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

Google Fights Back

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 475 posts

Re: Google Fights Back

#251

Post by dreamcompiler »

Every company has two mission statements: The stated one and the real one. Google's real mission statement is "make shitloads of money selling everyone's personal information to advertisers."

The noises Google makes about being "useful" are just cover for the fact that being useful is the only way they can entice everyone to give them that personal information for free. If Google could get a law passed that required everyone to have a grain-of-rice sized Android tracker implanted in their body, Google would do it in a heartbeat. And then the need for all that expensive "usefulness" would be over.

Re: Google Fights Back

#252

Post by srcmap »

gowld wrote: post #234
Jach wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they'll lower your rates by figuring out how often you're ill. Similarly with life insurance. Or they might not change. Maybe someone will try to blackmail you and your congressman husband, but both of you will just shrug, because no one cares at all about nudes. Not even you, after a few more decades of information wanting to be free and becoming free and public. Maybe it's better that you didn't get those job…

That's a whole lot a Maybe that's drastically at odds with millenia of human nature and human history.

drastically at odds with Corporate nature and Corporate history.

Re: Google Fights Back

#253

Post by britch »

groovybits wrote: post #148
bovermyer wrote: post #13

I'm impressed with the direction Google is taking, and how they've pivoted in the face of public awareness of privacy concerns. I like the Google products and services that I use. There are some that I miss (Reader) and some that just confuse me (Bookmarks), but the core works for me. Based on commentary I've seen, I may be the only person on Hacker News to think so. Regardless, I'm hopeful for the future.

FWIW, I agree with this sentiment. Google did not need to give this stance at I/O. It appears that they're being as transparent as they can about the fact that our data is their business model. I get it: our online privacy is important. It is becoming increasingly more difficult to remain truly anonymous on the Internet, and this is mostly thanks to Google. However, the converse could be Google using our data for mal…

> the converse could be Google using our data for malicious purposes. Has there been any evidence of that? I have not seen any.

You are right. I have not seen any evidence of this yet either. What frightens me is that IF something happens and Google is compelled or chooses to give that data to an entity to use maliciously there will be nothing we can do.

As I look at it: It is dangerous for that much data about that many people to exist in one place period.

Re: Google Fights Back

#254

Post by OkGoDoIt »

_bxg1 wrote: post #131

Say what you will about Google, they're really good at PR. They and Facebook share the most indefensible tech business model in today's political climate (at least in the west), but Google does such a better job of obscuring and re-framing that fact than Facebook does.

I think there's also a distinction about what you get in return.

When I let Google track my location, I get useful hyper relevant results for searches. When I let it track my emails, I get useful flight reminders and package delivery notifications.

But Facebook doesn't really need to track my location to offer the service I want from it, the extra privacy invasion very specifically only helps advertisers. By giving it access to my contact list I can add friends more easily which is nice, but it also does so much more analysis of my extended offline friend network than I want it to, which feels like it hurts me more than it helps me.

Both companies are monetizing my private data, but with Google it feels like I get enough out of the deal that I'll (sometimes grudgingly) allow it. With Facebook I feel like it's an adversarial relationship where I have to constantly defend myself from FB. Obviously each person's valuation of the deal will be different; for some people there's no amount of usefulness Google could offer to justify the data they collect. But I suspect for many people Google is on the right side of the usefulness to creepiness ratio.

Re: Google Fights Back

#255

Post by dgzl »

loudtieblahblah wrote: post #70
areoform wrote: post #7

Google owns my soul. Their boxes know when I sleep, when I wake, how much I exercise, what I listen to, my innermost thoughts, my chats with loved ones, what I watched on Netflix last night, what my company does, the flu I have at the moment, what the hypochondriac in me looks up in the middle of the night, what I buy, whom I call, what I spend money on, where I spend it... I nominally pay for these services, but I s…

Google is already not Google. The "Don't Be Evil" corporation that valued open source rather than open-washing, that valued openstandards over "oops, we didn't mean to break that for you!" isn't here anymore. The company that bends over backwards, much farther than the law requires, to enable the surveillance state. I despise Apple. Especially on mobile. No SDCards, no headphone jack, walled garden app stores. Ugh ug…

As a lifelong Android user, I'm pretty close to switching to Apple/iOS because of Google's gross surveillance behavior. I used to have the same qualms about the lack of features or components, but I recently began to see those complaints as pedantic.

