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

De-Googleify Internet

degooglisons-internet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 266 posts

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#141

Post by victorhooi »

divbit wrote: post #96
ssully wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A blood sample? The only fields they ask for that might be too much for someone is a phone number and prior email, and neither is required to make an account. I take my privacy very seriously and understand a lot of the apprehension about Google's tracking, but I think you are being a little ridiculous.

You "can" sign up for gmail without a phone number (iirc it's fairly difficult, and you need to do something like use a fresh install of an android device or something to trigger the right sequence of dialogues). However if you try to use that account outside of the device, they will soon (within a couple of logins) ask you for a phone number for "security purposes," - the dialogue says something like "there is somet…

Asking for a phone number seems pretty valid.

The number of times people forget their password, or accidentally type it into a phishing site, or re-use passwords across different websites where one of them (e.g. Yahoo) get breached....

Without a recovery phone number, these people are hosed - and they've lost data, photos, contacts, email, their entire digital life etc. That's a pretty poor user experience. So most people are like - yeah, OK, that sounds reasonable, let me put a phone number I can access just in case somebody hacks my account.

NB: I work for Google, but I don't speak for them here in any official capacity.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#142

Post by ptero »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #133
syphilis2 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe this is true. But I also have found that sometimes the user experience is diminished when not "logged in" to encourage people to create accounts. Pinterest has a box that slowly covers up more of the screen as you scroll drown. Facebook has a login prompt box that stays at the bottom of the screen and occasionally expands as a reminder. Quora prevents internal redirects to new pages. With enough know-how th…

UX is usually worse for non-customers because the main product offering of many online services simply cannot exist without strong relationship with customer (probably Quora is not the case). Because of that, experience of registered users receives much more attention. Most of the world is happy with it and is not going to deprive themselves from cool stuff on privacy grounds. I'd say it's counterproductive to fight…

Non-registered users lacking some functionality due to the lack of attention is not the problem. The problem is companies conciously making it hard for non-registered users to access the service. Deploying various annoying partial screen blockers is not the lack of attention -- it is the opposite.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#143

Post by gohrt »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #133
syphilis2 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe this is true. But I also have found that sometimes the user experience is diminished when not "logged in" to encourage people to create accounts. Pinterest has a box that slowly covers up more of the screen as you scroll drown. Facebook has a login prompt box that stays at the bottom of the screen and occasionally expands as a reminder. Quora prevents internal redirects to new pages. With enough know-how th…

UX is usually worse for non-customers because the main product offering of many online services simply cannot exist without strong relationship with customer (probably Quora is not the case). Because of that, experience of registered users receives much more attention. Most of the world is happy with it and is not going to deprive themselves from cool stuff on privacy grounds. I'd say it's counterproductive to fight…

The forced-login isn't to improve product quality, it's to make more money on ads. StackOverflow/Exchange works great without forced login to view content.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#144

Post by tombrossman »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #27

> These services track us everywhere, while claiming to give us a better “user experience”. That's kind of the problem though; they usually _do_ offer a better user experience. If we want users to start using open source software rather than walled garden solutions from large companies, we're going to have to start building open source solutions which offer a comparable user experience to proprietary ones from large…

I think this isn't necessarily about open source, it's about tracking users in order to manipulate them with relevant ads. A company could use a fully open-source stack and still cross that creepy threshold with user tracking no problem.

A few years back I was using a paid Google Apps account (which IIRC excludes you from some tracking?) and FastMail simultaneously. Both were excellent from a technical perspective, but FastMail was just better. They make all their money from selling their service to end users and I trust this model more. So I switched to using FastMail exclusively.

I use free and open source software and strongly prefer it - but I don't see it as some kind of 'automagic' solution to tracking and privacy concerns. Buying the product, and not being the product, is what is important to me.

Also don't forget to self-host what you can, for example it's not that difficult or expensive to set up Nextcloud on a VPS for file and contacts/calendar syncing. And don't be a cheap bastard with the FOSS you use, make donations to developers of useful tools. You're going to pay for all this one way or another.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#145

Post by mikevin »

mi100hael wrote: post #12

I like the idea of this project, but I have several nits/concerns: - De-Google-ify is a poor way of marketing these ideas. Your average web user loves Google because they are trendy and make everything so convenient. - The site enumerates the pitfalls of cloud-hosted solutions and then proceeds to link to their own cloud-hosted solutions with no explanation of why they're any safer, better, etc. And not limited to th…

I also feel like we should perhaps be grateful that it's Google that's powerful here. I know they are know longer the company that 100% embraces "Don't be evil" but I still believe they are trying. It's just that this amount of success, their market(s) and political pressure will steer any company towards "profit > privacy". If you accept this, Google might be one of the better companies to experience this from as some of the other contenders like Yahoo, Microsoft seem to go through this process more rapidly and without much consideration.

