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

Not OK, Google

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 594 posts

Re: Not OK, Google

#391

Post by throwawaymaroon »

mrgreenfur wrote: post #7

This is literally the perfect end-game for an advertising company: total awareness of need under the guise of 'optimization' or 'AI enhancement'. They can see what your'e searching for, where you're going, when you run out of Mayo in your GoogleFridgeAppAssistant. What better way to offer ads than EVERY time you have a want? It's an advertising utopia!

The really pointless aspect of this utopia is that a perfect ad (in the sense of a perfectly spherical cow) is not nearly as useful as the advertiser might think.

Re: Not OK, Google

#392

Post by Oletros »

ProAm wrote: post #300
Oletros wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware that your new link doesn't talk about unfettered access?

Yes, but this is all we know about now, every day there is a new revelation about what the government has access too that we previously thought they didn't. I think it's naive to assume they don't have access to all of it.

Your claim is that the government have unfettered access to ALL the data.

Can you provide a link to your claim or it is just your opinion because there is no proof of that?

Re: Not OK, Google

#393

Post by samastur »

tekromancr wrote: post #350
Eupolemos wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fear you will be unable to recognize when that burger was your choice and when it was a reaction. You probably won't notice. And that is harmless. I also fear you will be unable to notice in which areas of life and information the distinction between choice and reaction is harmless and which it isn't. Of course, I'm not talking about "You" you, but just people. Me as well. I feel we are widening the field of uncons…

That's the thing though. I reject the notion that you ever actually make a choice. I would posit that 100% of the actions you take are simply the deterministic reactions when the current world state is filtered through your brain. Then, after the fact, your brain gets busy inventing a reason that you took a particular action and calls it a "choice" when really you were just going to do what you were going to do anywa…

In effect you argument is that we don't have free will, right?

I wonder what is then causing inefficiency when we read restaurant's menu and can't decide what we will have.

I'm with those who think we make choices and decisions far less often than we think, but that we still do make them.

Re: Not OK, Google

#394

Post by r00fus »

marak830 wrote: post #280
pmyjavec wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great point, people didn't imagine a world where we became the product.

This right here. When I first heard about android, I imagined an open system I could tinker with like I can on my PC. Instead I get the current evolution. I want a 3rd party. The same thing comes to my every day of usage, I'm still on win 7, and short of leaving Linux(yes I should have already), I can't upgrade without becoming a product. I want what we all imagined and dreamt of, and I pay for it. What I won't do, i…

You can move to Mac, AppleID is not really required.

Re: Not OK, Google

#395

Post by witty_username »

jerf wrote: post #386
Ph0X wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry but that just sounds like blind fear mongering. What you're saying is vague and doesn't really mean much. It's like saying we shouldn't use prescription glasses, or medication, or cars, because it's not "us". Humans invent all these tools and systems to improve and optimize our life. Make our vision better. Make our health better. Make us move around faster. In the case of AI, make us do perform certain thi…

"Imagine it was a personal secretary you had that gave you the EXACT same information. Gave you your flight information, turned on the light when you asked, gave you the weather and your schedule." In your metaphor, you are implicitly paying the secretary, so the secretary is incentivized to maintain your interests. How much have you paid Google for its free services? Your metaphor is inapplicable. You don't have a s…

Google earns most of their money through ads.

Re: Not OK, Google

#396

Post by r00fus »

eternalban wrote: post #121
darklajid wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has Star Trek even a currency? It always feels like a socialist/communist thing to me. You cannot compare the world's biggest seller of advertisement space with the ST universe. The motivation's aren't aligned: Google/Alphabet want to make sales based on my information. I agree that I found these oh so clever AI fantasies interesting in my youth, still do to a degree. But I always pictured the data being held inacces…

Star Trek's world seems to be a 'utopia' of scientific-military governance. Most of the key players have a military rank, wear color coded uniforms, and appear to be under 24/7 surveillance (which is OK since this is a very nice and progressive scientific-military goverment and you know War On and all that. :)

Most of Star Trek is aboard starships and stations - I wouldn't imagine that leaves much for privacy.

Plus, most folks think ST is where hippies took over. Center of Federation is in San Francisco...

Re: Not OK, Google

#397

Post by e40 »

ubercore wrote: post #11

Google Now has done the same for me, told me how long it will take to get to a bar I frequent. My reaction was quite exactly "Oh that's neat, thanks!" and I went and had a great burger that night. Totally OK for me Google. I respect that people have different privacy thresholds, but I think the fact that it's different for everyone is being lost in articles like this.

but I think the fact that it's different for everyone is being lost in articles like this.

I think that it is different for everyone is completely and utterly obvious. It's clear the author doesn't think it's OK, but that it's his/her opinion.

Re: Not OK, Google

#398

Post by overcast »

CaptSpify wrote: post #352
swalsh wrote: post #326

Imagine you're a something like a muslim in the US, and somoene like Trump is elected 5 years from now. You've been here all your life, you have a job, you pay your taxes, you're just a person who happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Much like a jewish person in Poland in the 1940's. Now even back then, it was not easy to escape persecution... but it was possible. In a google world though, there's noth…

> Much like a jewish person in Poland in the 1940's or a Japanese in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_American_internment We tend to think that the nazi's were crazy out-there, but we weren't too far off not that long ago, and we can get back there pretty quickly.

While not to justify their existence, those internment camps were not even in any stretch of the mind "like" the German death camps.

Re: Not OK, Google

#399

Post by witty_username »

microtonal wrote: post #378
ubercore wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1 - Sure there is, Google has fairly fine-grained tracking control. Not perfect, but as another commenter noted, this is a double-edged sword, as _too many_ controls can conversely hinder user control (see Facebook's privacy revamp) 2 - My point is that I personally am OK with Google's AI knowing more about me. I respect that others aren't. I'm not naive in my acceptance. 3 - I don't really have a response here.

 Sure there is, Google has fairly fine-grained tracking control. The privacy control where I disable location tracking and half a year later when I look in Google Dashboard I see months of travel history? I respect that others aren't. I'm not naive in my acceptance. So what do you do in a situation where your use of Google's data collection also affects people who do mind it? I would not be comfortable visiting a fr…

How do you know the conversations were used for suggestions?

It could have been a visit to a website.

Re: Not OK, Google

#400

Post by ubercore »

microtonal wrote: post #378
ubercore wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1 - Sure there is, Google has fairly fine-grained tracking control. Not perfect, but as another commenter noted, this is a double-edged sword, as _too many_ controls can conversely hinder user control (see Facebook's privacy revamp) 2 - My point is that I personally am OK with Google's AI knowing more about me. I respect that others aren't. I'm not naive in my acceptance. 3 - I don't really have a response here.

 Sure there is, Google has fairly fine-grained tracking control. The privacy control where I disable location tracking and half a year later when I look in Google Dashboard I see months of travel history? I respect that others aren't. I'm not naive in my acceptance. So what do you do in a situation where your use of Google's data collection also affects people who do mind it? I would not be comfortable visiting a fr…

> So what do you do in a situation where your use of Google's data collection also affects people who do mind it? I would not be comfortable visiting a friend with an always-listening device like Alexa or Google's equivalent.

I'd turn it off if/when they ask. I don't think that's unreasonable in the least. I'm not responsible for enforcing everyone's privacy preference, but I also respect them and will accommodate guests in my house.

Post reply on HN