The Vergecast - Foursquare is tracking you... responsibly

Episode Date: February 19, 2019

CEO of Foursquare Jeff Glueck discusses the ethics of companies that track their users’ movements. Verge editor-in-chief Nilay Patel and Glueck further explore Foursquare's aim to help its customers become less reliant on mapping companies like Google, and how responsibly managing a user’s data and privacy is not only the right thing to do, but good for business. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Support for the show comes from Retool. Too many companies run critical operations on duct taped spreadsheets, Slack workflows, and whatever else they could cobble together. Not because they want to, but because building internal tools means weeks of waiting on someone else's backlog. That's where Retool comes in. Build custom internal tools just by describing what you need. Prompts something like,

Build Me a Revenue Dashboard on our Salesforce data. And Retool actually builds it on your company's data, in your cloud with enterprise security built in. Go to retool.com slash Verchcast. We all need to retool how we build software. What's up, y'all. I'm Skyler Diggins, seven-time WMBA All-Star, Olympic gold medalist, and mom. And I'm Cassidy Hubbard, host and reporter for nearly 20 years,

covering the biggest names and stories in sports and mom. And this is Am Mom, a community for athletes, game changers, and moms of all kinds. dropping May 14th. Tap in with us. Hey everybody, it's Neil from The Vergecast. This week on the interview episode, we have Jeff Glick, who's a CEO of Foursquare.

Now, you may remember Foursquare 10 years ago launched at South by Southwest. It was an app to check-in to locations with your friends, become the mayor of the airport coffee shop. It's a really different company now. They still run an app called Swarm lets you check in, but it is a location data services provider. It provides the location services to Snapchat, to Twitter,

to everyone that you can think of. that needs to know where you are. And right now, that is a really dicey kind of company to run because of all of the privacy conversations we've been having. But Foursquare, I think, is doing it right. And Jeff is a really interesting guy who's really focused on providing the services and the value that you can get from location

while still protecting privacy. And we really got into it about the trade-offs between everything technology and phones can do with your location and all of the privacy problems I could cause. It was a great conversation. I love talking to people who are fierce about their values. Check this out. It's Jeff Glick, the CEO of Foursquare. Okay, we're here with Jeff Glick, the CEO of Foursquare.

How are you, sir? Hello, great to be here. Thanks for joining us. So this is, like, an interesting time to talk to a man who runs a company that does, like, location services for other big companies and, like, helps the ad industry go. So I want to talk about that. But let's start with Forsquare. So Forsquare famously started is the checking app. It was like a hit of, like, the early sort of Web 2O.

Ten years ago, Southby. Yeah. And now it's a radically kind of different. company. And you've split out Swarm, which is sort of a still-the-check-in product, but your business has turned into something really else. So just walk me through the basics for people who haven't been following the journey. So for people who don't know how we've evolved from 2009 and checking in and mayors, now the company is really a trusted independent location platform. And to explain that, if you type the name of the verge offices into Uber,

They're using Foursquare. If you get a geofilter on Snapchat, that's using our data and technology. If you get tapped on the shoulder because you're traveling in Spain and a friend recommended the tapest place around the corner on TripAdvisor. That's our technology being used by TripAdvisor. If you tag a tweet on Twitter, that's Foursquare technology at work. And if you get an augmented reality layer over your photos and your camera on any Samsung device, That's Foursquare's API and developer tools at work.

So we help about 150,000 registered developers understand the context of the real world and connect the digital and the physical world to make user experiences better. And where people go in the real world, which is 90% of the economy still. And I would argue a lot of where we should be spending our time instead of endlessly scrolling screens

is discovering amazing places around us and real people and real friends. So that's what we're about. And so the company is 99% what they call a B-to-B company. We provide technology and services to other enterprises and help them get better. I just want to pull that apart. So I am using Twitter, which is a mistake I make every day. But I'm on it.

