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

Facebook is in the privacy spotlight but should Google be next

afr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 72 posts

Re: Facebook is in the privacy spotlight but should Google be next

#61

Post by [deleted] »

panarky wrote: post #39
notacoward wrote: post #11

Google is on the list, but I'm going to break away from the flock and say they shouldn't be next . Credit agencies and data brokers, who facilitate the worst kinds of third-party privacy violation and about whom most people know very little, should go next. Then the government itself. Then Google, and then Amazon. BTW, if you want to have some fun, just try to imagine that the the government's interest in Facebook's…

Facebook is in a completely different privacy universe from Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Twitter and Snap. Facebook actively employs dark patterns to get people to over-share. Google does not. Facebook has a social graph of 2.2 billion people. Google does not. Facebook has been caught repeatedly, systematically and recklessly leaking personal information to third parties over the last decade and a half. Google has not.…

[deleted]

Re: Facebook is in the privacy spotlight but should Google be next

#62

Post by hlecuanda »

open-source-ux wrote: post #5

Google tracks online behaviour on an industrial scale. It's baffling how little scrutiny the company faces, least of all from the tech community who often rush to it's defence. (Does a multi-billion dollar company need your defence?) When you create a Google account, you're asked to provide your name, your gender, your date of birth, your location and your mobile phone number. Some of your most personal and private d…

>Google and many of it's supporters conflate security with privacy.

>You're still being tracked relentlessly by Google no matter how securely it's storing your online behaviour.

Non sequitur conclusion from a faulty premise. If you're a Google user, then it's in your best interest that their security is up to par and they don't disappoint. I get enterprise class 2FA security to protect my data on my end and clear controls, opt-outs and buttons everywhere to delete all of my data from any particular service, plus I get to download such data in a useful, documented format for my own consumption, not some crippled html report I need to mine after the fact.

If you are NOT a Google user, though, not tracking you is not their duty, but a security breach on YOUR part, especially on the part of those who kbow better.

Its like a person walking naked in a public square, expecting that it was the city's duty to protect their privacy.

If you are Not a Google user and do not wish to be tracked by Google or Facebook or anyone for that matter, you need to assume responsibility for the security of your data and metadata by becoming as inconspicuous on the network as you can.

Again, it's nobody's duty but yours and failure to do so is a breach of your own security leading to leakage of your privacy.

Re: Facebook is in the privacy spotlight but should Google be next

#63

Post by jacquesm »

dschuetz wrote: post #59
jacquesm wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as money and politics are strongly intertwined it is unlikely this will happen within the country of origin of the company. Lobbyists are just too powerful. And that's before we get into the kind of tricks and entity like Google or Facebook could pull if they decided to become an active participant rather than just a channel for advertising. If that hasn't already happened.

Money and politics is basically the way people run things, as sad as it sounds. You can substitute money with something different, it doesn't matter as people need some system of exchange. Money seems effective and easy enough. So, it's not the money that is the problem. It might have something to do with people, but I haven't figured it out yet.

In most countries companies directly paying politicians is seen as corruption.

Re: Facebook is in the privacy spotlight but should Google be next

#64

Post by troyvoy88 »

sixothree wrote: post #43
troyvoy88 wrote: post #32

I absolutely agree Google has a much wider ecosystem they cover: social media with google plus or whatever is left of it, video via YouTube, Images via google Photos, cloud infrastructure via Compute Engine, google work via G Suit, ISP via Google Fiber etc... All these have Term of Services with very broad language they can dragnet collect whatever they want. I don't mind sharing the information and I don't want the…

You say you don't mind sharing information. Do you mind them collecting information about you outside of what you share?

Yes that is the VERY reason why I said wouldn't mind having them put on the spot that way we can ask. Provided the right people are asking the questions. If it comes up through the questioning that they are grabbing information I chose not to share with them. I'll stop using the services and go somewhere else no one has a gun to my head.

Re: Facebook is in the privacy spotlight but should Google be next

#65

Post by neisen »

notacoward wrote: post #11

Google is on the list, but I'm going to break away from the flock and say they shouldn't be next . Credit agencies and data brokers, who facilitate the worst kinds of third-party privacy violation and about whom most people know very little, should go next. Then the government itself. Then Google, and then Amazon. BTW, if you want to have some fun, just try to imagine that the the government's interest in Facebook's…

Most definitely credit agencies first. https://blog.nils.digital/gelvora-data-breach-and-your-perso...

