I always get cheap phones that have no chance of facebook, twitter or other BS being installed. It's cheaper too or free with a contract.

I don't buy phones "on contract" either. (Why would you sign-up for a 2+ year long credit agreement so that you can pay $600-$1,000 for a device that actually costs the company about $80?) "That is so 20th Century ..."

Nevertheless, all phones that you buy today have GPSes in them, and they run "apps."

I think that we, in the data processing industries, need to be the ones who are blowing the whistle ... and that right-now is an extremely fortuitous time to be doing so, everywhere in the world but especially in the United States. There are, I think, two key reasons:

1. The general public does not know what we do, does not wish to care, and does not look on both sides of any coin. But there will be unholy hell to pay when (not if ...) they do. A lot of careers, and a lot of companies, are going to be wiped-out by the backlash. The dollar-amounts of legal liability theories could be uncalculable. Governments and government-contractors can probably use a cloaking device; the rest of us can't.
2. The "military homeland-security (sic ...) industrial complex" is a typical example of human nature == greed, also. Scare a few politicians with disaster scenarios or simple C.Y.A. and presto! "the billions of top-secret dollars come raining down like manna from heaven." C'mon, what's really of greater concern to you: the actual impact of your goodies to the general public, or figuring out yet another way to sell something else to your dear Uncle Sugar?

The typical way that societies discover the "downside" to anything, is to run headlong off of the cliff. But, now that our world society finds itself so tightly interconnected, the stakes for all of us are substantially higher. Given the industry that we are in, we'd better not keep our mouths shut, because when the hits the air-movement device, it's gonna rain down on us.

There are plans with per-month contracts. You sign up for a month and you re-activate each month. I think that's better than yearly contracts. I don't see any facebook or twitter on my phone, but there is GPS.

if you ask me this would be a good reason to stay away from face book and turn off GPS
BUT can you really turn off GPS and expect it to stay off
anybody remember active x controls from internet exploiter
there is an undocumented code that can turn active x controls on
regardless of what the user setting are
I use the cheapest cell phone I can find I doubt it has a GPS chip in it
if it dose I'm going to be looking into cutting a trace to turn GPS off permanently

Ditto! (Not just for the privacy issues...but I hate cell phones in general, and just carry one for emergencies, and keep it turned off most of the time).

I think they either all have GPS tracking capability- or, at the very least, can be tracked simply because they are a radio transmitter/receiver with a unique identifier. In the state of Missouri, (and others too, I'm sure) they now keep track of traffic conditions (even in rural areas where there is no traffic to speak of) by monitoring how many cell phone signals are being picked up on a given road. Scary!

Locally, a few years ago, an innocent woman who was falsely accused of being a hit-and-run driver in an accident that resulted in the death of a child, was cleared because her cell phone data put her at a different location at the time of the accident. [After she spent 7 months in jail awaiting trial...and after the prosecutor tried to have the cell phone evidence barred from evidence! ...this is the monstrous country we are living in...] Although they didn't get that data from GPS, they essentially did the same thing simply by triangulating the pings from the various cell towers that picked-up her phone- which is pretty much how GPS works... so you don't need to actually have GPS to "GPS-plotted", as long as you have a radio signal and a unique identifier- AKA a SIM card).

The average person buys their smartphone + contract for social networking, social networking apps and considers the GPS a useful toy. They want to be tracked, they allow themselves to be tracked and don't see a problem with being tracked. Ignorance about tracking is only a small part of this, there is also the bigger factor of "ignorance is bliss".

This is why it's stupidly easy for the big tech corps and intelligence/security/spy agencies to track anyone and everyone.

The major social network has about 1 billion users - that's a billion people who want to be tracked, spied on and have their data sold to third parties. That's one billion people who think the minority of privacy conscious people are tinfoilasshats for not wanting the same. They don't listen to the people who know, instead they read the dumbed down technology press or watch the dumbed down news articles. This is because the later speak a language they can understand - hyped up sensationalist hysteria...

As they say - it's safe to assume that if data can be collected it will be collected. The net is closing in and there is pressure on the mega corps to not only collect as much data as possible, but also to provide extremely detailed data which can be analysed to produce bankable consumer stats, forecasting and of course data which is of interest to "national security".