I'm doing it. It's addictive. I'm working for Jack for free instead of working for the virtual money. And I tag a location. The Twitter app, what says, here's my GPS coordinates. 4Square. tell me where I am. That's right. So an API is a call, basically. And so the Twitter app will say, here's the Wi-Fi scans I see, and we have a proprietary map of all the Wi-Fi scans in

100 million places and how they interact in the world, GPS, time of day. And we will return back a list to the Twitter user, the saying, you know, maybe you're at Francis Tavern, which is downstairs here, or maybe you're at the Vox office or like, but we 80 or 90% of the time, the very first thing we return is right. The users, and users train us. If you're at the juice generation and not at the Starbucks, which is only a few feet away, we're constantly learning which is the right answer because billions, over 13 billion times people have said, hey, I'm here, or I'm actually at the, you know, the Gap Store next door. And so we're constantly learning the sort of digital fingerprint of 105 million businesses in almost 200 countries. With this community,

it's sort of crowdsourced. And so we make it better and easier to tag a tweet. But we do lots of other things with that technology. Right. That's the simplest, I think the Snapchat, right, it's like, what are the available filters here and you're helping them determine where they are? Yeah. So they might want to have a filter for, you know, Kupa Kaffa and Palo. And recognizing that the phone just took a snap inside Kupa Kaffa, and not at the wine bar down the street, that that is when we would trigger or help them understand like, hey, the Cooper Cafe overlay or filter on Snap is, now's the time to offer that. And so we just try to make experiences better.

You know, we're even getting into better romantic pairings. We've worked with Tinder on their Tinder Places project, which is live in a bunch of countries and cities. It's still in kind of beta. But basic ideas a user can opt in to be paired with people who love the same places that they love. So, you know, maybe, hey, Jennifer, you should meet this person who also lives in Brooklyn and loves the same cold brew coffee spot and goes to the same dog park all the time. You know, you have something in common. And so we found so far with Tinder that that's creating better matches in the sense of people more likely to accept a swipe.

Wow. Okay. So there's like three or four things I want to get into. Obviously, I want to talk about being sort of this like mapping company. Yeah. We talk about that a lot. We spend a lot of time on the Vergecast, I'll be honest with you. Probably too much time talking about competition and antitrust and behemoths.

and you're obviously in a market that is pretty concentrated. So there's that. I definitely want to talk to you about privacy, which is something that you have written about. But let me start with something. I think we have a lot of people who listen to our show who want to build companies who are building companies, who are part of companies that are experiencing change.

You just described a huge pivot from what Foursquare was, which is a big consumer company, which is a hit with consumers, to now an infrastructure provider. How did you guys make that pivot? So I joined the company almost five years ago, initially a COO. I had been a CMO and a CEO and a founder of a company and a CEO of a Palo Alto Mountain View company. And I met Ben Horowitz from Andreessen Horowitz, who's the biggest investor.

And he said, oh, you're thinking you're moving back to New York from the Silicon Valley. You should meet Dennis Crowley. That's our, force core is our biggest investment. And they have this really powerful crowdsource map of the world. And they're trying to figure out how do we make this a sustainable business? Because the consumer business wasn't growing at the same. Pace, post Instagram or Snap that the early years had. And so when I arrived and I had a conversation with Dennis Crowley, who is our chairman and this visionary founder, I'm very passionate. And I remember asking the question, wait, Dennis, you guys have built technology that can

recognize when the phone in your pocket or your purse goes in or out of a hundred five million places in the world. And all we're doing is guiding people to a better burrito. You know, this is big. This is how to connect the digital world and the physical world, how to tap people on the shoulder and understand the context, you know, how to distinguish that it's about to rain and you're in your office at 2 p.m., who cares?

Or it's going to rain in 10 minutes, and you're at Yankee Stadium. You better order an Uber now. And so that kind of context, what kinds of things you like, how to personalize technology, and how to understand how digital media affects offline behavior, That is a powerful platform.

And so the evolution, because we're still a location company, when it's not like Slack where they set out to make a game and they built the internal communication tool that obviously now is going to IPO, we're still a location company. We still, from the beginning, 10 years ago, talked about being the location layer of the internet. But obviously we're a B2B company instead of a consumer company primarily, although we still have millions and millions of consumer users of our beloved consumer apps. And so, you know, we started out, and I said, just give me a couple people, I was CEO. And we're going to go to our 70,000 developers using the tools for free.

And we're going to say, above a certain level, the top 1% of you are going to pay. And these were Fortune 500 companies calling our data centers billions of times a year. And we were losing money, and we had no revenue. And I remember saying, you know, people will actually pay for something. They're using billions of times a year and cost real money to develop and host. And I remember the internal conversation was like, well, but if we charge them, they might not continue using it. Well, what are you got to lose? They're not paying anything.

