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

Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 195 posts

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#91

Post by slowmovintarget »

ErikAugust wrote: post #49
dr_kiszonka wrote: post #43

(Disclaimer: I have a big personal gripe with Google, but I don't hate the company in general) Something has been on mind for a while. I see lawsuits against Google collecting / selling personal data and ideas to combat its monopoly in search. What I don't see is a discussion about regulating companies that have data on the majority of the population. I know for a fact that Google used search insights to inform strat…

"By knowing what people search for and modeling our behavior, they have unprecedented ability to forecast future events. I expect Facebook and other, lesser known companies do the same. I believe it is dangerous for a company to have this ability." I have thought of this as "search-based front-running". How much of it goes on, I would like to know.

It seems like corporations will develop psychohistory and use it for profit rather than some Hari Seldon type using it to save civilization.

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#92

Post by pphysch »

scohesc wrote: post #82
Romanulus wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably. I recall Project Veritas showing hidden video of a Twitter dev speaking about databases that link all profiles of someone (using things like IPs, fingerprints, etc. to stitch the relationships together).

I really hate changing the topic here, but I feel it has to be said sometimes. It's _very_ frustrating when people immediately discredit someone or something because they don't agree with them, even if they don't have the full story. Project Veritas does some good work, even if they're blasted in popular culture/mainstream media for being 'biased', 'alt-right', 'etc'. I bet you the downvotes you're getting are just b…

Come now. The issue isn't that Veritas is "biased", it's that they have been caught time and time again fabricating evidence.

We can talk about tech surveillance without playing into the modern fascist agenda.

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#93

Post by ciarannolan »

qchris wrote: post #88
ciarannolan wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I would argue that their actions contributed to the suicide of Ian Gibbons [...] Anyone who has read Bad Blood [1] should have no doubt about this fact. They destroyed this man and lead him to suicide in order to try to save their house of cards. [1] https://www.amazon.com/Bad-Blood-Secrets-Silicon-Startup/dp/...

I finally got around to reading it recently, and I think that aspect of the entire saga was the most startling. Not the fraud, not Holmes' ability to spin to the public and her board, not the work culture that she and Sunny Balwani created for their employees, but the severity and frequency of the real and implied legal threats Theranos employed through Boies Schiller and associates on literally everyone that touched…

The way they tried to bully Tyler Shultz [1] was also fascinating. I was impressed by his ability to resist them. I think his parents mortgaged their home to aid in his legal defense.

He tried to warn his grandfather, a member of the board, that something was wrong at Theranos. His grandfather said "Tyler, they can't convince me that you're stupid, but they _can_ convince me that you're wrong." His grandson turned out to be right.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_P._Shultz#Theranos_scan...

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#96

Post by ehsankia »

scohesc wrote: post #82
Romanulus wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably. I recall Project Veritas showing hidden video of a Twitter dev speaking about databases that link all profiles of someone (using things like IPs, fingerprints, etc. to stitch the relationships together).

I really hate changing the topic here, but I feel it has to be said sometimes. It's _very_ frustrating when people immediately discredit someone or something because they don't agree with them, even if they don't have the full story. Project Veritas does some good work, even if they're blasted in popular culture/mainstream media for being 'biased', 'alt-right', 'etc'. I bet you the downvotes you're getting are just b…

I'm sorry but no. I'm all for looking at all sides, but Project Veritas is not that. They have done extremely shady things such as intentionally sending a fake victim to WP [0], as well as editing/slicing sentences (which they recorded without consent) to create an entirely different narrative, different from what the person was originally trying to convey [1].

Even a single one of these incidents is enough to completely throw every thing you've done and said into doubt, let alone the half a dozen that PV has behind it. There is absolutely no way you can take anything they say or do serious after they've been caught times and times again lying and misleading.

It has absolutely nothing to do with how outlanding their views are, and everything to do with the fact that what they say or do cannot be trusted. I used to in the beginning, but they are way past being given a "fair look".

[0] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42150322

[1] https://www.theverge.com/interface/2019/6/27/18760463/projec...

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#98

Post by ehsankia »

s3r3nity wrote: post #70
Romanulus wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably. I recall Project Veritas showing hidden video of a Twitter dev speaking about databases that link all profiles of someone (using things like IPs, fingerprints, etc. to stitch the relationships together).

You're probably getting downvoted for discussing Project Veritas (which is a silly reason for downvoting IMO) but your point is still accurate: these companies are defnitely running models to create probabilistic identity models in the absence of deterministic associations. Deterministic = I specifically say I'm person X and am logged-in. Probabilistic = I am not logged-in on this browser, but am on the same computer…

It's not silly. A source that has been often shown to fabricate evidence and post straight up lies doesn't belong on HN. Many of their videos, including the "undercover interviews" with Twitter and Google have all been shown to have been edited/cut to completely change what the person was talking about or trying to say.

Nothing coming from PV can ever again be taken with a single grain of salt.

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#99

Post by coronadisaster »

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #29
simonw wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Found the full lawsuit PDF https://www.insurancejournal.com/app/uploads/2020/06/brown-v... It looks like this is mainly about the fact that Google Analytics still works even if you are in Incognito mode.

Which there is a warning of every time you open an incognito window. It's not fine print either, it's one of about six bullet points. "Your activity might still be visible to ... Websites you visit." This one is going nowhere I suspect. Just because a lawsuit asks for big damages does not mean the plaintiffs are likely to prevail on their claims.

while they do warn you, it is about time that they implement a real incognito mode, maybe using Tor by default... The current incognito only protects your privacy from other people that are using the same computer which is not really that helpful since you could just create another user to achieve basically the same (if your disk is encrypted)

Re: Google sued for secretly amassing vast trove of user data

#100

Post by shadowgovt »

coronadisaster wrote: post #99
asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which there is a warning of every time you open an incognito window. It's not fine print either, it's one of about six bullet points. "Your activity might still be visible to ... Websites you visit." This one is going nowhere I suspect. Just because a lawsuit asks for big damages does not mean the plaintiffs are likely to prevail on their claims.

while they do warn you, it is about time that they implement a real incognito mode, maybe using Tor by default... The current incognito only protects your privacy from other people that are using the same computer which is not really that helpful since you could just create another user to achieve basically the same (if your disk is encrypted)

Why should they? Tor is already there.
Post reply on HN