To sum up my thoughts: while I don't like the direction they seem to be going i'm glad they're the one leading.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#147

Post by r00fus »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #27

> These services track us everywhere, while claiming to give us a better “user experience”. That's kind of the problem though; they usually _do_ offer a better user experience. If we want users to start using open source software rather than walled garden solutions from large companies, we're going to have to start building open source solutions which offer a comparable user experience to proprietary ones from large…

What we need are ways to anonymize and abstract our presences in more ways than just creating new logins for each user.

Some kind of "TOR-like" way of aggregating login and thus behavior to nullify this kind of tracking.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#148

Post by bad_user »

cortesoft wrote: post #131
brilliantcode wrote: post #85

It's unlikely to happen as the vast majority of the public simply does not care . There is a deep technological disconnect. The only way to de-google-ify is to bring about mesh network that runs on our mobile devices or volunteer run nodes. Maybe you need to take the Skytrain to a remote part of the city to access specific information because there are no nodes there yet. The centralized infrastructure created betwee…

I think the public doesn't care for a good reason; no one has articulated a realistic, tangible cost to quality of life caused by letting Google track you. Lots of people talk about it being 'creepy' and dreaming up possible scenarios where it WOUDLD be costly, but for most people, the costs simply aren't actually felt. I am trying to think about it for me personally, and I can't come up with a single time that Googl…

They can change your perception of anything, leading you to buying stupid shit you don't need, or to voting for somebody that doesn't protect your interests.

And any piece of knowledge is dangerous in the right context. This is usually felt more strongly by minorities. You're actually privileged if you're a straight, white, middle class male, but even so you can end up being harassed and hurt for who you are. Have you ever cheated on your wife? Have you ever spoken against powerful men? Do you walk funny?

I was born in 1982, so I caught a couple of years of communist in Romania. And let me tell you, the atmosphere, the paranoia, the secret service of a police state managing to change the fabric of society by using a huge network of informants and fear was far, far more interesting than the 1984 novel.

And if you think it can't happen to you, then think again, because at least your parents were alive when such things happened for real.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#149

Post by neaden »

__jal wrote: post #75
Ajedi32 wrote: post #27

> These services track us everywhere, while claiming to give us a better “user experience”. That's kind of the problem though; they usually _do_ offer a better user experience. If we want users to start using open source software rather than walled garden solutions from large companies, we're going to have to start building open source solutions which offer a comparable user experience to proprietary ones from large…

"Better" is in the eye of the beholder. It creeps me the hell out, which is why I block the data flows that feed them.

I think it's a mixed bag. Real life example, my mom is flying in today for a visit, she emailed me the flight info. Close to the time of departure my android phone that's link to my google account gave me a push notification about it's status which it regularly updates in case there is any delay. Is this a little creepy? To me, yes. Is it also useful? Yep.

Re: De-Googleify Internet

#150

Post by divbit »

victorhooi wrote: post #141
divbit wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You "can" sign up for gmail without a phone number (iirc it's fairly difficult, and you need to do something like use a fresh install of an android device or something to trigger the right sequence of dialogues). However if you try to use that account outside of the device, they will soon (within a couple of logins) ask you for a phone number for "security purposes," - the dialogue says something like "there is somet…

Asking for a phone number seems pretty valid. The number of times people forget their password, or accidentally type it into a phishing site, or re-use passwords across different websites where one of them (e.g. Yahoo) get breached.... Without a recovery phone number, these people are hosed - and they've lost data, photos, contacts, email, their entire digital life etc. That's a pretty poor user experience. So most p…

> Asking for a phone number seems pretty valid.

I agree with your reasoning that for the vast majority of casual users it is useful (and maybe gmail is only intended for casual users). Otoh, there are countries where you could be punished for speaking your mind via en e-mail account that is linked to you (say by phone number) or from that e-mail account being linked to you via your using it to sign up for another service. For example, in the US one could conceivably be punished (or at least face an expensive court battle) for publishing certain types of software see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernstein_v._United_States from an e-mail address linked to you

Post reply on HN