this post was submitted on 26 May 2025
149 points (93.1% liked)

Technology

70942 readers
3693 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
149
Google Shared My Phone Number! (danq.me)
submitted 1 week ago by Pro@programming.dev to c/technology@lemmy.world
45 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 45 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] chaosCruiser@futurology.today 62 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

"Some years ago, I provided my phone number to Google as part of an identity verification process, but didn’t consent to it being shared publicly."

That may have been the case at the time, but Google have a bad habit of updating legal documents and settings from time to time. Even if you didn't consent to it directly, you may have agreed to a contract you didn't read, which resulted in Google doing everything permitted in that contract. Chances are, the contract says that Google can legally screw around as much as they like, and you're powerless to do anything about it.

[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 25 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Those pesky "We have updated our privacy policy" emails. And "by ignoring this message you have signaled consent" (paraphrasing).

[–] chaosCruiser@futurology.today 8 points 1 week ago

People should really start demanding more sensible terms. Currently, people just don’t care, and companies are taking full advantage of the situation.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 5 points 1 week ago

And such contracts are legally unenforceable, if you've got the resources to sue.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 28 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Guy uses phone number for business, shocked when it gets listed for that business. More at 11.

[–] CouncilOfFriends@slrpnk.net 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Except he provided it for identify verification, and if I was asked for this my assumption would be they need a mobile number to send a verification text message. If Google wanted a business number in order to publish it online they should state that clearly.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The author suggests it was added through people answering the "is this a business" prompts on their phones, not the identity verification.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So, all you have to do to "out" anyone who ever talks to you on the phone is mis-inform Google that the number is a business and "boom" they're out there.

Makes one want to start using callerID spoofing as a regular practice. I am calling from 212-555-1212.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What do you mean "out" them?

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Get their phone number published on the open internet.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If you wanted to do that, you could just edit it into a business listing directly, or even create one. If it's from the "was this a business" prompt, I expect it takes a bunch of people to say yes, not just one. (And if you get that prompt, Google associates your number with a business already.)

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 points 1 week ago

I expect it takes a bunch of people to say yes, not just one.

I expect the algorithm is a) not publicly published, and b) changes periodically - like to just require one click when a particular department needs to "make their numbers" by the end of the quarter.

you could just edit it into a business listing directly

I challenge you to find any "free and easy, one click" business listing that gets 0.1% of the visibility of a Google info business phone number.

[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yeah fuck Google. Delete all Google accounts before it's too late. Plenty of alternatives exist and you can still benefit from their rankings and whatnot, if your business depends on that.

[–] Glitchvid@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Sort of hard to exist without interacting with Google at all (lots of the material I'm given in courses is hosted on YouTube).

Your best bet is to use separate isolated/siloed accounts for their different services, never let your GCS account be attached to Gmail or one of their consumer facing products for example, lest it get nuked because some automated system went haywire and now you're scrambling to get the account back.

[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

You can use YouTube without an account. And without even using their website, bypassing their ads and their tracking.

Android has Grayjay, Newpipe, Pipepipe, Vanced. Windows has Grayjay, Newpipe, Freetube, yt-dl and others. Linux has Red, Utube, Freetube.. You get the point.

You do still need a login for age-locked videos, but those are a small subset of YouTube.

[–] Glitchvid@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

For now. Google is clearly experimenting with baking ads into the delivered video streams, YT Premium members get served different endpoints already in preparation.

[–] WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

that's a problem too, but the discussion was about interacting with google. fuck them for showing ads down our throats, but at least they don't know who watches the video (when using a proxy like invidious), and so they can't build a profile of you, and they can't bombard you with tailored manipulative ads either, just something possibly totally irrelevant.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 1 points 1 week ago

also. if you want to watch youtube on teevee on normal hardware, you are pretty much paying for premium...

[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org -3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Google is clearly experimenting with baking ads into the delivered video streams, YT Premium members get served different endpoints already in preparation.

Enshittification is guaranteed even for the paid tier.

Maybe there'll be silver, gold and platinum memberships next. How long til you realize you've been had?

[–] Goretantath@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

All the content i watch gets age locked because youtube is run by prudes.

[–] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 2 points 1 week ago

Sort of hard to exist without interacting with Google at all

I explicitely did not claim that.

And as the other guy said, you don't need a G account to watch youtube.

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

Wait, you can actually delete a Gmail account?!

[–] TherapyGary@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 1 week ago

I recently discovered that if you ask gpt-4o if there are any anarchist therapists in Florida, it provides my phone number in the text body of the response. I think this is very cool, but my partner disagrees 😅

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

I understand the story is about google adding a guy's number to a business profile, which seems very odd. But I wonder if anybody here is old enough to remember phone books? I haven't seen one in a while, but in the landline era the phone company used to automatically deliver one to everybody who had a phone. A large physical book with the name, address and phone number of everybody in the local area, except people who paid extra to be unlisted. If you didn't want to look somebody up in the book you could dial a number and a helpful operator would tell you their phone number so you could call them. This was totally normal and didn't bother anybody - how do people feel about that whole concept now?

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 3 points 1 week ago

except people who paid extra to be unlisted

With social media, e-mail, and the rest of it "out there" people have started assuming that "unlisted" is the default for voice phones now. Also, in those "good old days" of the ubiquitous phone books, the listings were mostly land-lines, and mobile phones were unlisted by default. Because of the rates charged for mobile calls in the dying days of the white pages, there were even special laws regarding unsolicited calls to your mobile phone.

