We used to have earbuds that don’t need to be charged because they had a headphone jack, didn’t get lost so easily because they had a cord attached to a headphone jack, never lost the bluetooth connection because they had a headphone jack, and they cost less because they had a headphone jack. https://bsky.app/profile/daisyfm.bsky.social/post/3l3mfjc6sn62k

  • Lojcs@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    profiling telemetry network

    Of course they need it for the very real scary words functionality

    • gencha@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Every single signal your Android phone sends, like looking up the address of a website with Google DNS, or just synchronizing your time with Google time servers, which are defaults in most Android phones, goes right into at least a shadow profile.

      Android exists to create highly detailed profiles of individuals, using your own device usage, and detecting other devices around you. Like WiFi hotspots to offer more detailed position information.

      Every single time any of this happens, you leave a data point in a Google database. Collecting all BT devices every time you see them as data points is so dramatically valuable if this is your core business. Google is an advertisement platform.

      • Lojcs@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        You know bluetooth doesn’t need to be turned on in the settings for your phone to scan for devices right? Google doesn’t need to trick you with earphones to turn it on. Why do these conspiracy theories always involve the vampire politely asking to come into your home anyways?

        • gencha@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I know they can still use the chip even if you don’t want BT. I know they can still use it regardless of your desire to disable it. If there was no reasonable user demand for it, then it would be pretty hard to sell a useless piece of metal that only eats up energy and space in the phone.

          You know, like an audio jack.

          No other type of audio device saw the need to have the jack removed. The BT-only headphones were introduced by the same companies who removed the audio jack from the phones.

          Nobody is “tricking” anyone. This is just as regular a shady business practice as false advertising. The companies doing this just weigh their options to maximize profits. This is a laughably easy sell, apparently, so it’s reasonable they would be doing it. The complaints about this subject were loud from day one. Removing the jack is artificially limiting the features of the device for literally no plausible reason. Point to their material that explains it in more words than “we decided it’s time”.

          We had the entire oil and tobacco industry lie to us for decades, but this is far fetched?

          • Lojcs@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            It’s really hard to follow your train of thought. Bluetooth isn’t a piece of metal in your phone. It uses the same antenna your phone needs for its other wireless connections and it’s also driven by the same modem. Compared to an audio jack its impact is miniscule. The demand for Bluetooth wasn’t created in 2016, it predates smartphones. There were countless wireless earphones before 2016 and they mostly weren’t even made by phone companies. Apple removing the headphone jack wasn’t ‘false advertising’, it was very well publicised.

            Yes, phone companies removed the headphone jack from their phones to drive the sales of their own earphones. Yes, Google collects lots of data about you. But interpolating these to “Google wanted people to keep Bluetooth on for its spy network” is a far fetched conspiracy