step in a wine merchant or your car dealer (both classic cases in the economic literature) or with either a t-shirt or a suit and tie; in either case, they’ll offer you all the same options, but unless the labels are true (they are not if they are too high and without dealer-negotiated rebate) the price will adapt and make sure you’ll pay as much as you can.
So… what happens on-line? Well, with the traces of your Facebook and Google logs, airlines can tell if you are really willing to take that flight, and might rake up the prices accordingly. It can come in many ways, depending if they have LinkedIn information (and can tell if it is for business or not) and they are generally far from perfect, but… Imagine that at one point, people notice it can be cheaper when you use the Incognito mode.
That would trigger a reaction: political ones (banning the practice, unlikely in the US; already done for some cases in the EU); one would be to only sell through a mobile application that have your Facebook ID (or your mobile phone, same thing) and don’t let you the option of hiding it. Very rapidly, anyone who refuses to be identified will be refused service — just like you can only pay using credit cards and letting FISA know you bough something big for many things today.
Forced service, cash is King? No problem: just make it more expensive than most non-revealing option, like what happen now if you want to purchase a car sticker-price. You are perfectly welcome to say you have negotiation and don’t want to deal with the slimy sales tactic: they would be happy to oblige.
But imagine that is not jus cars, but anything that is advertised on Facebook now: restaurants, transport, real-estate, games, electronic. Face value crazy high; “social price” lower, but never exactly the same.
You might be fine not having the social value — but if a single entity controls enough information about how much enough people are willing to pay… we will all suffer, except the stock-holders of that application.
It is a widely assumed belief that I have never seen backed up with hard facts.
User data being FB & Google's crown jewels and competitive advantage, you bet that they are concerned about not leaking it to anyone at all...
‘Privacy’ or even ‘Data’ are not even remotely well defined enough for those statements to have a clear meaning. However, many people have felt betrayed when using Facebook.
Some of it — potentially the majority of cases — have to do with the fact that the service is new, and the lack of understanding led to many context collapses: there are many situations to consider, but all involve three people knowing each other, one having authority over a second, but not a third. Classic case involve a teenage child, a parent and a common friend or relative. The relative reveals inadvertently something. This is far more disempowering to non-users mentioned by friends, or whose photo was taken.
Facebook was openly careless about those cases, manu legitimate — Mark Zuckerberg went up to publicly justify his disregard by saying that people shouldn’t have things to hide to their friends, a callous statement if there is any.
There are many more problematic cases, where the person feeling betrayed was attentive and knowledgable, but Facebook changed the way they handle privacy without clear warning, and something that wasn’t became visible. This is the case of profile pictures, for instance. You have important social information there; some people assumed that their photo with their significant other would remain as private as their set it, but that changed, without recourses. There are many more similar issues, related to poor explanations of updates.
There is no way the wordings chose for most updates came form considerate product managers.
There are more examples, generally to the overall attitude: ‘better ask for foregiveness than permission’, rephrased as (and plastered all over their headquarter as essential values): “Move fast, break things”. When it comes to privacy, you can’t get the cat back in the bag.
Company motto, public statements by the Founder-CEO, presentation of privacy-impacting updates… that’s plenty of proof for who would take five minutes to care looking.
I know for a fact that people at Facebook care about those — just they haven’t cared enough, repeatedly; and those cases where well documented.
It isn't so much of a leap of reasoning to think that a company willing to sell some information about you isn't willing to go further than you'd like them to. Again, it's not that we're worried about them 'leaking' it - we're worried about how they're going to sell and make money off of it.
If you are given a free service you better expect targeted ads at some point.
Theres a reason I'm looking to replace gmail after being a "beta" invitee from ages ago. But its a long term project as I have to migrate both to new email account and also update countless logins to use it. Pretty much on the back burner for the moment.