And so we went to all of our top, top developers, and we started signing commercial agreements. And most of them said, I was wondering when you'd get around to charging us. Of course we'll pay. We love it. It's the best, you know, location. There's another side of that too, which is if they start paying you, you have to promise them that you'll be around. And at some point, to continue growing for any company, your vendors have to be there for you. And we were spending millions of dollars mapping the world and hosting billions and billions of queries.

And so you're right. They want enterprise service level agreements. They want resiliency and they want uptime guarantees and anything that an enterprise software company is going to provide its clients. And so, yes, we needed to be a sustainable business. And so, you know, in the first year, quickly these B2B services became 70% of the company. And that's when Dennis came to me and said, it was Dennis's idea. I was not expecting it. And he said, you know, we're really, this is going to be our future.

That's a classic sort of Silicon Valley success story, right? We built a consumer app. We got a lot of data. We didn't know what to do with it. We figured out there was a market for this data. Now we're selling the data. You see that all over the place. There's, I think, a louder critique of that, which I have made, which others have made.

I just interviewed a woman named Shoshana Zuboff. She wrote a book called The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. She's putting a name on that concept. Do you think the consumers, you use your consumer app, needed to know, that we're contributing all of this data about where our phones go, about what we are doing here, about these place names even, and that's going to turn into a huge monetized asset for some company that's going to continue to sort of collect data from those?

Do you see that shifting? Do you think you could have made this kind of big change in what 4Square is today? Or did you need kind of that space of no one really knows how this is going to work yet? I think we set out to solve a problem, which is where am I right now? Yeah. And what is the nature of the place? Is it a vegan spot? Is it a steak and potato spot?

And there was no available tech to do that 10 years ago when Dennis started. So he had to build it. He had to build this sort of recognition of 100 million places. So to answer your question, I absolutely believe For Squoer has been thinking about this a long time because we started as a consumer app, and so trust and user participation was essential. And we still believe that data is a privilege. And so everything we do always starts with the question, how is this providing an informed choice to the user? The user's in control.

That's the first test. Second, is it adding value for the user? You shouldn't be collecting any information that doesn't relate to the use case. You're providing that the user has chosen. If a user is opting in because they're... want to be paired with people who love the favorite spots that they go to, better in dating, or because they want to get weather alerts that are contextually smart when you're in a park versus inside a tall building or a thousand other use cases we could talk about.

The user is in control, and you should only be asking for information that is related to the service the user is opting in. And I would point out that for the apps that we power, remember the vast majority of our understanding of the world and the people moving through it is through our network of developers. You know, we generally see 50 to 70% of people opt in to get these contextual pings when they're near a place to save money or an interesting place. And the other folks choose not to, and there is zero information ever collected if you don't choose to opt in. And then you don't get the benefit. You don't get the tap on the shoulder like, hey, you're a

touch tunes user and you know, you love Rihanna and you're at a bar where you can control the music, so you get a ping on your phone and get the party started. This bar Rihanna is the number one artist. So that kind of thing. So the first test is informed consent. We can talk more about that, and the standards are growing for what that is and how plain and clear that language is as opposed to these long-term privacy policies. Second is limiting information elegantly to just the minimal information you need to provide this special service the user is asking you to provide. And thirdly, users need to remain in control. So they need the right to be forgotten globally. We should have that in the U.S. like it does in Europe. We support it in the U.S. And we execute now. We have

right to be forgotten, right to be, right to portability globally, even though it's not the law here. We just believe it. This is on the four-square spot. This is on four-square. And so those are the three core tests, I think, informed consent. And informed is important. Second is, when you're talking about a very sensitive thing like location data, that it be limited to providing a useful service. A flashlight app shouldn't be asking you for your location all the time. And then thirdly, you know, users need continued control. And each of those we could dig into. And I actually advocate for a higher standard that we call, and I've written about this Hippocratic Oath,

and we've been working with tech ethicists to think about how the industry has to evolve and lift its standards. So David Ryan Polger has this concept of the Hippocratic Oath for Data Science. And we advocate that, which is do no harm. Are you using information that a user has entrusted you to help that user, or are you using that information to disadvantage that user or deny access to something in ways that would not be good for the user? And we think every company should be forced to ask that test, kind of like a fiduciary duty for a broker.