Cynwulf, you're describing the present state, but you're also describing a present-state populated by people who are mostly ignorant of the implications of their actions. No one gives serious thought to the reality of a private company having an insanely-detailed dossier on the innermost "private" details of hundreds of millions of individuals. No one in the private sector; no one in government.

Yet.

But, "yet" is a mighty big word, and those who do not soberly consider its full ramifications will one day be bankrupted out of existence. Don't look at "mighty-looking things" like Facebook and assume that even they are invulnerable. They are not.

HAhahaha!!! A new one for my vocabulary! Love it!

What amazes me, is how people not only put their real name on computers when setting them up- just because they're promted to- but they do the same on all the social-nutworking sites, too! (Makes me glad that I'm a loner- No temptation to ever use any of that junk!). It's like they don't even give the remotest thought to their privacy or security. Even if they're totally clueless about gov't and corporate spying, you'd think just with all the identity-theft and all, that that alone would give them a little reason to safeguard personal info from the prying eyes of the WHOLE FREAKING WORLD.

I'm amazed, when I go to the local big-box home-improvement supply store, when the cashier routinely asks for customer's phone numbers when they check out, everyone (but me) gives it! I'd wager that if they asked for a Socialist Security number/birthdate/car registration...they'd also give that- anything that is asked of them. Amazing! Those same people look at us and say: "What have you got to hide?!".

I think the key word here is "ignorance." Folks have no idea how much information is being compiled about them or what even a little bit of it reveals.

The only Google service I use with any regularity is the calendar. From that you can figure out my political leanings quite easily (I shoot my mouth off about them on my blog quite freely, so they are no secret and I don't care who knows), when I take the cats to the vet, when and where my LUG meets.

Add to that GPS tracking data for me and others, and you could know where my routine takes me, where and when I shop, who I meet with and when I meet with them, where I buy groceries, and so on.

I suspect that, if more persons knew how much GPS and social networking data (we won't even think about stuff like Foursquare and Meetup) can reveal, they might start thinking twice about running nekkid through the innerwebs.

Truthfully, we've had thought police ever since we've had webcams, recording equipment, and things of that nature. Or, actually, we've had thought police from the beginning, when spies came to be. And FaceBook tracking people, in my opinion, was coming for years. And now, it's almost here.

As I've said many times now, what scares me is not "the guv'mint" so much as "the private sector." No laws (yet), no regulations (yet), no discipline concerning information security, and "find the lowest-priced contractor anywhere in the world that you can get." This is what I think that we as "the industry" need to be raising the alarm about.

I don't usually discuss politics, but from what I last heard the gov's main purpose is to funnel money from the people to corporations and to protect their interests (not not your interests). But that's enough of me on politics, I'm out.

It's the trend with others as well. The question is can they* turn GPS back on remotely or even enable eavesdropping (mic\cam?) More than likely... if you don't have 100% free software running every aspect of your device and know how to use it your screwed! Wow had an RMS moment there.

With corporations, you have a choice of whether to participate/use their services. With the gooberment, there is no choice- they just do it. It is forced on you. Also, th corps are just interested in making money off of you/the sale of your data; while the government, in addition to wanting to wring every last cent from your hyde, wants to totally control your life; activities; interactions....maybe even throw you in the gulag they think that you know too much/make too much noise/might expose their corruption.

I can steer clear of Google's surveillence; but there's no way to avoid the traffic cameras; metal-detectors; giving-up of personal info to the gooberment, when they've come to control and regulate every facet of life; and require some license; permit; and/or tax for virtually anything one can do.

The real scary thing is when gov't teams up with corporations! (As they're doing with all this technological BS they're engaged in)- When lust for power and lust money come together to work with each other....(as is now the case)....watch out!

I'm not sure I agree that greed ("just interested in making money off of you") is somehow a noble motive, nor with the implied belief underpinning that statement that government is somehow inherently evil. I don't think I would prefer anarchy to (rational) governance, and those would seem to be the choices (except, of course, for the third choice of irrational governance, of which there is far too much).

I do agree that, when anyone proposes to do something "for your own good" (whether it's to "improve your browsing experience," "to provide better service," or to protect you from amorphous unspecified danger), scrutiny and skepticism are warranted.