91–100 of 348 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you are not paying for it, you're not the customer; you're the product being sold. Full price TVs from eg. Samsung comes with ads and spyware nowadays. I would say the saying has stopped being accurate. Also, phones are paid for.
TVs are so cheap now because of ad subsidies. That 42” panel wouldn’t cost $199 if it weren’t for ads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again, that you want, good for you. But when Google let people choose, and people choose in a way they didn't like, they immediately reversed course, pressured OEMs to make that user choice harder.
That's fine, but your comment makes no sense in response to someone who explicitly talked about their personal threat model. Of course they can grasp that other people have different ones, that's why they scoped the comment to their own.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I see no evidence that regular people are particularly unhappy with sharing their information. There's actually a pretty cool graph from Google from the court docs that says the opposite. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E2f1tSEWYAAVHGY?format=jpg&name=...
That graph didn't have a scale. It could be that 97% of users disabled the feature, or less than 1%. You just don't know.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That graph didn't have a scale. It could be that 97% of users disabled the feature, or less than 1%. You just don't know.
If the scale didn't matter, Google would not have called it a "Problem"
I've had a string of Google phones going back to the Nexus 5x but, for the very reasons laid out in this article, my next phone will likely be from Apple. That will be my first Apple product.
For example: you cannot install NoScript, or anything like it, on an iOS browser. You must choose between "all JS on" or "all JS off", and third-party browsers like Firefox are crippled because Apple forces all iOS browsers to use their WebKit engine under the hood.
The myriad of Safari "content blocker" apps are also pretty dismal, and often expensive. So ad-blocking is difficult as well.
They're better about app tracking, but you might want to keep an Android phone handy if you enjoy browsing the web.
There’s a huge privacy battle on the horizon in tech. The initial scuffles are just the beginning. Google and Facebook’s business models depend deeply on being able to track information that consumers are increasingly unhappy to share. Both companies attempts to diversify their dependency on such info for their revenue have been broadly unsuccessful (Google fiber or a Google car anyone?). Meanwhile the likes of Apple…
Google would be able to get a ton of revenue without tracking users at all. Selling ads based on search keywords would still work very well
There’s a huge privacy battle on the horizon in tech. The initial scuffles are just the beginning. Google and Facebook’s business models depend deeply on being able to track information that consumers are increasingly unhappy to share. Both companies attempts to diversify their dependency on such info for their revenue have been broadly unsuccessful (Google fiber or a Google car anyone?). Meanwhile the likes of Apple…
Earlier this week there was a post regarding Google and its utilization of private health information. A number of Googlers came forward to describe how very seriously Google takes user privacy and keeping inappropriate data from being shared across silos. I got the overall impression of Googlers taking the position of “you guys don’t know how seriously we take peoples privacy.” If any of those Googlers would please…
Is Google like that? If so, then it is easy to square things. The parts of Google that handle health stuff could have completely different policies about handling private information than the parts that deal with smartphones.
some people are outraged, but hey if google does it, are you really surprised when someone else does it?
I have worked pretty hard to kick google out of my digital life. it’s hard but not impossible.
what apple is doing with their privacy schtick has probably raised the alert level to red on the Borg and on the Klingon ships. There probably is going to be an intense struggle following with more things like this coming out.
There’s a huge privacy battle on the horizon in tech. The initial scuffles are just the beginning. Google and Facebook’s business models depend deeply on being able to track information that consumers are increasingly unhappy to share. Both companies attempts to diversify their dependency on such info for their revenue have been broadly unsuccessful (Google fiber or a Google car anyone?). Meanwhile the likes of Apple…
IMO, you're wrong on this one. Things like Google fiber/car are not ways to diversify Google's revenue.
They are just more tools in their arsenal to keep collecting more data on users and improving their ads.
By offering things like Google fiber, they ensure more people get online and that's more data they can collect.
Same with FB. Terragraph and Aquila are/were just ways to get people online so more data can be collected and fed into "the machine"