And so I think those are the four core principles that we try to think about. But look, the industry hasn't been perfect. We've tried to set the highest bar, and the standards are evolving. We are in favor of a national privacy standard in the U.S. and we can talk more about what that should look like because we think that in a world where the best practices of trust are followed, the good players like us will end up in a good position.

Hang one second. We're going to do an ad. We'll be right back. Support for the show comes from Framer. Framer is an enterprise-grade, no-code website builder, used by teams at companies like Perplexity and Muro to move faster. With real-time collaboration and a robust CMS, with everything you need for great SEO, not to mention advanced analytics that include integrated A-B testing, your designers and marketers are empowered to build and maximize your dot com from day one.

So whether you want to launch a new site, test a few landing pages, or migrate your full.com, Framer has programs for startups, scale-ups, and large enterprises to make going from idea to live site as easy and fast as possible. Learn how you can get more out of your dot com from a Framer specialist or get started building for free today at framer.com slash verge for 30% off a Framer pro annual plan. That's framer.com slash verge for 30% off. Framer.com slash verge. Rules and restrictions may apply. Support for the show comes from Upwork.

The days of doing it all, all by yourself, are over. There's no romance in burning out while you're trying to scale. Instead, you can check out Upwork. Upwork helps grow your business by giving you fast access to specialized talent across more than 125 categories, so you can fill skill gaps, launch projects faster, and scale without committing to full-time headcount. And finding the right talent is easy. You can browse profiles, review past work, and get help scoping the role so you can get started quickly. Seriously, you could connect with the right freelancer in just a few hours, especially when you sign up with Business Plus.

Their AI powered shortlisting pairs you with the top 1% of talent in under six hours. No endless searcher required. You can visit upwork.com right now to post your job for free. That's upwork.com to connect with top talent ready to help your business grow. That's upw-w-rk.com. Upwork.com. All right, we're back with Jeff Glick, CEO of Foursquare. We could do all day and all night on what the privacy policies should look like.

Yeah. I think we all know at some level they should just be simpler, right? And you should really know what you're reading. I think the idea that you should be able to push a button and take all your data away and go home. Exactly. It's pretty simple. Exactly. When you get to, the government should mandate these things.

I think it's a lot trickier. So how do you see that regulation shaking out? Because that move is coming, right? I mean, I talk to politicians. I talk to regulators. I talk to other CEOs. they're a little bit less happy about it than you are maybe, but everyone sees the momentum.

It needs to happen. What do you think it should look like? I've talked about those four principles just now that I think should be embedded. But how would you codify it? I think that's the question. It's very easy for you and me to sit here and say, I should be able to put the button,

delete my data from foreshar and walk away. It is much harder to write a law that compels Google to build that product. Well, look, GDPR and Europe is something that people have adapted to now. It's not necessarily... clear all the time what exactly, how exactly the GDPR regulations will break out because the French are interpreting it a little different maybe than other countries. And it's early.

My analogy is to self-driving cars. Yeah. So human beings are actually pretty bad at driving and over a million people are killed and tens of millions are badly injured every year because human beings are bad at driving. We go nuts rightly when one person is killed by a self-driving car because the norms are being built, and we need to have the right legal frameworks and the right ethical standard for this. But I think if you just throw out self-driving cars at the first mistake,

you are actually condemning the human race to millions and millions of people being killed and maimed every year. How do we not throw out the baby with bathwater? How do you establish norms for what self-driving software should decide to do when it has to choose between two accidents that are going to happen and things like that?

We have to create those standards. Same thing with location. We believe context is really important to making AI and AR work and location-based services. I mean, I remember, you know, learning to drive at age 16, and there wasn't Google Maps, and if you made a wrong turn, you were in big trouble. Like, you had to pull over and get out a paper map and flip 15 pages, right? Now we take it for granted that location-based services will just reroute you, right? And by the way, avoid the traffic.

So I think, you know, for urban planning and logistics and personalization of content, all these things, this is good stuff, but it needs to follow these legal principles. Now, the California law were actually big supporters of the one danger of writing the legislation poorly is not just stifling good innovation with the bad, but it's also the thing you alluded to earlier. We see ourselves as an independent platform for 150,000 other companies to invent the future. Very much our customers come to us because they don't want to be dependent on the big Waldgardens. They don't want to depend on Uber and Samsung don't want to be 100% beholden to Google Maps to build their future. And all of our customers are like that, Twitter and Tencent and Alibaba and all of them.

