Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google? • Hacker News Board

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#311

Post by jessaustin » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 5:03 PM UTC

squarefoot wrote: post #170

Malarkey73 wrote: post #14

I know Google is profiling me and harvesting my data. But it's not using me to harvest my friends information. I know Google is targeting ads at me - and they maybe AB tested. But those ads are from real companies or organisations - they aren't fake bots or astroturf groups algorithmically designed to tell me what I want to hear. I'm sceptically watchful of Google, I feel I have a social contract with them where they…

"I know Google is profiling me and harvesting my data. But it's not using me to harvest my friends information." Hey Google, text Alice, Bob and Lisa I'll meet them at the cafe at 17:30.

Don't you have to have them in your address book for this to work?

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#312

Post by bartbutler » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 5:12 PM UTC

product50 wrote: post #256

joering2 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get any spam on Protonmail, they already have strong filters. I don't use any automatic filters, but I could use their "Bridge" tools and install Bat on my Laptop and setup filters this way. Way more advance features in Bat than in Gmail. Protonmail is subscription service, true. But just like I can afford $5 per day for a good coffee, I can afford $1 per day for a secure, encrypted email; although I can beli…

Just because you don't use automatic filters doesn't mean every else doesn't use it. Just because you can pay $30/mo subscription doesn't mean every else can or are willing to pay it. Just because you don't want to be Google's product doesn't mean every else doesn't want to be the same. So just stop it. You seriously had the audacity here to compare GMail (a wonderful free product) with Protonmail (a $365/yr product)…

ProtonMail Plus (the lowest paid tier) is $48/yr. And you do pay for Gmail with your data, so let's at least get the comparison right. The final cost/benefit analysis is your choice of course, but Gmail is not free

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#313

Post by eric24234 » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 5:16 PM UTC

drawkbox wrote: post #190

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uh, Google and Mozilla and a handful of organizations are converting all web traffic to HTTPS through subtle manipulation of standards and user interface. They even proxy mobile traffic from their search engine. ISPs can't even see what IP you're visiting because it's all fronted by CloudFlare. Even your DNS is being hidden by an HTTPS tunnel in the browser. Your ISP soon won't be able to see anything you do online.…

You don't think ISPs inject ads/tracking into requests after the page is rendered on subsequent requests and override ad networks? [1] > For years, Comcast and other large telecommunication companies around the world have injected javascript into your web browsing experience to serve advertisements and account notices. Their ability to do this stems from their upstream position as your Internet Service Provider (ISP)…

Can they inject javascript even in an https connection ?

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#314

Post by CaptSpify » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 5:18 PM UTC

joshuamorton wrote: post #269

CaptSpify wrote: post #268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I believe there are power and compute related reasons that you actually do need there to be a central service that manages location data. That may be, but they could open up that service for me to run on my own server, rather than through them. > And I guess at that point you could say "but then there should be a single tool that does location management for apps and location tracking should be entirely separate",…

>And? I already have disparate experiences in apps for tons of reasons. So because some things are a bad experience, we should make more things a bad experience? I don't follow. Or do you mean that you as an end user, not an app developer, should be able to configure the server used to look up the mapping of gps coordinates to street addresses used system wide, as though that isn't a giant security vulnerability? (as…

> So because some things are a bad experience, we should make more things a bad experience?

I don't see how disparate experiences are bad experiences. Those are two entirely different things.

> if I were Uber or Lyft, I wouldn't want to deploy my app on a platform where another app with root privileges could, for example, change the GPS lookup location to something adversarial whenever uber was in the foreground, leading to bad end user experiences

Is there any reason this can't be done today? I already have root on my platform, and, afaik, I can spoof my gps coordinates. Besides, if you don't like how a platform has set up its permissions, then don't develop for that platform.

> But that's not what happens, since you can turn that off

You can flag a button, that tells you that it is turned off. There's no way of knowing whether or not they actually keep my data.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#315

Post by Quenty » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 5:18 PM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #306

cxseven wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Next from Comcast: You must install this privacy-busting add-on to "optimize your experience".

Or, more likely: a discount for installing it.

And an increased price hike to go with the “discount”

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#316

Post by joering2 » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 5:30 PM UTC

bartbutler wrote: post #312

product50 wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because you don't use automatic filters doesn't mean every else doesn't use it. Just because you can pay $30/mo subscription doesn't mean every else can or are willing to pay it. Just because you don't want to be Google's product doesn't mean every else doesn't want to be the same. So just stop it. You seriously had the audacity here to compare GMail (a wonderful free product) with Protonmail (a $365/yr product)…

ProtonMail Plus (the lowest paid tier) is $48/yr. And you do pay for Gmail with your data, so let's at least get the comparison right. The final cost/benefit analysis is your choice of course, but Gmail is not free

Thanks. 10 years from now it will surface Google through their arm 23andme was building your health profile and share it with health providers you shopped with. Since they don't have same data on me as on product50, the cost of my insurance will be mediocre and his will be thru the roof.

And if you don't believe me, Edward Snowden would like to have a word with you.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#317

Post by bartbutler » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 5:31 PM UTC

product50 wrote: post #310

bartbutler wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ProtonMail does have filters...am I missing something?

