Google Fights Back • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Fights Back

#371

Post by icebraining » Wed, May 08, 2019, 11:56 PM UTC

j05h wrote: post #96

loudtieblahblah wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with Libre5/Purism is apps. A lot of the secure applications I use have a linux app of some sort (DEB, AppImage, Docker) but I fail to see how any of that is going to work on a phone. I certainly don't see how a docker container would be good for battery life on a phone either ProtonMail - for example - on Linux, requires a bridge application in order to talk to a IMAP capable email client. Etesync requir…

So much this. Without a ride share app (and a few others) I just can't see going to Librem 5 as much as I would like to.

For Uber, there's https://m.uber.com, works fine on any browser.

Re: Google Fights Back

#372

Post by nirvdrum » Wed, May 08, 2019, 11:59 PM UTC

pdimitar wrote: post #257

nirvdrum wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same boat here. I'm not with Android because I think the OS is better or because I hate privacy. It's a matter of cost (I think I paid $650 net for my S9+) and lack of hardware options. I'm preaching to the choir, but it sucks that the only two viable options these days require such huge trade-offs. And that the premium for privacy is so much greater than what typical Android hardware costs. I'm glad you've been able…

Cost is rarely a concern unless you are barely making ends meet. iPhone's cost per year is actually lower than most Android flagships, if you factor in how quicker are the Android phones to start breaking down and/or lose their system software update window. So IMO Apple has the upper hand in terms of amortised cost (albeit not by much if you look at the insane prices of the iPhone XS/Max). I completely agree we shou…

I think you overestimate how much free capital the average person has. Even in my case, where I could afford an iPhone with max storage (to assuage my previously stated concerns), I'd have a really hard time justifying it. We budget pretty diligently, so we'd have to justify to ourselves why paying a premium to Apple is a better use of our capital than anything else. I came really close to buying an iPhone 8+ about a year back, but the Samsung Galaxy S9+ beat it out hardware-wise and was considerably cheaper.

I'll grant you that Apple providing better software support for their phones was a huge advantage. And their stance on privacy is leagues apart from Google's. So, I could work out the math on that iPhone 8+ and call it roughly breakeven. I typically keep a phone for 3 years, so the per annum cost was roughly the same. But, for that money I likely wasn't going to be happy and that factors in. I just wasn't going to have what I want out of a phone and I'd have to console myself with having an intangible benefit of better privacy. I care about privacy, but trying to be honest with myself, that likely wasn't going to make me feel better about paying $200 extra because Apple doesn't think I need a microSD slot.

My wife has a completely different hang-up. She gets very nervous about carrying around a fragile $800+ device. And she'd lose her mind if she misplaced such an expensive device. Prior to inheriting my Lumia 950 XL, she had a Lumia 640 she loved and only paid $30 for. So, she was never going to be happy with an iPhone 8 either. If Apple had refreshed the SE device, we may very well have made the switch to iOS. But, they want to sit at the high-end of the market -- as is their right -- and so we decided to self-select out.

All of this is a really long-winded way of saying that affordability isn't the only concern when it comes to making a purchase. For all its other faults, the Android ecosystem provides many options to suit people's budgets and comfort zones. And yet again, I have to lament the demise of Windows 10 Mobile because it really offered the best of both worlds there.

Re: Google Fights Back

#373

Post by Draiken » Thu, May 09, 2019, 12:00 AM UTC

TulliusCicero wrote: post #220

EpicEng wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I _think_ the GP's point is that Google is "managing" discovery, i.e., if Google were to up and disappear we would have a large problem on our hands. If search were decentralized then no single entity could bring it down.

I mean, there are a bunch of other search engines out there, and I still don't see how having even more would somehow 'solve' search for good.

I think Google is way more than just "search". No other engine knows everything about you. Knows what you read, what you dislike, your appointments, your travels, etc.

While there are alternatives for search, it's only search. Everything else is scattered. Google lives and breathes through the mesh of services they offer. Search is at the core, but everything attached to it is what makes Google so different.

It is a scary prospect IMO. We already sold our souls to it whether we like it or not. We live on our tech bubble and perhaps try to make better choices but it will never happen to the majority.

Most of what I said can also be said about Facebook, with the social network at the centre instead.

Re: Google Fights Back

#374

Post by djsumdog » Thu, May 09, 2019, 12:06 AM UTC

aerique wrote: post #304

djsumdog wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But my next phone will be an iPhone. I ordered a new old-stock Nexus 5X to run KDE Plasma on. Fuck both Google and Apple. I hope the Purism and Pinephone actually get released as well so we have more real Linux options. I hate we live in a world with totally non-standard mobile hardware. Back in the day you could wipe Windows and run Linux on nearly anything. Maybe you would only get VESA graphics or text, but it w…

I don't understand why no one mentions SailfishOS. It's an alternative that is available right now . Sure, it's not up to the level of Android and iOS in most respects, but it takes effort to get something like this going. Also from the users. Like Linux 20 years ago. Developing for it is not a nightmare either. And it's running Linux so there's advantages as well. I used it as my daily driver years ago and I've been…

I've looked into Sailfish before. Isn't it closed though? (It might have a Linux kernel, but that doesn't mean the rest is open) and as far as I can tell, it's not (easily) available in US markets.