And so there's a danger if you write the legislation badly that the only companies that survive are actually these giant oligopoly companies that have armies of lawyers. I mean, this is the critique of GDPR, right? The compliance costs are too high. Only big companies can pay them. They're going to be very happy about the law because they know it's going to reduce consequences. competition and that will take over. I saw this in the, I started working for a guy named Michael Porter, who wrote Competitive Advantage.

And we saw this in the gas station industry. I know this is a funny analogy for your listeners. But what happened is at first, like when pollution control technology came out and, you know, in most states now, you have to have those things that suction up the gas fumes when you're filling up your car. Well, that's really expensive technology for a service station to install. I mean, it's like a million dollars, a service station or more. And the big companies, the Exxons, and at first we're like, don't regulate us.

This is ridiculous. And then they realized, hey, we can afford this. We're the richest company in the world. All those independent gas sellers who undercut us in price, they're going to go out of business, which is exactly what happened. So then the big companies realize, oh, I like this regulation. It's going to stifle competition. And that, I think, is a little bit on the minds of Google and Facebook. They realize that if the legislation is shaped in such a way that it puts all their competitors out of business, that they'll end up in a good place.

And so it's just going to be a real, real awful tax, and it's going to put a lot of startups out of business, even though they may be right. They just can't afford the legal costs. And so that is a real danger because Google and Facebook have armies of lawyers, and they'll be fine. So I think it's really important that we think about the competitive dynamic as we write this legislation and that it gets what consumers want,

but it isn't overly burdensome. And you don't want to have to click 800 times just to opt into a service, right? It should be super transparent. and it should be a few sentences up front, not in a 200-page privacy policy. What are you signing up for? And what are you going to get? And how might the information be shared?

You brought up the flashlight app. Yeah. I think that one's pretty clear, right? Like, the flashlight's app, like, I need to know where you are. You should probably say no. Why? But weather apps are massive sort of problem in the industry. There are lots of weather apps to take your location

because they need to tell you what the weather is, and then they just sell it on the back end all over the place. How do you stop that from happening? How do you stop, how do you tell the consumer, actually this thing is going to keep a real-time record of your location? How do you stop Verizon from using a third-party data broker who then is going to happily sell your location? Like, there was that great motherboard report. So I think the lawsuit in the weather company case in L.A., if you really dig into it, it's that the disclosure in Europe on the weather company app is very clear. you're going to get alerts.

And these aren't just a storm is coming to where you are. That's also, it can be things like pollen alerts where you are, and it can be pollution alerts where you are, and lots more things that actually are really valuable, and they need to be dynamic to the neighborhood level and your specific location. And there's value to the user. So in Europe, it's very clear you're sharing location,

and it will be used under our privacy policy to create personalized ads across the Internet and share with partners. And you can read our privacy policy for all the protections we put in place. And then in America, it's just read our privacy policy like here. And that is where the industry needs to get better. And we've been upgrading and advising all of our apps to sort of put very plain language up front. But I actually think it's legit if you were providing a location-based service to learn about that, hey, this is a fast food frequenter.

And this other device is shopping for a car right now. And this other device is a fitness junkie. And it's always a parks and Crossfits and. or yoga studios and things. So I think it's legit to have an industry that brings more personalized content and offers and ads. And we can discuss that. I actually think it's good for the consumer,

but it has to be regulated. It has to have standards, and the user has to know what they're doing and getting in control. The motherboard article is a totally different thing. It's for the listener who isn't familiar. Motherboard had a great piece where they basically, the author,

paid, I don't know, like a bail bondsman, some money to track a phone number and return. a real-time map with his location that have been sourced through a network of shady third parties directly from Verizon. So not all location tech or companies are created equal. We don't do anything like that. Oh, yeah, sure, yeah. But how do you write a law that stops that?

Well, that's actually pretty easy. I don't think that regulated common carriers, basically. And basically, it's a basic fact of life that your phone needs to be connected to the network. And so really without a special opt-in, just because your phone was, on the network, they were collecting very coarse cell tower triangulation location data. It's actually not that good data, but that's aside the point. It's rough location. And by the way, that's stored, you know, the NSA is collecting all metadata on all your calls.

And the government privacy topic is just as big as what Facebook is collecting, I think. And we need to talk about that too and net neutrality and stuff like that. But you can just say you cannot sell. a phone number's real-time location, certainly not to a shady network of resell. I mean, we just don't do anything like that. We never would. And there's no consumer value.