Re: Facebook is in the privacy spotlight but should Google be next

#67

Post by open-source-ux »

teddyfrozevelt wrote: post #49
open-source-ux wrote: post #5

Google tracks online behaviour on an industrial scale. It's baffling how little scrutiny the company faces, least of all from the tech community who often rush to it's defence. (Does a multi-billion dollar company need your defence?) When you create a Google account, you're asked to provide your name, your gender, your date of birth, your location and your mobile phone number. Some of your most personal and private d…

G Suite for Education very clearly doesn't track students using it. https://edu.google.com/k-12-solutions/privacy-security/

Where does it say that it doesn't track students on that page?

The G Suite for Education Privacy Notice [1] clearly states that Google collects device information, unique device identifiers, mobile network information (including phone number of the user). Also logged are IP addresses, location information, and app usage using unique application numbers.

Even if this information is detached from individual accounts and aggregated, it equals a phenomenal amount of data captured by Google on millions of students in the US.

[1] https://gsuite.google.com/terms/education_privacy.html

Re: Facebook is in the privacy spotlight but should Google be next

#68

Post by squarefoot »

dschuetz wrote: post #59
jacquesm wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as money and politics are strongly intertwined it is unlikely this will happen within the country of origin of the company. Lobbyists are just too powerful. And that's before we get into the kind of tricks and entity like Google or Facebook could pull if they decided to become an active participant rather than just a channel for advertising. If that hasn't already happened.

Money and politics is basically the way people run things, as sad as it sounds. You can substitute money with something different, it doesn't matter as people need some system of exchange. Money seems effective and easy enough. So, it's not the money that is the problem. It might have something to do with people, but I haven't figured it out yet.

"It might have something to do with people, but I haven't figured it out yet."

Wanting more (which can be positive) paired with lack of empathy (which is not). People having both those traits should never ever put in a powerful position because they will eventually abuse their power for personal gain harming others in the process.

Re: Facebook is in the privacy spotlight but should Google be next

#69

Post by squarefoot »

jacquesm wrote: post #63
dschuetz wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money and politics is basically the way people run things, as sad as it sounds. You can substitute money with something different, it doesn't matter as people need some system of exchange. Money seems effective and easy enough. So, it's not the money that is the problem. It might have something to do with people, but I haven't figured it out yet.

In most countries companies directly paying politicians is seen as corruption.

Unfortunately politicians can be lobbied/bribed in many subtler ways. A corporation can invest in city infrastructure, donate medical equipment, libraries, etc. then invite their friendly politician for a public speech to the inauguration so that the public associates something good (that didn't cost taxpayers a single dime) to his face. That politician gets a lot more votes and the corporation gets a foot in the government door: a win-win scenario for both and completely legal.

Re: Facebook is in the privacy spotlight but should Google be next

#70

Post by sametmax »

zamalek wrote: post #58
sametmax wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Malicious actors can't access most Google data has on you. Especially not by releasing psychological quiz app. If I remember well, Google was part of PRISM. And it did give data to a malicious state actors. Plus it has analytics, which you can pay to have data on people (although no personal, but personal data from facebook is aggregated and used the same way in the end). Also google let you literally google peop…

> I'm not an insider, but I would imagine that with android, gmail, chrome, various search tools and google Web APIs (fonts, graphs, analytics...), Google tracks you everywhere, whether you are logged in or not. It doesn't even need a cookie with all the behavioral data it has to fingerprint you. Why would they take all that risk when they allow you to opt-out of targetted advertising?

Which risk. No actor has any way to verify that. It's incredibly complicated software, lost in the forest of their billions lines of code and thousand of servers.

Even if any actor had the will, the mean and the skills to check it out, and I doubt we had even two of that, the task is immense and the ability to hide high.

Add on top of that the power of a company that has the budget of a small country...

There is no important risk.

Now even if there were like 0.00001% of chance they get caught. So what ? What are the consequences ?

Bad PR ? Who cares, customers will forget in 3 months.

A fine ? Who cares, they can buy pay 10 times that before diner.

Prison ? Scape goats and lawyer will make sure it's not a problem.

Post reply on HN