Audible feedback on just how much your browsing feeds into Google • Hacker News Board

Re: Audible feedback on just how much your browsing feeds into Google

#141

Post by mixmastamyk » Mon, Aug 22, 2022, 8:59 PM UTC

kylevedder wrote: post #91

mola wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The attitude that if the government is using the data collected by tech companies to bypass constitutional limitation, then it's a problem with government and not big tech, is rather reductionist. This is a tangled system and you cannot completely separate the issues as you so simply claim. Big tech colluded with government, and got nice advantages for their participation with the surveillance system. The citizen/con…

I wholesale reject the following: 1) Big tech colluded with government, and got nice advantages for their participation with the surveillance system -- they're getting raked over the coals at dog and pony show anti trust hearings. 2) completely immoral act of gathering very private information without consent -- you literally gave these websites this information, and there's legal privacy policies that no one reads d…

Upton Sinclair would be proud. Try using a smartphone today, which is becoming more and more required, without giving up PII.

- Our school district requires our kids to do business with Google, there is no way around around it without significant pain. They don't have another option.

- Last week my attempt at buying concert tickets was refused because I would not disclose my phone number and Ticketmaster no longer allows other options. A small thing but they add up.

- More and more restaurants won't accept cash.

- DMV is selling our information, ADP is selling our paycheck information.

The idea that we have "every choice in the matter" is already silly and getting falser by the day.

Re: Audible feedback on just how much your browsing feeds into Google

#142

Post by fsflover » Mon, Aug 22, 2022, 9:00 PM UTC

kylevedder wrote: post #91

mola wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The attitude that if the government is using the data collected by tech companies to bypass constitutional limitation, then it's a problem with government and not big tech, is rather reductionist. This is a tangled system and you cannot completely separate the issues as you so simply claim. Big tech colluded with government, and got nice advantages for their participation with the surveillance system. The citizen/con…

I wholesale reject the following: 1) Big tech colluded with government, and got nice advantages for their participation with the surveillance system -- they're getting raked over the coals at dog and pony show anti trust hearings. 2) completely immoral act of gathering very private information without consent -- you literally gave these websites this information, and there's legal privacy policies that no one reads d…

> If you don't want them to have your info, simply don't give it to them.

Did you hear about Facebook's shadow profiles?

Re: Audible feedback on just how much your browsing feeds into Google

#143

Post by asf988f6728g » Mon, Aug 22, 2022, 9:02 PM UTC

kylevedder wrote: post #138

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're only seeing things from the Google bubble where the data they collect is kept only for themselves and law enforcement/nation states. There's a whole ecosystem of unscrupulous trackers selling your personal details indiscriminately to anyone who wants it. It all goes into profiles that most definitely have an impact on you in real life. No amount of goodwill for supporting free services is enough to permit this…

>It all goes into profiles that most definitely have an impact on you in real life Such as? I might add the initial discussion was about Google tracking ads but I'm curious to hear what you have to say about these down market trackers.

No post body was provided.

Re: Audible feedback on just how much your browsing feeds into Google

#144

Post by kylevedder » Mon, Aug 22, 2022, 9:02 PM UTC

krono wrote: post #134

kylevedder wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But that just means the novel representations are a step forward, just not the whole solution. No. The part where people argue Google is collecting a lot of data is sound. The part that's missing is why is this bad . No chart, no numbers, no sounds, or anything else will in their own argue why this data collection is bad. This argument as to why is what's missing, and until nominal privacy advocates start putting to…

This form of data collection and use has broken a status quo that has existed as long as life itself. Shouldn't it more conventionally be the ones in favour of this change to provide evidence of its benefits rather than the other way around?

They already did. People vote with their feet and attention, and people continue to flock to free services powered by targeted ads, systematically out competing services that had other models. If you don't like these services, don't use them; they don't have subpoena power. However, you might find the other options to be lacking, because they have inferior business models that do not allow them to compete on product quality.

Re: Audible feedback on just how much your browsing feeds into Google

#145

Post by mixmastamyk » Mon, Aug 22, 2022, 9:05 PM UTC

kylevedder wrote: post #138

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're only seeing things from the Google bubble where the data they collect is kept only for themselves and law enforcement/nation states. There's a whole ecosystem of unscrupulous trackers selling your personal details indiscriminately to anyone who wants it. It all goes into profiles that most definitely have an impact on you in real life. No amount of goodwill for supporting free services is enough to permit this…

>It all goes into profiles that most definitely have an impact on you in real life Such as? I might add the initial discussion was about Google tracking ads but I'm curious to hear what you have to say about these down market trackers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqn3gR1WTcA

John Oliver is informative here, though some of his jokes fall flat on this one. It's just not a funny subject I suppose.