And there's no consumer value or opt-in. Just because your phone's connected to the network, just because you turned on your phone, you consent it. But that's not how consent should work. Like I said, when we do consent, it's like, hey, do you want to participate in Tinder places? And, you know, 50 or 60 people say, yeah, I'd love to be paired with people who are like me

and go to the same spots because where you go says a lot about who you are and, you know, 40 to 50% say, no, I don't want to participate. The user's really in control because when, you know, it's 50, 60, 70% choosing yes and 30, 40% choosing no, the user's making an informed choice, I would argue. It's the stuff that's just like buried on page 400 of the Apple terms of service that when you turn on your phone, that's not opt-in. That's not consumer control. And so the telcos just shouldn't be in that business. And you just, I mean, the telco regulations are thousands of pages. It's very easy. They can't help themselves.

They'll want to be in that business. But you collect a lot of data. So do you ever think you're working at cross incentives? Like, are you working against your own self-interest economically to not sell some of this stuff? I have turned down time and again million-dollar offers to sell data that was against our sense of ethics. And I turned it down in a millisecond. And people have offered millions of dollars. And, you know, nothing is worth violating.

the trust because this is a business that depends on trust. And I mean, my, it's not that people don't approach us. It's just that we say no. One of the things in the New York Times article, which we didn't really dig into about location, is that in theory, if you have a consistent identifier and you, that consistent identifier over specific timestamps goes to lots of different places, you could in theory re-identify that anonymized individual because you know where they, work and they live and they were at a certain place. It's actually hard to do at scale. The article

made it sound easy. It's actually really hard because you live in an apartment building and you go to this 100-story building and good luck deciphering who's who. But we think a lot about that. And so when we worked with institutional investors who wanted to understand, you know, is Chipotle affected by the E. coli standard? And so, you know, we blurred the data set so that you could never connect a person across visits. We might say, you know, this month there were so many visits at a Chipotle and last month there were so many visits. But you can't see the trails of individuals.

So you can't re-identify the data. That would be an example of putting a lot of thought into how to ensure privacy. Because what those stock pickers want, they don't care about, you know, Zach's trail. They want to know, are more people going to McDonald's after they announced all day breakfast than the week before? Yeah. And so that's the kind of, and that's, I think, a legitimate market research question. And we can help.

But we do it in such a way that you can't get the identities. And we've been asked for that. And we just don't participate in that because we just think there's too much upside to risk this. We're playing for the next 20 years. And there's so much opportunity here in ways that can be totally privacy friendly and user-controlled, that we're not going to risk that for, you know, someone offering us a million dollars for raw location data. We just won't participate in that. The real danger is that all this innovation that we believe in and contextual awareness, what we call contextual computing, that could all

be risked if some creepy company does creepy things, and we get really bad legislation instead of smart legislation. And so that's not worth it. And we'd love to see unethical behavior weeded out of the market, because I think that's what the consumers will need to believe in this future. And so, no, it's not where I've never had a board member push us to violate our ethics principles. And by the way, you know, employees at all of these companies are a great check because employees are concerned. I mean, I'm a dad of three kids and I care about what kind of world we're building for my kids. And our employees, you know, look at what, you know, the backlash of Google experience when they started building the Chinese censored search engine. I mean, employees are vocal advocates because they want.

want to, these are talented people and they want to be working on stuff they feel good about. So that's another real check. I think at top tier companies is that the employees and I think, you know, are joining companies that have a real sense of values and principles and omission. They are the first line of defense and a lot of this stuff. Yeah. I think the problem is there are lots of companies that are quite a bit shadier. I think that's the real, the real thing that needs, the regulation needs to address. I couldn't agree more. So I want to talk about competition because you brought up the oath again. And I want to end with like what Foursquare is doing. Yeah.

