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

Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 784 posts

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#421

Post by WhompingWindows »

pjmlp wrote: post #68
falcolas wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A large established and (based on personal connections) loyal fan base is a failure? Growth is not everything. Growth isn’t even really sustainable over a long enough time span, and Fitbit’s been around awhile.

Many management boards do live on the utopia of eternal growth and and it stops, a couple of hundred thousand employees get shown the door, just because they need to collect their bonuses.

So true, often when I google news of a company laying off a bunch of workers, I then see the stock ticker and sure enough, the stock is up 10% on the news.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#422

Post by OnlineGladiator »

tma12345 wrote: post #402
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who works at Google and who used to think these things were true, I can say that most of this is simply not true. We store hardly any data about users. Far from everything we get. Of the things we store, hardly anything gets stored longer than 30 days. So, no, we do not store a constant audio stream from everything in your house for all of eternity. We don't store every website you visit in chrome for all…

Throw away account... As someone who works with Google partners and partnering with Google's data, we see a lot of personal data in it. You simply might be someone that doesn't work with such data. I do and we use a lot of it and it gets very personal.

> and it gets very personal

What does this mean? Are you reading people's depressed love poems and looking at pictures of their exes?

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#423

Post by arbitrary_name »

samastur wrote: post #166
scarface74 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What long and successful history? The only one that I can think of that was a definite success is Android. Their only notable hardware acquisitions that I can think of were Motorola which was a disaster, Nest which is barely muddling along, and the semi-acquisition of HTC’s hardware team that made the Pixel. While the Pixel may be a great phone, it isn’t taking the world by storm

To be fair I don't think they are trying to make Pixel world-wide popular. If they did, they would sell it to more places (can't buy it here in Slovenia).

It took years after the first iPhone launched in the US for it to be available in peripheral markets.

The hardware supply chain capability at Google is beginning to ramp up, but is nowhere near the maturity it needs to be to support a global rollout.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#424

Post by pbhjpbhj »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #416
blotter_paper wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the perspective of a user this sounds positive, but do you have any idea why they don't store more data? Worry about public backlash? Lawsuits over data breaches? There would seem to be a financial incentive to store more given how cheap storage is and the fact that seemingly unimportant data could be useful in future models.

I mean, I'm new and just a lowly engineer, so I can't speak too much for the company. I do work in analytics / logging, so I do have pretty decent insights into our different storage systems and logging policies. The people that I interact with view data as a liability, not an asset. I think this is because of lawsuits mostly. We've been bitten by a few big ones. But also, storage is expensive, and even storing a Boo…

If you're actually a new engineer you might want to check your company policy on communicating details of internal systems in public; your external communications people probably don't allow you to speak about such things ... on the other hand, if you are allowed to talk about such things then you're probably just a persona adopted by someone in external comms.

Take care!

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#426

Post by panpanna »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #395
cdnsteve wrote: post #339

Google makes 80% of revenue from ads. It covers the entire web with adsense/adwords, records anything you search, has users login to chrome, scans gmail for purchase history, tracks your gps location and where you live and work with your commute + waze.. plus much more through android. It has microphones in homes and knows about all your iot devices with nest, it knows about any other online accounts you have because…

As someone who works at Google and who used to think these things were true, I can say that most of this is simply not true. We store hardly any data about users. Far from everything we get. Of the things we store, hardly anything gets stored longer than 30 days. So, no, we do not store a constant audio stream from everything in your house for all of eternity. We don't store every website you visit in chrome for all…

> We don't analyze your face as you browse Hacker News

You disappoint me ;)

> You need to jump through a million hoops to get permission to store anything at all!

I guess you don't work with Android.

Today I wanted to set up my smartwatch. My phone told me to enable Bluetooth _and_ gps. I turned on GPS, it asked if it was okay to send positioning data to Google for some vauge reason. I said no. So it turned off GPS altogether. So now I won't be able to use my watch. (This is a clear GDPR violation btw)

Why am I telling you this story? Because someone at Google is trying really really hard to get his hand on all possible data. Maybe you two should have a chat.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#427

Post by kcorey »

For heaven's sake, please let this mean that Google finally gives a shit about wearable devices!?!

I know wearOS devices have been struggling. I hate the thought that I have to buy a watch from China to get decent battery life (a Huawei band 2) which means that my data goes through some sketchy companies in China.

I already have given everything to Google. Why would I want to do that for Huawei, Samsung, and whoever else is making hardware?

I want to control when my devices talk back to a server and what they say, so I started using net guard and monitor the URLs my data is going to.

I want to see the data stream so I can get even more detailed in my blocking efforts.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#429

Post by lern_too_spel »

taurath wrote: post #353
cletus wrote: post #325

Oof. Goodbye Fitbit. Or, rather, welcome to the world where you're a pawn in internal politics. You may think you have a product but you don't. If your product survives (as in, Google didn't buy you just for the team), your product schedule will have to survive the interests of every other PA/team in Google. - You think you have software to run your products? Ha. The Android team will have a different opinion. - Even…

They don’t care about the product in so much as they care about the avenue to suck up more data, no?

The data isn't very valuable, and it's even less valuable without users. They care about the product but are just incompetent at making hardware that people will buy, even if they eventually make the the product have useful features like identity assertion.

Re: Google Buys Fitbit for $2.1B

#430

Post by joveian »

MereInterest wrote: post #82
Mortiffer wrote: post #11

I can see them linking this data to medical data and getting sued again. Like last June https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/26/technology/google-univers...

I've been interested in tracking sleep/exercise/heart rate more closely, but have yet to find a manufacturer that takes privacy seriously. Whatever device I have should transfer data only to computers that are under my control. No matter how pure the intentions of the current maintainers of centralized databases, acquisitions can lead to those databases being in unscrupulous hands.

I'm the same. I use a Contec CMS50I purchased new on ebay as a sleep data logger. I use SleepyHead software, however I think even the windows software that comes with it doesn't require a network connection. It is a pulse oximeter that tracks SpO2, pulse rate, and perfusion index. I think they are primarily sold as a low cost option for hospitals. The data format was reverse engineered not provided by the company and while I haven't compared directly I think there might be some debouncing that should be applied in some cases involving movement of the sensor (possibly their software doesn't do anything about that either). I've used it overnight maybe 30ish times and I'm not sure it will last all that long, although the blue line the display acquired at one point went away after a while. I did find that it is a good idea to wipe with rubbing alcohol each time you use it as the manual suggests. I wish there were more options.
Post reply on HN