Privacy Taken by Life-Logging Cameras

One of the founders of Memoto, Martin Kaellstroem, lost both of his parents to cancer when he was a young adult.  When this happened, he was inspired to create a camera that would spontaneously capture the user’s life as it is being lived.  This small “life-logging camera” is worn either clipped to your shirt collar, or around your neck on a string.  Every 30 seconds, a picture is taken and there is no off button.  Essentially, it captures every ½ minute of a person’s life

.

Now in his late 30s, Mr. Kaellstroem has said, “When you lose your parents, you realize that you don’t live forever.  It definitely affected me in my entrepreneurship.  I can’t wait until later to fulfill my dreams; I have to live my dream now.” He states that normally, people bring their cameras to special events to capture those around them at their best.  He stated, “You don’t know in advance which moments will be important in the future.  Perhaps you meet your future wife or witness an accident or a crime.  These are pictures you might want to return to.”  But, will everyone accept that they will be filmed whenever they are with a user of a life-logging camera?

This brings “Big Brother” and “The Truman Show” to life.  Mr. Kaellstroem doesn’t see his camera as a breach to anyone’s privacy; he sees it as a collection of memories.  Personally, I don’t see it that way.  I would not want to meet friends for lunch knowing that one of them is using a life-logging camera.  I’m a fairly private person and I wouldn’t like knowing that someone has pictures of every 30 seconds of me as I sat down with them for lunch or dinner.  It’s not that I have something to hide; it’s just that I don’t like having my picture taken.  To know that a picture would be taken every 30 seconds would not make me happy at all.

This life-logging camera looks like an iPod mini and gathers pictures automatically.  They are sorted by GPS location, time and lighting.  Anyone using this camera can share the pictures on Twitter, Facebook, or any other social media.  Oskar Kalmaru, who is co-founder of Memoto, likens the camera to a diary for those who are tech-savvy and who don’t have the patience or discipline it takes to keep a written diary.  He says, “I’ve failed several times when trying to write a blog or travelogue.  Older relatives managed to keep a diary over 20 years, but it’s hard with the routine.”

Law Enforcement and Social Media

It’s common knowledge that most criminals aren’t the smartest people around.  Many of them are so proud of their crimes that they feel the need to tell people about them.  This has happened a lot in the past, but now, that just about everyone has at least one social media account, the criminals now have a wider audience they can brag to.  Before social media, it took a while for word to spread about how “George” burglarized 10 houses in one night.  Now, with Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, the word can go out immediately to thousands of people. 

 

While spreading the word mouth-to-mouth took a while, it also took the police to catch up with these criminals.  Social media, along with the egos of criminals, has now made arresting some of these crooks a quick, simple process.  Things go a lot quicker for the police when criminals are posting about their crimes on Facebook and Twitter, posting pictures of their “haul” on Instagram and even posting videos of the crime, as it’s happening, on YouTube. Like I said, criminals aren’t the smartest people around.

 

While criminals have long discovered that bragging about crimes they commit on social media lets people know how “bad” they are, the police are now discovering how to use Pinterest as a means to catch criminals.  In Redwood City, California, police have used Pinterest to post photos of items recovered from arrests in order to return them to their rightful owners.  Detective Dave Stahler had success using Pinterest in February when he posted a picture of a family heirloom that was recovered among other stolen jewelry.  Three users called in tips within a few hours of the post going up.

In Richmond, Virginia, police have used Pinterest to solve murder cases and a town in Pennsylvania set up a Pinterest board to post mug shots.  Arrests for theft, sexual assault and fraud have seen a 57% increase since this board was set up.  Hopefully, more towns will see the usefulness of this and begin their own mug shot boards.

Google Glass: Innovative or Creepy?

In 2012, Google began testing and demonstrating a new product that they call “Google Glass”.  Google Glass is a device that is a very small display screen and it is made to be worn either by itself, or hooked on to a pair of glasses or sunglasses.  The device will show the user the time, give directions, search the Internet, send messages and take photos and videos.  This is all done hands-free.  Just speak and Google Glass will do as you ask. 

