• Pup Biru@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    I simply trust him enough

    but what people are saying is it has little to do with trust: it’s a utility… in fact, the trust is flipped: i trust my partner to have my location, and only look at it for things like checking how far away i am for my benefit

    It feels to me like if you need your partners location on tap, you must first have other problems

    you’re allowed to feel that, but that’s absolutely not true. given the safety and utility aspect, it FEELS to me like if you don’t trust your partner to have and not abuse your location data then you must have other problems

    • _g_be@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      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.

      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.

      • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day 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

        • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          NO surveillance is truly constant, that would defeat the point of surveillance which is to create the ever present possibility that someone is watching so you begin to subconciously assume you are always being watched.

        • _g_be@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          24 hours ago

          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