return2ozma@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 month ago‘If I switch it off, my girlfriend might think I’m cheating’: inside the rise of couples location sharingwww.theguardian.comexternal-linkmessage-square387linkfedilinkarrow-up11arrow-down10
arrow-up11arrow-down1external-link‘If I switch it off, my girlfriend might think I’m cheating’: inside the rise of couples location sharingwww.theguardian.comreturn2ozma@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 month agomessage-square387linkfedilink
minus-square_g_be@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·1 month agoSeems like the underlying tension is wether being surveiled at all is inherently a violation. If it is, then your partner doing it might feel like a lack of trust. for my benefit Its not a benefit if you don’t like being tracked If not, then it’s just a practical tool, might as well use the data if it’s getting captured anyway.
minus-squarePup Biru@aussie.zonelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·1 month ago surveiled surveillance implies active, constant, and surreptitious… i would not classify mutual location sharing as any of that: it’s passive, occasional, and well-known and consented to by both parties
minus-square_g_be@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·edit-21 month agoIf you’re doing this through Google or whichever company is facilitating, then I would say that’s the party doing all of the things listed. But yes, I presented it in the context of just the two parties, so your point is still valid
Seems like the underlying tension is wether being surveiled at all is inherently a violation.
If it is, then your partner doing it might feel like a lack of trust.
If not, then it’s just a practical tool, might as well use the data if it’s getting captured anyway.
surveillance implies active, constant, and surreptitious… i would not classify mutual location sharing as any of that: it’s passive, occasional, and well-known and consented to by both parties
If you’re doing this through Google or whichever company is facilitating, then I would say that’s the party doing all of the things listed.
But yes, I presented it in the context of just the two parties, so your point is still valid