  

Since its debut, there have been around 8,000 Glass wearers.  Last year, at SxSW (an annual conference featuring music, films and interactive technology), Google Glass was seen everywhere.  The same was true of this year’s conference.  People are curious about what it’s like, but most find it pretty creepy.  But, why is it that most people find it creepy?  After all, it’s just a small piece of glass that sits near the wearer’s eye.

When you see someone wearing Google Glass, whether they are sitting across from you at a table or simply walking past you on the street, you never know what they are doing on the device.  They could be reading texts, doing research, or they could be doing nothing at all with it at the time.  When someone walks by you wearing Google Glass, you would never know if that person has just taken a picture of you or even shot a video as you were approaching each other.  This is what makes it so creepy.  In fact, many people feel uncomfortable even coming close to someone wearing Google Glass.

Google Glass makes people so uncomfortable that some have been told to leave stores, clubs and even meetings at work if they didn’t remove the device.  Wearing Google Glass at an airport could cause problems as could driving while wearing the device.   In fact, Cecilia Abadie was the first person to get a traffic ticket while wearing Google Glass.  She was initially stopped for speeding in October 2013, but when the officer saw that she was wearing Google Glass, he added a ticket for the violation “monitor visible to driver”.  Ms. Abadie took the matter to Court in January 2014 and was found not guilty.  The officer had no proof that the monitor was turned on at the time of the incident.

When it comes to discussion groups about Google Glass, there are two views:  Google Glass wearers love the device, but those interacting with them don’t like it at all.  In fact, they barely tolerate it.  In social situations, non-wearers get a feeling of paranoia because they feel they are always being “watched”.

What’s odd about all this discomfort is that those who say they don’t like the feeling that they are being recorded by Google Glass wearers don’t think twice about being recorded other ways; like with a smart phone or security cameras.  Of course, the difference here is that with a smart phone or security cameras, you always know when you are being recorded.  With Google Glass, you would never know.  So, I guess the feeling of unease isn’t from the fact that they could be recorded, it’s from the not knowing if it’s happening or not.  

Google Glass wearers don’t see an issue with each other because they know how the device works.  However, if you have never worn Google Glass, and you are talking with someone who wears it, all you see is this small piece of glass and you can’t help but wonder if your conversation is being recorded.

How Else Will Your Privacy Be Taken?

In the article Looking for a Job?  Beware of this Privacy Risk, you learned how looking for work could lead to a breach in your privacy.  This is a risk for only those who are currently looking for a job.  There is another privacy risk that should be a concern to everyone, regardless of age or state of employment.  Employers and schools are demanding to know your social media information.

Many companies do not want their names mentioned in social media unless they have control over what is being said.  The only way these companies have to keep control over this is by checking each employee’s social media accounts to make sure nothing derogatory is being said about the company.  Because anyone can set privacy controls, the only way to know everything that an employee says on social media is to have full access to the accounts.  That is why employers are asking for the log-in names and passwords of all employees. 

 

Employers are not only looking for what is said about the company, or if the employee has the company name listed as their place of employment, they are also looking for anything inappropriate that may be posted.  Pictures of wild parties or visits to a nude beach may just get you fired.  True, these parties and beach pictures were taken on your leisure time, but now, unless you have a contract, you are considered an “at will” employee.  This means that your employer can terminate your employment for any reason.  Even if you have a contract, most of them have a morals clause, so any inappropriate postings could void the contract.

Losing Privacy While Seeking Employment

As we all know, the rate of unemployment all over the US is staggering.  Many of these unemployed people are without jobs through no fault of their own.  Many companies are closing their doors, and with so many people out of work and looking for jobs, this gives employers a chance to try new methods of weeding out “undesirable” candidates.  One of the methods now being used is to ask each candidate to agree to a credit check at the time an application is submitted. 

 

What does a credit check have to do with one’s ability to work?  Well, according to employers, if someone has bad credit, they are considered a high risk for corporate theft.  So, if you have bad credit, you will not be getting an interview.  By using this theory, instead of creating a time frame for 20 interviews, that number can be lowered to 5 or less with the click of a button.

True, prospective employees aren’t forced to submit to this credit check, however, if you don’t agree, your application will not be considered.  The employers hold all the cards on this. 

