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

441–450 of 594 posts

Re: Not OK, Google

#441

Post by internaut »

msabalau wrote: post #116
jpalomaki wrote: post #16

For consumers this will be a choice between keeping their data private and having intelligent systems that perform better. So far I haven't seen much, but based on my limited experience I believe customers are going to continue handing over their data to Google and Facebook in exchange for personalised services. The truth is, the only times my smartphone has actually felt smart is when Google has been mining my infor…

There 50 million domestic workers in the world: living, breathing, naturally intelligence, autonomous human beings that people welcome into their homes. Not surprising, given that during almost the entirety of our evolutionary experience everyone one knew knew everything about one. The notion that people would object to a company knowing some things about one in order to place slightly more relevant ads is silly. It…

Almost everybody screens their cleaners and babysitters in some way. Either they are connected through well known friends and family, or for the rich they get checked out for criminality/dangerousness by professional services.

Even then, we have 'nanny-cam'.

Re: Not OK, Google

#442

Post by Sargos »

marcosdumay wrote: post #406
blhack wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you comparing something designed to kill a rat with something designed to help me go to a burger place I like, or leave on time for work?

Yes. How does Google make money of this service again?

By having burger places pay money to get on the list of places it helpfully gives us when we want to eat a tasty burger. I still get my tasty burger.

Re: Not OK, Google

#443

Post by pjlegato »

witty_username wrote: post #395
jerf wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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.

Yes. Google is selling you, to advertisers, quite literally.

When you aren't paying anything for something of value, YOU are the product.

Re: Not OK, Google

#444

Post by pjlegato »

empath75 wrote: post #77
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…

I think for quite a large number of people, allowing AIs to make decisions for them will probably be better for them.

The same argument was historically made to justify slavery.

Re: Not OK, Google

#445

Post by carapace »

ianai wrote: post #369
ht85 wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We might get to the point where society is so safe and easy that insurance company start selling "Risks and Uncertainty" packages.

That reminds me of the TNG episode where two sides of a war long ago switched to simulating attacks. When there's a strike the casualties are required to report to termination "centers" to comply with the simulation.

That was Star Trek original series, Season 1 Episode 23, "A Taste of Armageddon". Brilliant episode.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Taste_of_Armageddon

Re: Not OK, Google

#446

Post by woliveirajr »

justinclift wrote: post #390
rch wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I met a good friend and current employer because Google Now told me about an event I might be interested in a couple of years ago. Of course it also once told me how long it would take to get to an ex's house from my current girlfriend's place. How about an 'OK, funny once' command?

As a possibly humourous thought along those lines, imagine explaining to your future child they were born because of a Google Now reminder. ;) (eugenics through large scale suggestions anyone? ;>)

:-) do you know that getting pregnant isn't that easy and many couples track the cycles to see when their fertility is higher?

There are even apps to that... It wouldn't surprise me if someday this tracking was learnt by Google

Re: Not OK, Google

#447

Post by 51Cards »

codemac wrote: post #292
51Cards wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You _must_ do this for every account if you have multiple. As I would expect? I don't know of any service that has a "And also do this for all my other distinct acounts too".

It depends how you view what you're setting. Do you think you're setting a behavior of the phone, or a behavior of your account?

I guess it could be both but I view it first as a setting of the account since you can also be location tracked perhaps by a browser, or your Wear device? That would be my first go-to on that setting but I guess it can be seen both ways.

Re: Not OK, Google

#448

Post by pjlegato »

csydas wrote: post #54
TulliusCicero wrote: post #4

What I think is interesting is that many of us nerds have probably innocuously fantasized about having a Star Trek-like AI assistant with us, but now that they're taking the first steps towards that, we're starting to realize that in order for it to do everything for us, it has to know everything about us, too.

Well the missing part is the dedication to ideals and to the greater good of all life that was supposed to be core to the federation. I realize Star Trek is fantasy, but the reason people are more at ease with the omnipresence of technology in Star Trek is because you see people living by these humanitarian and noble ideals. People fight and die to defend thems. The right to self and privacy and protection is held ve…

> When's the last time Google risked itself or business or any tech ceo risked their livelihood for the sake of the greater good?

February of 2001.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Nacchio

The former CEO of Qwest, a massive telco, spent years in prison for insider trading. He says this is because he resisted the NSA's demands to tap Qwest's network and hand over customer data.

Re: Not OK, Google

#450

Post by pmyjavec »

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…

Totally agree, I remember when that was the promise! I wonder what Ununtu smart phones are like ?
Post reply on HN