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

Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

blog.malwarebytes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 119 posts

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#11

Post by jstanley »

baxtr wrote: post #5

I have said this before: the reason why people find a hidden camera much worse than a visible camera is simple. People aren’t dumb, they make trade-off choices . Of course they could spy on you with a visible camera, too. But either you know and don’t care and still buy the damn thing or you don’t. Knowing means in this case being able to make an informed decision. Not informing customers about a camera inside a home…

I agree with you in principle, but I think the Nest actually only includes a hidden microphone, not a hidden camera.

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#12

Post by FakeComments »

dpark wrote: post #6
FakeComments wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Unexpectedly smart” and “hidden, software enable-able features” are both anti-features of security hardware. I don’t think Google deserves the benefit of the doubt anymore: these untruths happen with every product, and they’re always in Google’s favor. There’s a consistent pattern of Google specifications, documentation, etc being knowingly untrue. The only “error” is Google got caught deceiving people, again.

It may be true that Google no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt. The hyperbolic “ every product” doesn’t help your case, though. Claiming that they engage in misleading behavior with every product, especially with no supporting evidence or examples, makes it look like you just have an axe to grind.

You are correct, let me list the Google services I’ve experienced deception from Google on:

YouTube, GMail, Google search, Google Docs, Google Drive, Google ads (both selling and buying), and GCP.

To me, that seems like every core product they offer, and so a little hyperbole is appropriate when calling out the misconduct of a gigacrime[0] syndicate.

It is, however, very HN to say I was too hyperbolic and mean to the gigacrime supyndicate.

[0] I mean this in the technical sense — I believe YouTube has committed over 1 billion acts of copyright infringement for profit, given that Google’s editorializing removes their safe harbor coverage. I believe other parts of Alphabet have similarly engaged in “scaled petty crime”.

Edit to footnote: I do want to say, I don’t think Google is unique in this category — and it should be taken partly as a criticism of corporate governance (particularly American), rather than Google in particular, that any business is allowed to operate that way.

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#15

Post by gcb0 »

baxtr wrote: post #5

I have said this before: the reason why people find a hidden camera much worse than a visible camera is simple. People aren’t dumb, they make trade-off choices . Of course they could spy on you with a visible camera, too. But either you know and don’t care and still buy the damn thing or you don’t. Knowing means in this case being able to make an informed decision. Not informing customers about a camera inside a home…

wait, that's even in question?

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#16

Post by cube2222 »

FakeComments wrote: post #12
dpark wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It may be true that Google no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt. The hyperbolic “ every product” doesn’t help your case, though. Claiming that they engage in misleading behavior with every product, especially with no supporting evidence or examples, makes it look like you just have an axe to grind.

You are correct, let me list the Google services I’ve experienced deception from Google on: YouTube, GMail, Google search, Google Docs, Google Drive, Google ads (both selling and buying), and GCP. To me, that seems like every core product they offer, and so a little hyperbole is appropriate when calling out the misconduct of a gigacrime[0] syndicate. It is, however, very HN to say I was too hyperbolic and mean to the…

You've just listed a bunch of services, in no way have you described how they use deceptive strategies in them.

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#17

Post by yardie »

hgjwq wrote: post #2

>“The on-device microphone was never intended to be a secret and should have been listed in the tech specs,” a Google spokesperson said. “That was an error on our part.” I don't know, it sounds believable. Maybe they put it there "just in case", but didn't want to put it in the list of specifications because it had no software support, and having it there would've mislead customers who could've thought the microphone…

They could have done what every console maker has been doing since the 80s. List the expansion port, say it’s for future use, and leave its use optional.

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#18

Post by untog »

hgjwq wrote: post #2

>“The on-device microphone was never intended to be a secret and should have been listed in the tech specs,” a Google spokesperson said. “That was an error on our part.” I don't know, it sounds believable. Maybe they put it there "just in case", but didn't want to put it in the list of specifications because it had no software support, and having it there would've mislead customers who could've thought the microphone…

I actually agree that it almost definitely wasn't something nefarious. But it speaks to a general lack of awareness of Nest's part about privacy and customer expectations - was there really no-one in a position of power who could have said "this is bad for customer trust"?

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#19

Post by iforgotpassword »

I suspect this is going to be an unpopular opinion, but I still don't get the fuzz. People buy crap like Amazon echo left and right, and have been carrying little computers with microphones and an internet connection around all day for even longer. Apart from the fact that any sane person shouldn't trust any google product value their privacy in the first place, how many people are there consciously not buying a smartphone in fear of it being used to spy on them, then go buy this nest product and feel safe about it.

I might be an asshole for it and rightly so get down voted, but I really feel schadenfreude from this story. And maybe now some more people will learn their lesson. You can tell a toddler a dozen times that the stove is hot. They really only learn after they touched it once.

Re: Google’s Nest fiasco harms user trust and invades their privacy

#20

Post by orev »

iforgotpassword wrote: post #19

I suspect this is going to be an unpopular opinion, but I still don't get the fuzz. People buy crap like Amazon echo left and right, and have been carrying little computers with microphones and an internet connection around all day for even longer. Apart from the fact that any sane person shouldn't trust any google product value their privacy in the first place, how many people are there consciously not buying a smar…

There’s a difference between doing it knowingly vs unknowingly. In fact, that is the ONLY thing that matters.
Post reply on HN