 

There are a few flaws with this method of choosing potential employees:

1.  Each time a credit check is run, it lowers your credit score.  Credit reporting services don’t see this as an employment check; they just see it as you looking to get approval to raise your credit limit or to add yet another credit account.

2.  If you file applications with several companies, all of which are receiving your credit report.  This means that an unknown number of strangers are privy to not only your credit score, but also know each bank and amount you have credit with.

 

3.  You will not be given a chance to explain your low credit score.  Employers don’t care WHY the credit score is low; they just care that it IS low.

4.  Employers don’t take into consideration that you haven’t paid your bills because you’ve been unemployed.  They see the low credit score and automatically assume that you will steal from the company.  It doesn’t seem to cross anyone’s mind that you want a job not to steal, but to earn money to pay your bills in order to raise your credit score.

Personal Information Sold at Goodwill

Have you ever donated old clothes, books, furniture or other items to a Salvation Army or Goodwill store?  Well, one donator to Goodwill in central Indiana donated a bit more than he intended.  If his donations were checked before being put up for sale, this may not be an issue.  Unfortunately, a box containing 39 pounds of one family’s personal information was sold to a woman for $27.69.

Emily Watson opened a box that she bought from a Goodwill outlet store in the Indianapolis area and found someone else’s sensitive records.  If items can’t be sold at the retail stores for any reason, they are put in bins and sent to Goodwill outlet stores.  These are closed boxes sold by the pound to anyone who wants to take a chance that there is something valuable inside.  Ms. Watson bought one such box and when she opened it found personal information all belonging to one family.  The box contained Social Security cards, tax returns, pay stubs, banking information, dental and other medical records, divorce papers and insurance documents.  There were also family photos and addresses of family members.

This had happened to Ms. Watson before.  At another time, she purchased a box containing personal information, so she opened the box in the store before buying it.  When she saw what it contained, she pulled out all the items to show a store employee, who referred her to the manager.  When the manager looked through the paperwork, she said, “It doesn’t look harmful to me.  It’s OK.”  Ms. Watson then made the purchase because she was afraid that it would get into the hands of someone not as honest as she.  She was afraid for the people the information belonged to. 

After purchasing the box, Ms. Watson tipped off WTHR Channel 13 as to her find.  WTHR 13 Investigates then opened an investigation as to the allegations made of Goodwill selling personal information.  The station sent undercover “shoppers” to three Indianapolis area Goodwill outlets and found that at every outlet location they visited, they were able to purchase someone’s personal information.  This didn’t just happen once; out of 28 visits in 2 months, personal information was purchased 24 times.   WTHR employees were able to purchase valid debit and credit cards, leases, automobile titles, medical histories, immigration papers, bills, employee drug test results, college transcripts, IRA and 401K statements and all other kinds of legal documents containing personal information. 

 

The personal information donated to Goodwill, then sold by them, contained thousands of pages, filling three boxes.  Some Social Security numbers found belonged to police officers stationed at the Indianapolis Metro Police Department.  When WTHR spoke with Sgt. Eric Eads, who is an identity theft expert in the department, he said, “Let me put it to you this way:  this is a police nightmare here.  If someone got ahold of this stuff.  It’s just shocking the amount of Social Security numbers and tax records you found.”

Another person whose tax records were found by WTHR employees is Elesabeth Leclercq.   She is quoted as saying, “It’s terrible.  I don’t even know what to say.  I’m still stunned and in a state of shock.”  Julie and Brett Snyder also found out that their information had been sold along with information on their children.  Mrs. Snyder said, “This isn’t anything we would throw away.  I mean, we wouldn’t have just handed this over to Goodwill.  It’s shocking.  We are completely shocked.”

The person whose information started it all when Emily Watson purchased it is named Rose.  She refused to give her last name, but she did give a statement.  “It’s pretty devastating and I’ve had nightmares about it” she said. 

Grocery Shelves Will Now be Spying on Us

As if we don’t have enough to worry about, now we need to start thinking about being spied on while we do our grocery shopping.  Food giant Mondelez International, parent company of Nabisco, Kraft and Cadbury, is said to be planning on introducing “smart shelves” to grocery stores by the year 2015. 

