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

Computer, Respond to This Email

googleresearch.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 202 posts

Re: Computer, Respond to This Email

#181

Post by pluma »

marvy wrote: post #76
pluma wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same argument as the NSA: "It's not surveillance until a human looks at the data"

Interesting point, but there's a potentially important, albeit somewhat subtle difference. Google collects data which they claim nobody will ever look at. The reason they collect lots of data is so that machines can look at all of it now, while the NSA collects lots of data because they think that a person might need to look at some of it in the future.

If anything, that makes Google's bulk data collection more suspect than the NSA's. Not only do they collect it en masse, they also process it.

(Note that I personally think Google's collection is more ethically defensible than the NSA's, if only because they at least seek implied consent whereas the NSA doesn't even have to pretend)

Re: Computer, Respond to This Email

#182

Post by brobinson »

ErrantX wrote: post #101
mmanfrin wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Oh wow! That explains wierd artifacts I've been seeing since El Capitan, when using my trackball mouse. The cursor randomly grows in size, usually when I move it between screens quickly. I expect it's some "random jitter" in my using the trackball that causes it to happen.

Yeah, I thought I was losing my marbles until I saw someone mention it on HN...

Re: Computer, Respond to This Email

#183

Post by dexterdog »

supersan wrote: post #52

I'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 like the attachment recommendation thing and it can be useful but what I find ridiculous is that they still have yet to recommend that you use the correct from address when sending an email to your work contacts. I have about 15 email address that I can send from. If any recipients are in the x.com domain and I am not sending it from my x.com account it should alert me. Better yet, it should just switch the from address for me. This feature has been requested for years now.

Re: Computer, Respond to This Email

#184

Post by eloisant »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #160
alttab wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I don't think the risk is Google harming you for the books you bought, but disclosing the information to a government who may.

For example, a government (China?) may pass a law to force Google to disclose the list of nationals who bought certain books (political book criticising the Chinese government?), and Google may choose to comply to stay in that market.

Re: Computer, Respond to This Email

#185

Post by kuschku »

dredmorbius wrote: post #166
Maxious wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I seem to recall the Microsoft Mouse drivers for Windows 95 had a key shortcut to make lines radiate out of your cursor. Very useful on the low refresh rate LCDs where that cursor would appear like a submarine on the other side of the screen.

I liked the "shroom mode" mouse option in one of the hack packs. Trails, man....

It’s still there – in windows itself even!

Re: Computer, Respond to This Email

#186

Post by kuschku »

elwell wrote: post #107
ErrantX wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh wow! That explains wierd artifacts I've been seeing since El Capitan, when using my trackball mouse. The cursor randomly grows in size, usually when I move it between screens quickly. I expect it's some "random jitter" in my using the trackball that causes it to happen.

Case in point why the OS is a terrible place to allow a hacky ethos.

Yes. Popping up a notification the first few times (or the first time after a few months of not using it) would be neat.

Re: Computer, Respond to This Email

#187

Post by kuschku »

rcthompson wrote: post #138
vram22 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another Google April Fools Day joke, some years ago, was Google Paper, or some such name. IIRC it was funny.

Well, they kind of made that one for real too, didn't they? http://www.google.com/cloudprint/learn/index.html

Great Scott, that site looks like it’s from 1985! https://www.google.com/cloudprint/gadget.html?user=0

Re: Computer, Respond to This Email

#188

Post by kuschku »

cromwellian wrote: post #136
JoshTriplett wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Even if I accept your interpretation, it still doesn't justify the description "you're not the user, you're the product" In the case of the private highway example, even if the customers are the advertisers, the product being sold isn't the drivers, it's the billboard space. Google's users are not its products. You might claim its users are not its customers (users != customers), but that does not imply the users ARE…

> billboard space.

No, the product being sold is viewers and viewing times.

Which means the highway owner will try to make sure that everyone has to use this highway for their commute, no others, and then the owner will try to make sure people drive slower, so they see more ads.

And I can tell you, Google is definitely #2. Many examples in the past showed that. Like them directly ignoring a law, and then arguing in court "but throwing away all the data we got when we violated that law would mean we’d have to collect it legally, and that would cost millions!" (Compare: Google vs. Federal Republic of Germany: Street View)

Google is definitely not user focused.

Re: Computer, Respond to This Email

#189

Post by kuschku »

DanBC wrote: post #102
sunnyps wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm passionate because I'm sick and tired of seeing the same nonsensical dishonest FUD memes such as "you're the product". "You're the product" is absolutely a lie, even with the most generous interpretation it implies something you own is being sold. Can you point out what thing is being sold? I'm not interested in being part of some "true HN" clique that rewards paranoia for imaginary internet points. And I'm not s…

> Can you point out what thing is being sold? In EU my personal information (my name, my username, my email addresses, my clicks, my metadata, etc) is mine and there are limits to what you can do with it. In US who knows. There seems to be strict rules on HIPPA, and some tax stuff, and some money laundering stuff. But other than that selling the data seems to be fine.

EU data laws for everything are on a similar level to HIPPA.

Today I got an email because a website where I had an account was sold (from one SevenOne subsidary to another one) and they explained who owned it before, who will own it after, and explained to me that I’d have to allow them to copy my account data to the new company, otherwise it would not be transferred and thereby be lost.

That’s how you do it.

When US startups I have accounts with get bought – like WhatsApp – I never got an email asking if they could sell my data to Facebook.

Re: Computer, Respond to This Email

#190

Post by bespoke_engnr »

eloisant wrote: post #184
TeMPOraL wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I don't think the risk is Google harming you for the books you bought, but disclosing the information to a government who may. For example, a government (China?) may pass a law to force Google to disclose the list of nationals who bought certain books (political book criticising the Chinese government?), and Google may choose to comply to stay in that market.

The fact that none of the other commenters above made this connection is a bit strange for a community of Tech/Internet/Web people. Is all of this really that shiny?
Post reply on HN