[znfi]

In this particular case I'm not sure that blocking internet access at the base will solve much since the data is stored on the device, and it's enough to bring the device to a location with internet access?

Basically people go home or whatever and plug in their Garmin and then it'll just upload the last 6 months of data, and there is the same issue.

[pbhjpbhj]

Why do deployed soldiers need personal fitness trackers (or what did you mean by a Garmin). Surely anything with a GPS or other wireless network abilities is an affront to opsec I'd imagine?

[Johnny555]

"need" or "want"? I'm sure they don't "need" them any more than anyone else, but I'm also sure they "want" them for the same reason as everyone else that wants them -- for fitness tracking.

[chrisseaton]

> Why do deployed soldiers need personal fitness trackers

To track their personal fitness while deployed?

[pbhjpbhj]

I was hoping for something a little more inciteful ;o)

My imagination of how an army is run requires careful maintenance of fitness of soldiers, so use of PT instructors, regular monitoring of fitness metrics. It also has dieticians to monitor food production/intake. Opsec would probably deny any personal electronic devices.

If a deployed soldier needs to track their personal fitness then that suggests a deficiency - fitness of sisters must be of prime importance during deployment? There seems no reason that soldiers wouldn't have a fitness record they could access that included all food intake, mandated exercise, regular weight monitoring, blood pressure, and whatever.

Of course, the use of personal fitness devices suggests my conception is wildly off how a deployed corpus of soldiers is actually run.

[chrisseaton]

> My imagination of how an army is run requires careful maintenance of fitness of soldiers, so use of PT instructors, regular monitoring of fitness metrics

When deployed operationally fitness is usually your own business. PTIs often have a different job operationally (something like close protection of the commanding officer), although they may provide some mentorship and help improvise fitness equipment.

Generally soldiers are treated like professionals and left to manage their own fitness when deployed, using the skills and self discipline they've been taught. A fitness monitor is a good way to do that.

> Opsec would probably deny any personal electronic devices.

It doesn't. I've been told to not connect to Afghan mobile networks, and obviously not to talk about what you are doing, but apart from that you can just use your common sense.

> Of course, the use of personal fitness devices suggests my conception is wildly off how a deployed corpus of soldiers is actually run.

It's probably far more chilled out than you imagine. In my experience tech people think the Army is all 'sir-yes-sir'. I've literally never said that in my entire life in the military.

[gaius]

use of PT instructors, regular monitoring of fitness metrics. It also has dieticians to monitor food production/intake

Check the FB group Fill Your Boots for what Army catering is really like... Nutrition seems to be very, very far down the list of priorities.

Soldiers generally lose a lot of fitness while deployed, manning an observation point or a weapons emplacement just doesn’t involve much movement, only a small minority are out on foot patrolling every day.

[JohnStudio]

They are not robots. Why do they need iPads? Why do they need personal phones? Not being snide, but when on deployment they have a LOT of tech tools, just like any other demographic of folks. It's just a thing ...

[notatoad]

tracking fitness and tracking location aren't the same thing.

[mind_bakery]

True and false. At the moment, they are inexorably linked if tracking how much and how well you move is part of your fitness plan. GPS tends to be part of a common and usually pretty smart way to do that. For people who are deployed, it's important to have metrics of personal performance and keep track of any progress or decline in physical capabilities. Using that data wisely makes them better at whatever they do.

The problem isn't just the soldiers and it's not just Strava, it's the culture around data itself. Tech companies that produce quantified-self devices or services need to realize the ENORMOUS responsibility they're taking on by collecting and using this data. Users need to realize just what it is they are sharing and how their data gets from point A to point D. Burying it in the fine print is not enough. Maybe people should get into the habit of looking at the data profiles each company has on them or at least being aware of the totality of what's collected so they can make better decisions. It is kind of ironic that the point of collecting this data is to help people make better decisions while this particular case is actually a collection of really bad decisions. Fire is both a useful tool and a dangerous chemical reaction, this is no different.

Perhaps there needs to ALWAYS be an option to route the data to a private server of the user's choosing instead. If that were standard practice, it probably could have prevented this problem.

[znfi]

Well, the data does not just appear on strava all by itself. I made an assumption that a non-neglible fraction of the data uploaded was from Garmins/fitness trackers or similar devices (like watch for tracking your running etc).

I guess people could also be using their smartphone app, which I am less familiar with. If I'm misunderstanding what the source of the data is I apologize.