Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 153 posts

Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo

#111

Post by fixermark »

duaneb wrote: post #103
fixermark wrote: post #52

"Let that sink in for a moment: The selling point of this app is that Google will read your messages, for your convenience." If that's the author's objection, it's like the author never heard of Gmail. https://developers.google.com/schemas/tutorials/google-now-c...

It's a little different as gmail is useless without search. This is an extension to messaging that nobody was asking for. Furthermore, email was never secure to begin with. E2E encryption has finally been making its way to devices; this is a major setback for the effort.

Why is it a major setback of the effort?

Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo

#112

Post by duaneb »

fixermark wrote: post #111
duaneb wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a little different as gmail is useless without search. This is an extension to messaging that nobody was asking for. Furthermore, email was never secure to begin with. E2E encryption has finally been making its way to devices; this is a major setback for the effort.

Why is it a major setback of the effort?

If you're giving every text message to a third party, it's not e2e encrypted anymore....

Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo

#113

Post by fixermark »

duaneb wrote: post #112
fixermark wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it a major setback of the effort?

If you're giving every text message to a third party, it's not e2e encrypted anymore....

Nobody's giving every message to a third party. Just every non-Incognito Allo message.

... unless you're assuming "It's from Google, therefore everybody will be using it next week" or something. And if that happens, maybe people find the ability to have a third party sift their conversation data and integrate it against their other data to solve problems they have to be more useful than anonymity?

Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo

#114

Post by zxcvcxz »

vthallam wrote: post #96
visarga wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gmail? What about Google Search? It knows more about a man than his wife, doctor and lawyer combined. But Google convinced us to happily give up our privacy, for the amazing advantage (no sarcasm) of searching the internet. Maybe it was worth it, but Alo doesn't offer any ground breaking service.

The demo showed only some use cases which mostly look like first world problems, but i personally see a huge need for this. I mean there are millions of people who plan things over chat and Google showing search results for movies, restaurants, flight ticket prices etc in the chat which can be viewed by all the users is very huge IMO. Also, if they open up the platform for other bots like Google, basically we are see…

Why not just install a keylogger on all google devices?

Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo

#115

Post by fixermark »

zxcvcxz wrote: post #114
vthallam wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The demo showed only some use cases which mostly look like first world problems, but i personally see a huge need for this. I mean there are millions of people who plan things over chat and Google showing search results for movies, restaurants, flight ticket prices etc in the chat which can be viewed by all the users is very huge IMO. Also, if they open up the platform for other bots like Google, basically we are see…

Why not just install a keylogger on all google devices?

Lack of useful semantic context to guess at the meaning of the keylogged strings making it more difficult for the data to be combined with the user's existing data to help them solve problems.

... but I know you were just being facetious. ;)

Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo

#116

Post by corndoge »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #70

"Don't Use Allo" Wasn't planning on it. The people I communicate with use either Hangouts or iMessage. I don't have room for YAMS (Yet Another Messaging Service). Google now has what? half doesn't ways to send messages? This time next year, how many will they have shutdown? I'm not moving until Hangouts is one of the victims.

*half dozen

Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo

#117

Post by entonidas3 »

freshhawk wrote: post #97
darkerside wrote: post #38

What bothers me more than the lack of privacy or encryption is the idea that we are giving our voice to machines. We are moving to a society where we let technology speak to our friends and loved ones as if they were us. Something essentially human is being lost in that process.

On the bright side maybe we'll get to the point where the bullshit social media conversations are all done by bots. Then we can devalue and ignore them and only have to actually participate in actual conversations. My bot can just continuously post variations on "Here is a belief, validate it!", "Accept this high status social posturing as true!", "My worldview has been questioned. Outrage! Let us form a mob and bull…

Liked, subscribed, +1'd, followed, and cride evry tim.

Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo

#118

Post by Renner1 »

GauntletWizard wrote: post #89
dragonwriter wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How can you get to that point and not immediately understand that it's obviously satire? By having encountered people who express exactly that sentiment and are deadly serious about it.

And you should treat those people as satire, too. The insistence on taking everyone seriously all the time only creates friction. It is not your job to take someone seriously, it is their job to make you take them seriously.

> jury duty, a state-mandated intrusion into my most private information and thoughts

Which aspect of that statement do you find satirical?

Jury-duty forces someone to have an opinion on record about some contentious topic. By most accounts that is an intrusion into one's private information and thoughts.

Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo

#119

Post by jrockway »

cobralibre wrote: post #58
webkike wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing here to indicate that; not retroactive commentary at the end, nothing. If (s)he's trying to make a joke to make a point, (s)he's doing neither.

All kinds of clever and subtle things become possible in human communication when you stop insisting on overt signposts to interpretation and instead rely on your wit, experience, and judgment to resolve (or accept) possible ambiguities.

The chatbots on HN and Reddit are pretty smart, but yeah, you can find them when they complain about having to have human emotion and intuition to interpret a comment.

Re: If you care about privacy, you should not use Google Allo

#120

Post by eevilspock »

Renner1 wrote: post #118
GauntletWizard wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you should treat those people as satire, too. The insistence on taking everyone seriously all the time only creates friction. It is not your job to take someone seriously, it is their job to make you take them seriously.

> jury duty, a state-mandated intrusion into my most private information and thoughts Which aspect of that statement do you find satirical? Jury-duty forces someone to have an opinion on record about some contentious topic. By most accounts that is an intrusion into one's private information and thoughts.

You won't and can't be forced. You can state your objections, and your refusal to make a public judgement, in which case you will not be selected to be on the jury. Even if some unreasonable judge still put you on the jury, you can refuse to vote guilty or not guilty, in which case there would be a hung jury. No court wants someone with such an attitude on a jury, so it won't ever get to this.
Post reply on HN