Working with Microsoft Kinect, Mondelez International is said to be working on a system to identify shoppers walking down the food aisle.  Using facial recognition, these “smart shelves” will be able to identify shoppers by age and gender.  Once identified, a coupon will appear near a food or snack targeted to that particular shopper.  For example:  If a woman in her early 30s walks by, there’s a good chance she may be thinking about chocolate.  As she approaches the shelf for Cadbury chocolates, a coupon will pop up.

Along with facial recognition, the smart shelves will also have weight sensors installed.  This way, if a shopper over the age of 18 picks a box up from the shelf, a coupon could be sent to “persuade” the shopper into buying that product.  The coupon will come by way of either a dispenser or a display screen.  Tech writer Brian Fung of the Washington Post says of this technology, “it’s not quite Minority Report levels of creepiness, but it’s getting there.”, while Neal Ungerleider of Fastcompany.com said it’s “the ultimate in creepy, yet inevitable marketing tech.”  Personally, I have to agree with Neal about it being the ultimate in creepy.

According to Mondelez’s CIO Mark Dajani, no videos or photos of specific shoppers will be saved.  The information will only be used to collect information about the types of shoppers looking at the products or walking down the grocery store aisles.  It could help food companies with product placement so as to maximize sales.

Is Your Smart TV Spying on You?

New York State Senator Chuck Schumer recently issued a warning to all smart TV owners:  If your TV is equipped with a camera and can connect to the Internet, it could be used to spy on you.  Yes, your smart TV is capable of allowing a hacker to steal your credit card information, or worse, your identity.  Not only that, but a hacker can remote-access your TV’s camera and watch everything you do in the room that the smart TV is in.  To make matters worse, these TVs don’t have much in the way of security settings. 

Researchers Aaron Grattafiori and Josh Yavor were at the Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas, Nevada recently and showed how a smart TV can be hacked.  During the demonstration, they were able to control social media and any other application installed on the TV, they accessed files and even turned on the camera.  If they were able to do this, anyone else can do it too.  It’s like giving up your remote control to a hacker.

Mr. Grattafiori spoke with Mashable regarding this issue (Your Smart TV Can Be Hacked to Spy on You).  He said, “Because the TV only has a single user, any type of compromise into an application or into Smart Hub, which is the operating system – the smarts of the TV – has the same permission as every user, which is, you can do everything and anything.”

Grattafiori and Yavor, who work for iSEC Partners, a security firm, began looking into the issues with smart TVs in December of 2012.  They notified Samsung about this security breach in January 2013.  Samsung issued a statement to CNN shortly after claiming that “patches” have been issued to plug up the holes in security (Your TV Might be Watching You), which now makes it difficult for hackers to break into your smart TV.

Who is Following You When You Shop?

By now, we all know that when we shop over the Internet, we’re being tracked.  But, did you know that when you shop in the stores, you’re also being tracked?  Each time we enter a store, whether it’s a department store or a grocery store, we see security cameras positioned in just about every aisle.  These cameras, however, are not doing the tracking.  Customers are being tracked through their cell phones. 

According to the New York Times, last fall, Nordstrom began using Wi-Fi signals from customers’ cell phones to track their movements (Attention Shoppers:  Stores are Tracking Your Cell).  A sign was posted advising customers of the tracking and many shoppers were not happy about it.  Tara Darrow, a Nordstrom spokesperson said, “We did hear some complaints” and because of this, the tracking was stopped in May 2013.  Other stores testing this type of tracking include Family Dollar, Cabela’s and Mothercare. 

 

This tracking can tell a lot about a customer.  The cell phone signals used with the security cameras will tell the retailer exactly who is shopping.  They know how long each shopper spends in any aisle, how long they look at something before they actually purchase it and even the gender of the shopper.  Somehow, many shoppers find this tracking much more invasive than being tracked on-line with cookies.  They consider this more of an invasion of privacy because with on-line tracking, you are still fairly anonymous in the sense that cookies can’t see you.

