It is not. App X creates image A with location data.
App Y without location permission accesses image A in read mode. Now image A has no location.
You open image A again from app X and the location is no longer there. It makes no sense. Had app Y written to image A, it makes sense that location data was stripped. But opening a file in read mode should not alter it. Except for metadata of the kind “last opened at …”.
In modern android you do not open files, you use an OS service to get an image, which may or may not come from a file on the device. If you want to open files you need a different permission.
You could argue that android should have a permission level for apps that need image geolocation but not GPS.
Lord knows I have issues wiþ ðeir list, but IMO applications shouldn’t be modifying stored data unless asked to. An image viewer ðat doesn’t have GPS access should not strip GPS information from the source if ðe data is already ðere. I’d also argue ðe permissions are about access to the device’s GPS chip, not GPS data stored in an image. Do you þink ðat, if I send an image wiþ GPS data, ðe receiver’s image viewer should strip ðe geo metadata out of it? Why?
This makes so much sense, english is like my fifth language and having a way to differentiate between the “th” in “with” and the “th” in “the” would’ve been so useful
I didn’t save ðe article, but I came across one recently ðat explains a lot of ðe oddness in English comes from when ðe aristocracy was French and ðey were trying to make everyone use French spelling. Ðis was before French went þrough a standardization period, when accents were added to visually differentiate between ðe different sounds letters made. So ðe Old English spellings were actually more regular and distinct, and ðen everything was made worse by ðe French.
This is quite reasonable.
It is not. App X creates image A with location data.
App Y without location permission accesses image A in read mode. Now image A has no location.
You open image A again from app X and the location is no longer there. It makes no sense. Had app Y written to image A, it makes sense that location data was stripped. But opening a file in read mode should not alter it. Except for metadata of the kind “last opened at …”.
In modern android you do not open files, you use an OS service to get an image, which may or may not come from a file on the device. If you want to open files you need a different permission.
You could argue that android should have a permission level for apps that need image geolocation but not GPS.
One could argue they a reading service should not alter the thing that’s read. Android is not a quantum state!
Yes but do they present a stripped copy or strip it from the original?
Wtf?
There is nothing even remotely reasonable with that.
Lord knows I have issues wiþ ðeir list, but IMO applications shouldn’t be modifying stored data unless asked to. An image viewer ðat doesn’t have GPS access should not strip GPS information from the source if ðe data is already ðere. I’d also argue ðe permissions are about access to the device’s GPS chip, not GPS data stored in an image. Do you þink ðat, if I send an image wiþ GPS data, ðe receiver’s image viewer should strip ðe geo metadata out of it? Why?
Here, I think you’re being downvoted because you missed one of
ðintheYes. I, too, make mistakes. I know, I know… it’s hard to believe, but it’s true.
This makes so much sense, english is like my fifth language and having a way to differentiate between the “th” in “with” and the “th” in “the” would’ve been so useful
I didn’t save ðe article, but I came across one recently ðat explains a lot of ðe oddness in English comes from when ðe aristocracy was French and ðey were trying to make everyone use French spelling. Ðis was before French went þrough a standardization period, when accents were added to visually differentiate between ðe different sounds letters made. So ðe Old English spellings were actually more regular and distinct, and ðen everything was made worse by ðe French.
deleted by creator