Re: Audible feedback on just how much your browsing feeds into Google

#146

Post by weystrom » Mon, Aug 22, 2022, 9:18 PM UTC

cs02rm0 wrote: post #7

Did anyone get it working on MacOS? I couldn't find the audio library in homebrew and gave up.

  sudo tcpdump -i en0 -n -l dst host 8.8.8.8 $(for a in $(curl -s https://raw.githubusercontent.com/berthubert/googerteller/main/goog-prefixes.txt); do echo or dst net $a; done) | while read; do tput bel; done

Link to read the list (remember to read what you curl | bash): https://raw.githubusercontent.com/berthubert/googerteller/ma...

Re: Audible feedback on just how much your browsing feeds into Google

#147

Post by dogman144 » Mon, Aug 22, 2022, 9:26 PM UTC

Karrot_Kream wrote: post #107

kylevedder wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Snowden leaks were about NSA data collection. Last I checked the NSA was not a tracking ads powered big tech company. Also I hope you realize pointing me to an entire metaverse of memes is not an argument. If this corpus is so massive it should be easy to concretely point to several very specific examples, not hand wave at the entirety of one of the largest national security leaks in American history .

This reminds me of the Slashdot days where commenters would have a hard time distinguishing between the RIAA, the MPAA, and the Government (TM). They were roughly convinced that the 3 just formed this nebulous malicious entity.

I’ve worked for the govt and no they aren’t a nebulous blob of power with tech.

What they are though is an entity that has a set of directives supported by access to the data tech provided in conjunction with either not understanding tech or really getting it.

The tech company approach of staying willfully ignorant or positions like ITT with “we just build it!” has caused a lot of damage in the hands of the govt users it’s delivered to.

I don’t think it’s possible to in good faith ignore this dynamic or pretend it doesn’t exist and tech products’ role in it. This is actually the first time I’ve run into it like this where both the dynamic and the impact is just totally denied.

Re: Audible feedback on just how much your browsing feeds into Google

#148

Post by pclmulqdq » Mon, Aug 22, 2022, 9:30 PM UTC

kylevedder wrote: post #136

wahnfrieden wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can go learn about state surveillance more generally to answer that instead of handwaving it away as 'seems worth it to me'

Google making ad auctions more efficient and "state surveillance" aren't the same thing. Did you legitimately not know this or are you being intellectually dishonest in your argumentation?

Google making ad auctions more efficient becomes state surveillance the instant a subpoena arrives at their door. You might believe you are safe from a subpoena because you haven't done anything wrong, but you would be wrong about that:

* Things like geofence warrants are used to surveil people who are merely within a given radius of a crime.

* Subpoenas don't have to be for criminal cases, they can also be civil or investigatory (eg congressional subpoenas).

* Things you don't think are wrong are often crimes. Abortion clinic visits in Texas are the most obvious example. Other examples are things like using someone else's WiFi without permission, using a fake name online, or carrying around things like screwdrivers (which are a burglary tool) or permanent markers (which are used for vandalism). Estimates suggest that the average American breaks 3-5 federal laws per day.

A couple of examples:

Alexa recordings were used in a criminal court: https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2018/11/12/18089090/amazon-ech...

Amazon received 2000 subpoenas: https://www.theregister.com/2018/01/08/subpoenahappy_us_gove...

Re: Audible feedback on just how much your browsing feeds into Google

#149

Post by krono » Mon, Aug 22, 2022, 9:33 PM UTC

kylevedder wrote: post #144

krono wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This form of data collection and use has broken a status quo that has existed as long as life itself. Shouldn't it more conventionally be the ones in favour of this change to provide evidence of its benefits rather than the other way around?

They already did. People vote with their feet and attention, and people continue to flock to free services powered by targeted ads, systematically out competing services that had other models. If you don't like these services, don't use them; they don't have subpoena power. However, you might find the other options to be lacking, because they have inferior business models that do not allow them to compete on product…

Not all cards were on the table back then when. The general public and perhaps even Google and such themselves didn't really know what they were getting into or where this was headed - at least not today's scale, ubiquitousness, or invasiveness. Hence I would argue that this contract or trade of sorts was not a conscious choice.

By the way, for what its worth, I really do appreciate all the time and effort you are spending on this discussion and the defence of your stance in it.

Re: Audible feedback on just how much your browsing feeds into Google

#150

Post by kylevedder » Mon, Aug 22, 2022, 9:35 PM UTC

Nextgrid wrote: post #119

kylevedder wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are ad funded websites "anti competitive"? Start by defining "anti competitive", as I suspect you're using a non standard definition.

I see 2 problems with ad-funded services: 1) nobody can compete with free. 2) the service and the advertising are tied together, with the amount of money being earned by said advertising is private. The second point can be addressed without necessarily banning advertising, but having the advertising separate from the services - you have some kind of ad platform/etc that by itself is neutral and you can browse it (and…

>nobody can compete with free

Yes you can, just make yours also free and put up ads like DuckDuckGo.

>the amount of money being earned by said advertising is private.

Google is a publicly traded company with a legal obligation to disclose financial data to their shareholders as a matter of public record. You can go read their quarterly earnings reports stretching back years.