None of those things are nefarious and don't necessarily provide additional knowledge, as long as care is taken to fully deanonymize and fuzz start/stop/end locations of trips or associate trips together.
People agree to provide this information to services like Waze etc for exactly these tasks.
It’s strange to me that people read something like this and infer the absolute inverse of the actual situation. That is definitely a “thinking fast” reaction.
Them selling my data to others without telling me is unethical, but that's not the case that Jet describes.
> Them selling my data to others without telling me is unethical.
Don't you think Google does this to you already?
[0] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/google-says-it-doesnt-...
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/24/technology/google-search-...
No I don't. I actively refuse to use these surveillance services.
https://jet-start.sh/blog/2020/06/09/jdk-gc-benchmarks-part1
The point is that Jet can track several million distinct keys, even on a single machine, and finding velocity vectors boils down to linear regression sliding window against two FP variables.
If your concern is why you would specifically want to track locations, the answer is that there are plenty location-based apps that track locations with user's consent.
By user consent you mean someone clicked a button without thinking to get to the app ?
Besides, I think this statement is just meant to give a sense of the kind of processing that can be done, and the scale it can reach.
I can't think of one.
https://www.strava.com/ for example.
It baffles me they're so casual about it ...