I've noticed that when I travel, I get spam calls from the area code I am visiting. I have asked my cell provider if they monetize my location data, and they swear they aren't. But I don't trust them, given that no one else (other than Apple) would know where I am in real time. Recently switched providers and haven't experienced it since then. Wouldn't be surprised if there was a class action lawsuit someday.
Of course, this doesn't require having GPS location, just cell tower info is enough.
> But I don't trust them, given that no one else (other than Apple) would know where I am in real time.
Literally every website and app you use with any kind of shared analytics/ads gets your general location just from your IP address alone, and can update your profile on that analytics/ads provider.
It is far more likely this, than your cell phone provider.
I use a virtual number for almost all such signups (only doctors or other safety-related providers), so I'm not sure that would be a possible avenue for these calls, which come to my direct cell phone number. It is not quite a secret, but it is not something I give out to many companies.
They do pattern matching against lots of pieces of information. It could be as simple as a local utility company selling their customer list with phone number and address attached, then a retail website has your address from when you bought something, now your phone number gets linked.
It doesn't matter if you don't give your phone number to many companies, it only takes one.
Yeah it's a possibility if they matched up ad stuff with my home location and guessed at my phone number based on that.
But if they're trying to get me to answer the phone, calling from a local number actually makes me less likely to answer. Nobody would be calling my cell phone from the city I'm visiting. I'm more likely to pick up a call if the area code is from back home.
Pure Talk. Much cheaper than AT&T, and good customer service. But I found something that was cheaper on an unlimited basis. Between that and the sketchy calls I was getting, I decided to move.
One of the reasons I use iPhones is that Apple controls an integrated hardware/software experience, which makes it less likely that private information is being leaked despite the presence of privacy controls.
I wouldn’t be so confident. The article even references this. Apple has used third-party baseband devices in the iPhone since the beginning, which was from other manufacturers. All bets are off regarding security when this is the case. This does included microphone access.
The article touches on this by saying Apple is making the baseband/modem hardware now. Something they should have done since day one, and I’m not sure what took them so long. However, it was was clear they didn’t have the expertise in this area and it was easier to just uses someone else’s.
Apple found out the hard way with the iPhone 4. Their secrecy didn't help. People doing real world testing had a case that made it look like an iPhone 3s and that also happened to mitigate the death grip problem. We know this because one was stolen and given to gizmodo.
And that was even only antenna design, they still used a standard RF stack then.
Apple is not as lazy as anyone else, don't believe the hype.
That assertion is a bit overblown. And people can easily find out it's overblown with a bit of research.
But at the same time, my whole philosophy is never let it touch any network connected device at all if it is critical. I don't care if it's an Apple device.
Here's reality, mobile carriers have been able to get your location from nearly the inception of mass market mobile phone use. I'm not sure anyone really believed their location was somehow secret and not discoverable. If you're using the phone or internet networks, you're not anonymous. Full stop.
Forget whatever anyone told you about your VPN, or whatever other anonymization/privacy machine that Mr McBean is selling Sneetches these days. Assume everyone is tracked, and some are even watched. Therefore everything you do or say with your devices should be considered content that is posted publicly with an uncertain release date.
There is a pretty large chasm between "When you explicit (or accidentally) use the siri functionality, it can record the interaction for quality purposes and per the agreement you made share that will Apple or its agents" and "random third parties can engage hardware functionality without your knowledge and spy on you".
I am entirely, 100% certain that my telco can't just enable the microphone on my iPhone and record me, short of some 0-day exploit. I simply cannot make that bet on many other devices.
I'm surprised that an app like this can be rated are 4+, since any open web browser has to be adult-only. I would think that an app like this, unless it has very secure guardrails.
How does Apple deal with rating apps that tie into LLMs?
Crazy that when I search for this in the App Store on my phone, it first shows me results for Talbots, and then when I click "show results for Talkbits" it shows me a bunch of other apps. I scrolled through a bunch but then gave up and copied/pasted the URL. Ridiculous!
It is not hard for many students to get a pretty good score (1350). But a score like this will not help you get into a top school, and might actually hurt you. Even having a very good score (1530) does not necessarily help you much, especially if you are from what is perceived to be a high-resource (wealthy) area. If you have a perfect score (1600), that would help you get into any school.
Admittedly, it wouldn't help that much if you are Asian and from a wealthy area, but if you cheated then you could spend time that you would have spent studying for the SAT instead doing something else that you could put on your application.
> A variety of coding and SAT “prep” websites discuss ways to bypass Bluebook security. One way is to use a plug-in that seems like a mouse, but is, in fact, a video capture device. Another is a program called a “sandbox, an isolated virtual environment that can work without detection within a computer.
I assume that "plug-in" means peripheral? Seems very difficult to catch all of these people, since a proctor won't be able to inspect the device and tell whether it is a regular mouse or something trickier.
Virtual machines seem like a game of cat and mouse, and one which the SAT is likely to lose.
Apparently 50 mice days is equivalent to about 5 human years, so even if these other causes of death here directly caused by the treatment (not alleged), surviving this much longer (5-20 years) would be pretty incredible for humans.
Where did you get that "50 mice days is equivalent to about 5 human years"?
Mice are short lived, so the time for some events like sexual maturation are shorter.
On the other hand, the problem with cancer is that it adapts, it "learn" how to avoid the effect of the drugs, or how to make the signals to get more blood vessels, or ... I think most of these only depend on how many times the cancer cells reproduce to get a lucky adaptation, so for these effects 200 days is only 200 days.
Also survival rate depends on how early it's detected. In a recent post about colon cancer, the mice got the treatment like 2 weeks after the cancer cells were injected. My guess is that this study also has a short time before the treatment.
This isn't quite as bad as the garden variety "in mice" studies:
> The combination therapy also led to significant regression in genetically engineered mouse tumours and in human cancer tissues grown in lab mice, known as patient-derived tumour xenografts (PDX).
PDX is a double edged sword. Human tumors are engrafted into mice with no immune system. Immune-cancer interface is incredibly important, yet completely lacking in these models. Consider that some of the greatest cancer drugs ever work specifically on the immune system (e.g. checkpoint inhibitors like Keytruda).
A drug that works even without help from the immune system seems like it might be even better. It's hard to imagine how the immune system might interfere, since it doesn't interfere with other drugs.
Is PDX considered to be illegitimate? Would be curious to know if prior studies that showed success with PDX methods ultimately resulted in useful therapeutics.
> These agents together were tested in orthotopic mouse models of PDAC, where tumour cells are implanted in a location that closely resembles their natural environment in the pancreas.
Ugh, of course: "in mice"!
> The combination therapy also led to significant regression in genetically engineered mouse tumours and in human cancer tissues grown in lab mice, known as patient-derived tumour xenografts (PDX).
OK, maybe "in human tissue grown in mice" isn't so bad.
Of course, this doesn't require having GPS location, just cell tower info is enough.
reply