You run a company, you're articulating some very clear values here. You're in a big, messy market. There are big telcos that maybe have fewer values or less well articulated values. There is a Google in this world that runs a mapping business. There is an Apple in this world that runs a mapping business. How does Foursquare continue to compete as an independent with values that keep you from making all of the money that you can potentially? make. What is that ramp for you continue to look like? Well, I think there's room for a scaled, independent location platform that is serving

the independent innovators of the world. You know, our customers, whether it's Garmin or Apple is a customer, or Twitter, Uber, or Microsoft, Snapchat, or Line, or, you know, companies around the world that don't want to be beholden in their innovation futures, as well as, you know, kids in a dorm room in Amsterdam who want to start up a company. Those are our customers, and we're devoted to this independent community, and we think that an alternative to Google Maps should exist for the future of innovation. Because otherwise, you wake up, you know, companies that have, if you're HTC and you signed up for Android, and all of a sudden, you're fully commoditized and you're out of business because you signed up for the Google worldview and the terms keep changing. And, you know, it's a Google world you live in. And that's why Uber wanted to start migrating off Google Maps, and they came to us, and we're helping them.

do that. And so, you know, there is value in that independent. And we have found a sizable business. We're nothing like the size of Google. And we're not yet profitable, but we're growing fast and we're going to get profitable at this rate. But it takes a lot of R&D to build a map of the world and keep it fresh so that the Ubers and the Samsung's and the Twitters rely on us nightly and Apple and others. And so, you know, it takes a lot of investment. And so I think there's a room for an independent player. There's demand for it. We're seeing that. But that's how we compete because our clients don't want to be at the beholden to Facebook and Google forever. Do you think that you'll ever build another, like a straight consumer map app?

So we have innovated a bunch with Swarm, which is a wonderful way to log all your, you know, travels through the world for yourself. It's really for yourself. And City Guide has great recommendations globally, especially when you travel outside the United States because we're truly global and Yelp is very good in the U.S., but they're not as. global at all. And so we have a kind of small labs skunk works that Dennis Crowley, our founder, leads. And there's good stuff coming over the next year. You're going to see kind of experiments about the next generation of things in augmented reality and gaming that are intelligent to where you're standing. And the game might change based on walking into a pizza place versus

walking into a gym and things like that. So Dennis is very interested in that. So you're going to see us continue to innovate and experiment and we'll look for beta testers. But I think, you know, I think more likely than our future is, you know, invent the next Snapchat or Instagram, it's much more likely that we'll invent new kind of user interface paradigms that are useful and then encourage our 150,000 app developers to implement some of them in their scaled communities. Do you think that you have the ability to export those values out to those developers? I mean, that's the thing that you have a little bit of leverage now. You can say, hey, we're not, we're not going to let you do this kind of tracking.

Hey, we're not going to let you resell this kind of data. Is that something that you enforce? Yes. We have a bunch of privacy rules that are just built into the systems. We have an ethics committee and ethics training. And so we think a lot about this. And I can give some examples. So for instance, we sign the Never Again Tech Pledge,

which is we don't think digital data should be ever used to create a compilation or registry of religious belief in the United States or anywhere. Like a Muslim registry was a hot topic at that time. And so we just block all that sensitive information, things like LGBT locations, things like sensitive medical locations. We just don't let our developers see that. It's sort of hard-coded into the system. Now, we see it, but by policy, we just don't think that should be out in the world. And so those are, we could talk for another hour about all the privacy safeguards and things.

And look, we're continually trying to get better. We audit our partners, but I would like to see all of our partners do a better job at onboarding screen disclosures. I think that's going to be a real place for both regulatory and self-governing push because I think consumers should be in control and data is a privilege and the industry has to get better there. Last question. When the Vergecast listeners listening to this, how should they think of Foursquare and, two, what comes next in this big conversation about location and privacy and data? I hope they now know that Foursquare really is this platform. So it's the most trusted, independent platform for understanding how people move through the real world. That's what's been blazoned on the wall in our offices, and that's what gets us up in the morning.

And, you know, you will see us trying to spend time with policymakers and explain the benefits of location. And also our belief that privacy standards, the U.S. needs them, and there should be a law. And it should be a smart one that ensures competition and innovation, but also, protects users so they can trust their apps, their favorite apps. And so we want to be part of that conversation. We want to elevate that conversation. And we're happy to dig into the details, but that will maybe be the next podcast. Probably.

Well, I'm always happy to talk to companies and CEOs that express their values. So thank you very much for coming by. Thank you for providing us. That was Jeff Glick, the CEO of Foursquare. I suspect we'll have him back on as sort of privacy regulation conversation heats up. We'll be back later this week with another regular Vergecast, and we're here every Tuesday with an interview episode, sometimes some emergency episodes as well. Let me know what you think. I'm at Reckless.

We'd love to hear from you. We'll talk to you soon.