Gun Owners have the Right to Privacy, Too

Using the Freedom of Information Act, the Journal News, the leading newspaper in Westchester County, NY, requested the records for pistol permits issued in the state.  The information they received showed that there were about 44,000 registered gun owners in Putnam, Rockland and Westchester counties.  Once the information was obtained, the newspaper published the names and addresses of every one of them.  As if this weren’t enough of an invasion of privacy, along with the list was an image using Google Maps, that had each gun owner’s address pinpointed.  

New York State Senator Greg Ball was extremely frustrated and angry over this publication.  He stated, “It’s just absolutely ridiculous that the Journal News would do that and they’ve done a lot of boneheaded things in the past.”   He went on to say that he thought the act of publishing this list would give criminals a “map” to go door to door trying to get those weapons. 

Senator Ball is planning on reintroducing legislation that would make the publication of this kind of information illegal.  He said, “This isn’t only about the second amendment, this is about privacy and it’s actually boneheaded for this editorial board to take law abiding firearm owners and treat them no less than a level 3 sexual predator.”

A television news crew was sent to one of the neighborhoods that had a large amount of “red dots”.  When they knocked on doors, many people either did not answer or refused to speak, but some did express surprise and concern that there were so many guns in their neighborhood.

How is the NSA Putting Your Privacy at Risk?

Within the last couple of weeks, 29 year old Edward Snowden has become famous.  He’s not an actor, or singer, or author; his “fame” came from telling the world that everyone’s privacy is at risk because the NSA (National Security Agency) has been spying on Americans for years.  It’s the job of the NSA to keep the United States safe from terrorism.  Everyone knew without it being spoken that spying was involved, but most people were surprised at the extent of this spying.  It’s expected that terrorist groups or people with ties to known terrorists were probably targets, but no one thought that the private e-mails and telephone conversations of Joe Public would be compromised.

Anyone can be a target of the NSA.  E-mails are flagged by certain keywords that are considered “terroristic” in nature, like “bomb”, “gun”, “shooting”, etc.  Unfortunately, some of these words are used in conversation that has nothing to do with terrorism, however, an e-mail to “Aunt Sally” that talks about someone “shooting a video” near your home could lead to suspicion.  Not only that, but Aunt Sally will probably be checked out as part of your “conspiracy”.

Is there really a threat to our security or are we all simply paranoid?  According to the NSA, there have been more than 50 terrorist threats that have been discovered and blocked (one of which was targeting the New York Stock Exchange) since the spying program was started after September 11, 2001.  Knowing that these threats have been discovered and blocked, do you now feel better that the government is taking away some of your privacy?  Will you re-think some of the wording that you use in your e-mails so they won’t be targeted?  Telling a friend you went to the movies and you thought the latest hit was really a “bomb” could be re-phrased, but should we really have to think so hard about our choice of words?   Then consider your phone conversations; do you ever vent about your frustration with some politicians?  One red flag and all of your phone records will be reviewed.

Your Old E-Mail Can be Read Without a Warrant

What do you do with your old e-mails?  Do you just let them sit in the “Read Mail” folder, or do you permanently delete them?  If you let them sit until they automatically disappear from the “Read Mail” folder, you may have a problem. 

If you have e-mail that is over 180 days old stored in a cloud server, it is considered “legally abandoned” and can be read by any government agency without obtaining a warrant.  This means that if you use Yahoo! Mail, Hotmail, AOL Mail, G-Mail, etc, your privacy could be at risk.  If you store your e-mail on your hard drive, however, a search warrant is needed no matter how old the mail is.

The law that permits the release of e-mail without a warrant is the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), which is from 1986.  In 1986, most people who used e-mail would delete it immediately after reading it to save on computer storage space.  There was very little chance that your average citizen would have an e-mail in storage that was 180 days old. Today, however, with the use of cloud servers, storage space is just about unlimited.  E-mails are read, then left forgotten in the “Read Mail” files.  Unfortunately, the laws haven’t been updated to keep up with the rapidly growing technology.

Recently, the ACLU requested information from the IRS under the Freedom of Information Act.  In response, the IRS indicated that their criminal investigation department does read citizens’ e-mails without obtaining search warrants.  This is one of the reasons why an update of the ECPA is needed in order to protect the privacy of all US citizens when it involves any digital communications.