If you want to add more than 1 custom filter on ProtonMail, you have to be on the paid plan: https://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/filters/

Or you can just put all your stuff in a single Sieve filter.

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#318

Post by Ivoirians » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 5:53 PM UTC

zombieprocesses wrote: post #295

Ivoirians wrote: post #70

Disclaimer: I work for Google and these views are only my opinion, etc. From my perspective, Google's goals are aligned with improving the world by offering information services. Search, Gmail, Maps, Translate, basically all of the Other Bets, etc.--it's easy to imagine that the people behind them are more concerned with impact on the world than on generating profit or consolidating Google's power. To me, Facebook ha…

> From my perspective, Google's goals are aligned with improving the world by offering information services. Ah yes. From "Don't be evil" to "Improve the world"? Who asked google to "improve" anything? > To me, Facebook has no such world-improving aspirations. Which is why they are being attacked. They are neutral. > Plus, I keep seeing studies of how increased Facebook usage correlates negatively with peoples' moods…

I'm not saying Google handles everything correctly. My comment was meant as an explanation as to why one person has a positive perspective of Google and a negative perspective of Facebook. Obviously if someone thinks Google is destroying the world, they're going to want to change my opinion/as many positive opinions of Google as possible, and I respect that even if I disagree.

To respond to your points quickly: I'd rather support a company with a moral stance I agreed with than one that was neutral. I think news media in general has a problem with sensationalism/optimizing-for-clicks/echo chambers, but I don't perceive that Google is particularly bad as an news aggregator. I think a lot of complaints about Google/Youtube overlook that most policy decisions about removals/demonetization are driven not by politics or agendas, but by advertisers, without which Google/Youtube would not exist. (And again, if you disagree and believe that targeted advertising is itself a net bad for the world, oh well.)

Personally, I think viewpoint polarization and the internet's enabling of echo chambers is the biggest problem facing the world. I know Google is often accused of making the problem worse, but I don't agree. Google News, for example, won't stop showing me Fox/Breitbart articles, even though they have to have enough data on me to know I'm super far-left.

Anyway, I did some searching (on Google, ha), but can't find any articles linking Google/Youtube usage to mental health problems, so I'd be interested if I'm wrong. The only one I remember seeing said Youtube had a positive effect on mental health. (https://www.psychalive.org/worst-mental-health-instagram-fac...)

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#319

Post by joshuamorton » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 6:05 PM UTC

CaptSpify wrote: post #314

joshuamorton wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And? I already have disparate experiences in apps for tons of reasons. So because some things are a bad experience, we should make more things a bad experience? I don't follow. Or do you mean that you as an end user, not an app developer, should be able to configure the server used to look up the mapping of gps coordinates to street addresses used system wide, as though that isn't a giant security vulnerability? (as…

> So because some things are a bad experience, we should make more things a bad experience? I don't see how disparate experiences are bad experiences. Those are two entirely different things. > if I were Uber or Lyft, I wouldn't want to deploy my app on a platform where another app with root privileges could, for example, change the GPS lookup location to something adversarial whenever uber was in the foreground, lea…

>I don't see how disparate experiences are bad experiences. Those are two entirely different things

Inconsistent experiences is perhaps the single biggest complaint about Android as a platform. This is on comparison to iOS which has much stricter controls on how things can look and what you can do. Unified interfaces are better experiences. Predictability is a part of good ux.

>Is there any reason this can't be done today? I already have root on my platform, and, afaik, I can spoof my gps coordinates. Besides, if you don't like how a platform has set up its permissions, then don't develop for that platform

I'm honestly not 100% sure, but it wouldn't surprise me if it's the kind of thing that only possible via BusyBox or whatever.

As for the second part of your comment: losing Uber for a feature that will be used by 6 people is not a reasonable trade-off for a platform to make.

>There's no way of knowing whether or not they actually keep my data.

Well yes there is. You can see all the data Google has one you via takeout. For location specifically, there's timeline.

Unless you mean that you think they are lying and secretly storing your data in which case there's a plethora of legal reasons they can't do that. You're veering off into conspiracy territory.

(I work at Google but these opinions are mine alone)

Re: Is Facebook Really Scarier Than Google?

#320

Post by Fins » Sun, Mar 25, 2018, 6:05 PM UTC

Ivoirians wrote: post #70

Disclaimer: I work for Google and these views are only my opinion, etc. From my perspective, Google's goals are aligned with improving the world by offering information services. Search, Gmail, Maps, Translate, basically all of the Other Bets, etc.--it's easy to imagine that the people behind them are more concerned with impact on the world than on generating profit or consolidating Google's power. To me, Facebook ha…

Pretty much every major company has a mission statement about "improving the world" in some way. Can't really think of any that says that their goal is to cheat, lie, and steal to hasten the coming of the Brave New World.

If you seriously think that "people behind them are more concerned with impact on the world than on generating profit" then I have a bridge to sell. Oh, and shareholders would like a word with you, too.

There's nothing wrong with generating profit, and I would trust people motivated by profit fart more than ones motivated by the whole "making the world a better place" -- the latter tend to be genocidal maniacs -- but for companies that's exactly what they are supposed to do, generate profit. It just would be nice if they were a bit more transparent about how they do it, whether Facebook, or Google.