Re: Google Fights Back

#256

Post by NoInputSignal »

I see a lot of comparison of device makers, with regards to privacy, in this thread. I think this is a moot point, in that data is collected regardless of what company, service, device is used. The fact that the data is being collected is key; your anonymity is compromised regardless. Google is an easy target due to their size and market share, but many people here work for tech companies of all sizes. Reflect on what data that company collects, how it is leveraged, and if the semantics is much different. Collect, leverage, repeat.

Re: Google Fights Back

#257

Post by pdimitar »

nirvdrum wrote: post #174
pdimitar wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I am not a religious technological ecosystem zealot and you'll get no hate from me. Use what serves you best. I recognise that your scenario isn't well-served by Apple. Of course you'll switch.

Same boat here. I'm not with Android because I think the OS is better or because I hate privacy. It's a matter of cost (I think I paid $650 net for my S9+) and lack of hardware options. I'm preaching to the choir, but it sucks that the only two viable options these days require such huge trade-offs. And that the premium for privacy is so much greater than what typical Android hardware costs. I'm glad you've been able…

Cost is rarely a concern unless you are barely making ends meet. iPhone's cost per year is actually lower than most Android flagships, if you factor in how quicker are the Android phones to start breaking down and/or lose their system software update window. So IMO Apple has the upper hand in terms of amortised cost (albeit not by much if you look at the insane prices of the iPhone XS/Max).

I completely agree we shouldn't have to make the big trade-offs between the duopoly. But truth be told, if Microsoft failed to gain ground as a third smartphone vendor, what hope does anybody else have? They were sabotaged by Google at every turn and let's face it, if your mobile OS cannot have YouTube that means at least 80% of the smartphone populace will write you off as useless. If not 95% even.

I also haven't found the perfect setup yet. Pondering investing heavily in a 10Gbps router + 10Gbps switch + NAS with 25TB as a start. I have loads of videos and can't pay iCloud for them. So things are still shaping up.

Overall though, I am really happy with my choice. Serves me well in 98% of the time.

Thank you for the kind words. Right back at you. :)

Re: Google Fights Back

#258

Post by ploika »

Circuits wrote: post #230

Honestly the amount of people concerned about their "privacy" is shocking... kinda makes one wonder what most of these people are up too, what are they trying to hide? Obviously, some people are just concerned for good reason but I get the feeling most people are concerned because their hiding shit. If it means that an literate mother of 3 from India can become literate when it counts then Google execs can take naked…

When I get a plumber over to my apartment to fix the sink I don't want him telling his colleagues what's in my medicine cabinet.

Re: Google Fights Back

#259

Post by OkGoDoIt »

chris_engel wrote: post #100

So if I am using an ad blocker and dont see any ads at all, dont I just _cost_ google, facebook, etc. money from using their services and having them store my data? What if the majority of people would block all ads? Wouldnt data collection become meaningless?

Ads are much harder to block on mobile. Especially on iOS, it's nearly impossible to block ads in a native app. There are some tricks you can do with a VPN but the coverage isn't great and it's error-prone enough that I don't bother, which means casual ad-block users like my sister will absolutely never go that route. So to the extent that mobile is the future, it seems ad-blocking is not a long-term solution.

Re: Google Fights Back

#260

Post by JohnJamesRambo »

dreamcompiler wrote: post #251

Every company has two mission statements: The stated one and the real one. Google's real mission statement is "make shitloads of money selling everyone's personal information to advertisers." The noises Google makes about being "useful" are just cover for the fact that being useful is the only way they can entice everyone to give them that personal information for free. If Google could get a law passed that required…

>a grain-of-rice sized Android tracker implanted in their body

I don't even think they need that with everyone having a smartphone.

Post reply on HN