The ACLU also sent a request under the Freedom of Information Act to the FBI.  The response indicated warrants aren’t generally gotten, but the FBI wouldn’t come out and say for sure.  As a way of explanation, the FBI provided the ACLU with excerpts from two of its Domestic Investigations and Operations Guides; one from 2008 and one from 2012.  Both state that “FBI agents only need a warrant for emails or other electronic communication that are unopened and less than 180 days old.”  

Obviously, the time for modification of the ECPA is well over-due.  Since 1877, any government agency was required to obtain a warrant to read any personal mail sent via the US Postal Service.  Now is the time for this policy to be expanded to include e-mail and any other electronic communications.  In the meantime, if you want to keep your privacy, make sure you use the “Delete Permanently” button provided each time you read your e-mail.  For most of us, this isn’t a matter of covering up criminal activity; it’s to protect our privacy.

 Please go to the top of this page and download the free Internet Privacy Guide.  There are many other tips and suggestions on how your privacy can remain safe both on-line and off.

Parents: Do You Know Who Your Children are Chatting With?

I spend a lot of time on the Internet researching popular sites and I notice a very disturbing trend:  parents have given their children free reign over the Internet.  It has been said that in the 60s and 70s, the television was used by busy parents as a babysitter.  Well, now in the 21^st century, the Internet has taken over that function.  The difference between the television and the Internet is that the television didn’t have the capability to try to lure children away from home.  Sure, there were interactive shows like Winky Dink, where a child could put a clear vinyl sheet over the television screen and connect the dots to draw the item that Winky needed to save the day, but Winky Dink never talked one on one to any child.  Not so with the Internet.  This leads to the question, “Parents: Do you know who your children are chatting with on-line?”  

With children getting their own computers and laptops at younger and younger ages, there should be rules set and followed for the use of this equipment.  The main rule should be that no child under the age of 16 should have a web-cam/Internet equipped computer in his or her room.  I find it unbelievable that parents who will not allow their young children to walk to school alone will allow them to wander freely around the Internet.  One of the sites that tweens and young teens seem to be latching on to is Omegle.  Parents, beware!

Omegle is an unmonitored site that was started on March 25, 2009 by then 18 year old Leif K-Brooks.  Within a month of the start date, Omegle had in excess of 150,000 users each month.  The site was set up to be an anonymous chat site where strangers who would never otherwise have an opportunity to meet, could chat on-line.  The site is open to anyone without the need to register and there is no cost for its use.   Sure, there is a disclaimer that a user must be 18 years old to chat, but, as we all know, anyone can be any age they want to be on the Internet. 

In the beginning, the site was text chat only.  Now, it offers both text and video chat.  Kids and chatting with strangers via text is a nightmare in itself, but when you add video to the mix, results can be disastrous.  A very public instance of the dangers of video chatting with strangers is the story of Amanda Todd, a Canadian teenager who committed suicide in October 2012.  When Amanda was 13 years old, she discovered video chat and loved that males of all ages would comment about her beauty.  During one of her chats, a male told her that she was gorgeous and wanted to see more of her.  He convinced her to show her breasts on camera.  This person took a screenshot of the video and spread it all over the Internet. 

Instagram Claims Right to Sell Photos

Early in 2012, Facebook approached the founders of Instagram with a $1 billion deal to buy the fledgling Internet photo company.  In September 2012, the deal was finalized for reportedly $750 million.  Good news for Instagram, but bad news for anyone who posted one or more of the 5 billion photos.  Why?  Because now, with Facebook owning Instagram they have the right to sell any of these photos.

The policy to sell user photos was supposed to take effect on January 16, 2013, which was 3 months after Facebook’s purchase.  According to this new policy, Facebook is claiming their right to sell Instagram photos without notifying or paying the original poster.  The only way to avoid this happening to you is if you deleted your Instagram account before the January 16^th deadline.  News of this caused an uproar among users.   