It used to be difficult AND expensive to get an unlisted domain name as well, but that has been evolving and now it's a no-cost checkbox option when registering whether you want your contact info to be listed with the domain ownership or not.

Times do change, and while we are generally more exposed than ever, I believe the shifts to more "private by default" configurations of our contact info are a good thing.

[–] Goretantath@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Its weird how more people decided to use this information against people in the modern era than people in the past.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 points 1 week ago

It was used against people in the past too, probably more underreported then than now.

[–] Etterra@discuss.online -1 points 1 week ago

Well I mean you had to go the the kitchen and then look around in the cabinet for the yellow pages. Then you would realize you had five of them, and would say "why the hell do we have five phone books?" Then you'd their out the old ones, only to realize they were all outdated. Then you'd ask your family if they knew where the current one is, and it turns out that it's propping up the short end of the old couch in the basement. Then you'd need to go get it, but since somebody dumped old leftovers in the trash (this was before recycling) they're all gross. So you had to go grab a suitably thick replacement, and figure that the table of contents book from the 1982 encyclopedia set you've always had would work. You after your 3rd trip up and down the stairs you've finally got the phone book but can't remember why, but while you have it you decide to order a pizza, then throw the book in the cabinet where they go. Two days later you find the phone number you needed in the first place, written on the back of an envelope.

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yes, I remember these (they also send a map of the city with all the street and public transportation lines)

But the point is that you can be unlisted from these (and as far as I remember it was free). Not sure about the part where you can call an operator that tell you the number you are looking for.

Anyway, the problem is that Google seems to have shared the phone number even if the user declined to do so (and by the user account, the number was not listed for years). This just seems a move from Google that show a total disperect of the user decision.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

In the US the "standard" low cost line was listed in the white pages by default, you effectively paid extra - per month - for an unlisted number.

The operator information was basically a phone company employee reading the white pages info to you, for a fee.

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

In the US the “standard” low cost line was listed in the white pages by default, you effectively paid extra - per month - for an unlisted number.

As far as I remember in Italy the situation was different.
You can ask to delist the number when you sign the contract and it was free. I am not really sure if in the case you decided later to delist the number you needed to pay a one time fee for that, but keeping delisted was always free.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 1 points 1 week ago

Italy, and all of Europe, have always had a greater respect for personal and a lesser respect for business' profits than the U.S.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The phone company definitely did charge extra for unlisted numbers. The number lookup service, which was just called "Information", was accessed by dialing 411 - the origin of "What's the 411?" In the olden days you got a human being, then they automated it with voice recognition. In most places 411 doesn't exist anymore but it was in service until only a few years ago.

[–] gian@lemmy.grys.it 1 points 1 week ago

Wait, I suspect that we don't live in the same country.
In Italy keeping the number unlisted was free (you just needed to declare it when you were signing the contract) and I have no memory of something like the 411.

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's like having 100,000 yellow pages books. In the days of old you might be able to switch cities if you were trying to evade a stalker. Now you'll have to change your name, face, and accent.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You can still pay for lookup services. I got a 1-month subscription recently to contact the mom of a friend who disappeared. All I had was the guy's last name and the town he said his mom lived in. Cost 7 or 8 bucks but it was worth it. So anyway I imagine a stalker wouldn't need a ton of resources to track a person down using pay services.

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

If you know the town then in the old days you could go there and get a yellow pages. But your point is valid, because there's so many other privacy concerns this one is a drop in the bucket. I'm much more scared of the government watching me through my neighbor's ring cameras just because I said Luigi Mangione is innocent on Lemmy (which he totally is). Or that Elon Musk told us he's a Nazi sympathizer and I'm repeating what he said, neutrally.

[–] Engywuck@lemm.ee 6 points 1 week ago

It might be an Android phone you’ve called who marked the phone number as a business and added Three Rings to it. Might not be, I’ve just noticed I get queried after being called or calling numbers not in my contacts, whether it’s a business phone number.

This makes sense to me.

[–] muusemuuse@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I wonder if it’s possible to specifically exclude your business/website/project from google search. Surely that must be something you can legally do.

[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

Sure, reach out to every website and human on the planet, read through each terms and conditions, and hire fewer than 8 billion lawyers to litigate if they don't. Easy peasy.

[–] JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

If it's your personal info, you can ask for it here.
If it's your own website you want delisted, that's here.

Now do the same for bing, ddg, startpage, yandex, yahoo, kagi, brave, ask, ecosia etc etc....

Which is to say, if it's on the internet and publicly accessible, assume it's permanent and going to be indexed at some point.

[–] Halcyon@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 week ago

Isn't it a function of Google Maps that anybody can submit changes to the business informations of a company listed there?

It's like a wiki where all registered uses can suggest contributions.

[–] Teknikal@eviltoast.org 2 points 1 week ago

I think it's dodgy as well I'd been job searching and I guess I accidently linked Google somehow, so now the sites completely ignoring the details I gave it and insists on sending everything to my Gmail instead of Proton which I actually ditched Gmail for.

[–] Psythik@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago

I was really getting into that article, and then it just just suddenly ends. How anticlimactic. I was hoping the article writer was a bit more dedicated towards finding out why Google posted his personal number in the first place...

[–] kepix@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

anyone can make a google company profile. seems like clickbait.