I guess I've already automatically consented to Google using my emails to train their algorithms. How does filing bugs work in the scenario where the machine learning can't figure something out? Is a copy of someones personal email attached to the bug report?
Computer, Respond to This Email
151–160 of 202 posts
Re: Computer, Respond to This Email
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
> sometimes very useful features which may be considered unorthodox like "Gmail telling you when it thinks you wanted to attach a file but forgot". That one's not that hard. http://marc.info/?l=mutt-dev&m=95685122323646&w=2
Doing it with a low false positive rate (so that you can enable it for everyone without being annoying) is much harder. Also, Gmail has lots of users who speak languages other than English... has anyone tested whether the forgotten attachment detector works for them too?
It works in Japanese, though with more false positives than in English, I think.
Re: Computer, Respond to This Email
#153I'm often amazed how Google still gives it staff this unique hacker-like approach to their million dollar projects. For example, the stuff in Google labs (gmail) has had some silly things like don't hit send when you're drunk but sometimes very useful features which may be considered unorthodox like "Gmail telling you when it thinks you wanted to attach a file but forgot". It's something I wouldn't generally associat…
I had a similar thought with Apple -- El Cap has a feature where if you shake your mouse around, the cursor will momentarily grow in size so you can find where it is. That does not feel like a top-down design idea, but a bottom-up feature designed by an engineer who was sick of those moments where he/she had lost the cursor.
I liked this feature when I found it actually was a feature. For a while I thought it was my Razer mouse drivers messing up.
Re: Computer, Respond to This Email
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think I understand your reasoning. You're already tolerating an AI processing your email to produce the ads, so assuming that, why does a cool new feature push you closer towards a "dumber" service?
Because I'm lazy and switching would be time consuming. Each new privacy-related "innovation" motivates me a little more. You're right that the practical effect of this new service is negligible on a technical level, but it still reminds me that I should find an alternative I find acceptable.
So basically, because pretty much every useful data-and-automation-based thing - especially on the social, not individual level - can be considered an erosion of privacy, should we just stop progress? That's the sentiment I feel radiating from yours and others' complaints about privacy here.
Re: Computer, Respond to This Email
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
Much of this strikes me as a "just because you can, doesn't mean you should" issue. Google clearly loves machine learning and doing cool things but I think lately they've been taking it too far. For example; after purchasing a book on Amazon recently I happened to do a Google search on that book and the first thing I see is, "Your book is scheduled to be delivered on..." Aside from the creepy factor I'm left wonderin…
> Aside from the creepy factor (...) One man's "creepy factor" is another's superbly useful feature. The feeling of creepiness probably stems from being surprised and defaulting to negative reaction. Remember that GMail was never supposed to be a dumb mailbox. If you want a dumb mailbox, there are tons of alternatives (i.e. almost every other provider and various open-source UI packages). Honestly, I really enjoy tho…
And please - like Google cares that you ordered that book from Amazon. Until they do.
Abuses of this technology are inevitable, but we haven't seen it yet. It's the source of magical "how did they do that" wow factor in technology that touch screens and thin devices used to have.
Re: Computer, Respond to This Email
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
Much of this strikes me as a "just because you can, doesn't mean you should" issue. Google clearly loves machine learning and doing cool things but I think lately they've been taking it too far. For example; after purchasing a book on Amazon recently I happened to do a Google search on that book and the first thing I see is, "Your book is scheduled to be delivered on..." Aside from the creepy factor I'm left wonderin…
On http://myaccount.google.com you can go into search settings and turn off "Private Results" and it will not return GMail search results. Edit: It is under Your personal info -> Search settings -> Manage settings
I imagine this could be useful for live demos.
Re: Computer, Respond to This Email
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a lot of words that amount to "Nuh-uh!" The entire point of the "if you're not paying, you're the product" spiel is that everybody already knows everything you said, but there's a fundamental difference between paying and not paying. You're not going to get that far demanding that people stop thinking there's a difference, nor are people going to stop verbalizing that difference, nor should they. What's clich…
That was a rational argument. You know as well as I do that if you explained it the way I did above most people would not care. But instead you insist on the "you're the product" FUD nonsense to elicit an emotional response. Spreading FUD is a demagogue's job, I would never condone it.
you insist on the "you're the product" FUD nonsense
I like the phrase as it draw attention to the fact that the services offered aren't "free" but rather are paid via a mechanism that a typical user wouldn't think about. Sure it is shocking, but it is useful.
I'm not sure how it is FUD ... your data is being repackaged and sold off to the highest bidder. There's no doubt in that.
Spreading FUD is a demagogue's job, I would never condone it.
Congrats.
Re: Computer, Respond to This Email
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google does not sell "users", that's why it is inaccurate and misleading. What would you say of a private highway that sells billboards? If the business model of a private highway is not tolls, but instead selling ads along the road. "You're not the user, you're the product?" Would you say the highway owner is selling the personal information of the drivers? The people buying billboards do not receive any personal id…
> What would you say of a private highway that sells billboards? If the business model of a private highway is not tolls, but instead selling ads along the road. If it's funded primarily by the billboards and not by the drivers, then yes, the billboard purchasers are the real customers. And that could potentially lead to poor results, such as optimizing for billboard viewing time rather than safety and throughput.
Then it would be fair to complain if the company was a) new, or b) it was already a typical thing to do for them. Google keeps proving otherwise; applying "you're the product" meme to them is nonsense.
Re: Computer, Respond to This Email
#159When you receive a call today, you are already prompted with auto response messages such as 'I'm busy, I'll call you back.' This seems like the natural next step.
Imagine the day when it suggests an insult for a co-worker based on his or her perceived inferiority.
Re: Computer, Respond to This Email
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Aside from the creepy factor (...) One man's "creepy factor" is another's superbly useful feature. The feeling of creepiness probably stems from being surprised and defaulting to negative reaction. Remember that GMail was never supposed to be a dumb mailbox. If you want a dumb mailbox, there are tons of alternatives (i.e. almost every other provider and various open-source UI packages). Honestly, I really enjoy tho…
And please - like Google cares that you ordered that book from Amazon. Until they do. Abuses of this technology are inevitable, but we haven't seen it yet. It's the source of magical "how did they do that" wow factor in technology that touch screens and thin devices used to have.
Maybe I'm weird, but for me none of this (touchscreens too) is "magical", and all of this is "interesting" and then "obvious" when I learn/figure out how they do it. Maybe that's why some people are afraid - because it's more magic to them?
> And please - like Google cares that you ordered that book from Amazon. Until they do.
Well, if Google starts caring that I ordered a book from Amazon (more than they already do - Google Now shows me info on my purchases, including delivery time), then they'll do what exactly? Tell their self-driving cars to kill me because I didn't use Google Play?
Google so far has a stellar history of being helpful, pro-user, quite often pro-bono at it. Please apply these levels of scrutiny to someone else first, like every other SV startup running on the investor-storytime model.