But how will this new Instagram policy affect users’ privacy?  If you have an account that hasn’t been deleted prior to the January 16, 2013 deadline, any of your photos could be sold to advertisers.  In other words, that picture of you in your bikini while you were on Spring break, holding up a bottle of Coors Light, could be sold to Coors and used in one of their advertisements.  Imagine your surprise when you see this picture on a billboard!  Instagram will be making money for Facebook from Coors, Coors will be making money from the advertisement and you will be making nothing at all for your part in all of this.

Kurt Opsahl, Senior Staff Attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation says of this new policy, “It’s asking people to agree to unspecified future commercial use of their photos.  That makes it challenging for someone to give informed consent to that deal.”

Because there is nothing specified, this leaves an endless list of possibilities for exploitation of user photos.  Travel agencies, airlines and resorts can all use your photos in magazine ads, brochures, Internet advertising, television advertising, etc.  All they have to do is pay the fee to Facebook and your Instagram photo is now theirs to use as they see fit.  There is no limit to what types of photos will be sold.  This means that if you post a picture of your children playing in the sands of a tropical island, your children could be the subject of an advertisement.  

Facebook Finds a New Way to Make Money Off of You

Facebook now has a new feature:  Promote and Share.  This feature allows all Facebook members to promote posts made by their friends.  Of course, to do this, there will be a fee.  You can now choose to “Promote and Share” any post made by any friend, for a $7 fee.  The posts promoted do take into consideration privacy settings, but there is no way to opt out of this.  The feature is causing some privacy concerns because the friends whose posts you’re sharing have no say in the matter. 

According to Facebook, this feature has been added because they felt there was a need.  It is said to be beneficial to all Facebook members by allowing them to make others aware of special events in a friend’s life.  This includes such things as landing a new job, welcoming a new member into the family, graduations or good deeds.

A statement issued by Facebook said, “This feature respects the privacy of the original poster – i.e. it will promote to everyone who originally saw it.  You can only promote posts to the people that your friend originally shared with.  If you have mutual friends, they’ll see that you shared it and promoted it.”

Some may not see the need to spend $7 to promote a post since the only people who can see the promoted and shared information are the ones who were originally allowed to see it.  What would be the advantage of such a feature?  The “advantage” would be that it would bring the post higher up on the news feeds, so if a mutual friend missed the original post, he or she would most likely see the promoted and shared post.

Can Your GPS Lead a Stranger to Your Door?

Nowadays, almost everyone has a GPS.  As you drive down the highways and back roads, just about every car you see has one attached to the windshield.  Some newer models of cars come with the GPS as either a standard feature or an option.  A GPS doesn’t only tell you how to get where you’re going; it also tells you when you should be arriving.   If one of the roads you need is closed, or if traffic is unusually heavy, the GPS will tell you which detour to take.  For these reasons, I’m addicted to my GPS, just like millions of other people.

Yes, the GPS is a huge part of our lives, but do we ever think about how we can be risking our safety by using it?  Think of all the information about you that a criminal can get just by looking through your GPS’s “Favorite Places”.   Below is a scenario that is played over and over all over the country:

You just got a promotion at your job.  Along with this came a very large raise, so, to celebrate, you and your husband go out for a night on the town.  Your first stop is that new nightclub that opened a few weeks ago because a band that you both love is playing there.   You know the address, but aren’t sure how to get there, so you program it into your GPS.  You get to the club and hand your car over to the valet so you don’t have to walk unfamiliar streets to find it later.  If you have an in-dash GPS, it’s all but forgotten, but if you have a portable GPS, you stash it in the glove box so it’s out of sight.

Maybe your husband comments about the band and how long it’s been since you’ve both been to one of their concerts.  You tell him that you can’t wait and will savor every minute until the club closes and you are forced to leave.  During this conversation, the valet has heard every word.  He also noticed where you put your portable GPS, or that you didn’t turn off your in-dash GPS.  Who is this person that you just handed your car to?  Does he have a criminal background?  Well, whoever this person is, he now knows your plans for the entire evening.

The valet is doing a quick scan of your keys as you are walking into the club.  He notices that you are like thousands of others who keep their house keys on the same key ring as your car key.  He then takes your car and parks it.  He reaches for your GPS and scans your list of “Favorite Places”.  He hits the jackpot when he sees an entry listed as “Home”.