Re: Google Fights Back

#375

Post by nirvdrum » Thu, May 09, 2019, 12:08 AM UTC

8ytecoder wrote: post #209

nirvdrum wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if it falls under "freedom to tinker", but having a microSD slot saved my vacation once (well, the pictures of it anyway). We were out at a children's amusement park in the mountains with poor service, so just moving things to the cloud wasn't an option. Deleting apps from my phone to pick up space is of course an option, but also a silly one. Swapping out the microSD card, however, was simple and I just…

I use my DSLR to shoot pictures in RAW and still don't fill ~10GB of space in a full vacation. Granted different people have different needs - but anything over 32GB seems to work fine for me.

I have the OS taking up space, games that now take up 1+ GB, some offline music, and offline maps so I can use the GPS in rural areas. All of that eats up a sizable portion of that 32 GB. Add in photos and 1080p video and it doesn't take long to fill up. If 32 GB works great for you, awesome. But I didn't make my story up :-)

Now my phone has 64 GB based storage and I'm still in the same situation because everything has bloated to fill the available space. microSD is a really cheap and incredibly effective solution to the problem. Certainly much cheaper than buying a new phone so you can get more storage.

Re: Google Fights Back

#376

Post by solipsism » Thu, May 09, 2019, 12:08 AM UTC

holy_city wrote: post #352

joefkelley wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, so you trust them to store the email, and parse it for something like spam detection, but not for some smarter feature? What specifically are you concerned about that is a problem with this and not with them having the email in the first place? Sounds like you shouldn't be using Gmail at all tbh.

>What specifically are you concerned about that is a problem with this and not with them having the email in the first place My issue is that federal law regulates what information my bank can share with 3rd parties and allows me to opt out. The ethical thing to do is at least hold oneself to a similar standard. If I had worked on those projects I would have made it policy to ignore emails from healthcare providers a…

But I get the feeling that most developers/engineers working on these features have warped senses of ethics

Nonsense. It's a totally reasonable ethical viewpoint to assume that a user who opts in to their financial institution to send their data to Gmail has opted into Gmail reading that email and trying to provide awesome features on top of it. It's not like Google keeps it a secret when it does this kind of stuff. This is the bread and butter what Google is, and anyone not interested in that kind of thing should choose another email alternative.

Google taking privacy seriously means they treat the data you share with them with respect. In this situation it is you, as a person who does not trust Google, who is apparently not taking privacy seriously when you opt into sending them your financial records.

Do you think customers have absolutely no responsibility over what applications and services they choose to use?

I realize the downvotes will come... But also take the time to let me know what I'm getting wrong.

Re: Google Fights Back

#377

Post by ben_jones » Thu, May 09, 2019, 12:10 AM UTC

groovybits wrote: post #307

britch wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the converse could be Google using our data for malicious purposes. Has there been any evidence of that? I have not seen any. You are right. I have not seen any evidence of this yet either. What frightens me is that IF something happens and Google is compelled or chooses to give that data to an entity to use maliciously there will be nothing we can do. As I look at it: It is dangerous for that much data about that…

I look at it this way: What is your threat model? What do you stand to lose if: * Google shuts down tomorrow? * Google turns into a malicious conspirator tomorrow? * Google's databases are compromised by a separate malicious party tomorrow? Each of these can have different outcomes for your data. Do you wish to mitigate, avoid, or accept that risk? Likewise, what do you stand to gain from using Google services? AKA,…

I think for me personally its:

Over the next 20-30 years personal freedoms and economic opportunities in the United States gradually erode, and large corporations seeking to continue/increase profit are entirely complicit in legally feeding their data into a surveillance state.

The goal of the model would be to decrease how fucked I am from this eventuality.

Re: Google Fights Back

#378

Post by tinus_hn » Thu, May 09, 2019, 12:21 AM UTC

PaulHoule wrote: post #249

This article is uncritical. In particular it doesn't mention the critical problem that Google makes its money from advertising, not from people who pay for premium phones or premium services. That is, you are still the product. I recognize social positives from advertising, but there is a fundamental conflict when you are dependent on "free" services paid for by a third party.

You can still make money from advertisements if you don’t track everything your users do. Magazines don’t know how long you look at a page and they still sell ads. It’s just harder.

Re: Google Fights Back

#379

Post by TeMPOraL » Thu, May 09, 2019, 12:34 AM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #362

pdimitar wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I admire people like Richard Stallman and Sir Tim Berners-Lee, IMO they fail to understand that most people simply don't care -- they have a life, job, family and stuff they like to do in their free time and they want technology to enable them and save them time, not get in the way and take their free time. I used Debian as a main driver for several years and lost patience around 2010. Using a MacBook Pro with…

They don't fail to understand it. They just realize that if people don't push back, they won't have freedom to tinker even when they need it .

Also, for those believing in free markets: freedom to tinker for you is also the freedom to ask your friend or pay a local professional to tinker on your behalf. It doesn't mean everyone has to be a tinkerer, only that everyone can be. The opposite of that is requiring to go through the official vendor for every little thing you need to tweak.

Re: Google Fights Back

#380

Post by TeMPOraL » Thu, May 09, 2019, 12:36 AM UTC

Nextgrid wrote: post #314

i_cant_speel wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of mouths to keep shut on the inside. If anyone responsible for building the fake delete tool spoke out, Google would be in trouble.

If people couldn’t be unethical at scale then Facebook wouldn’t exist at all and yet it does, so I’m sure the same would be possible at Google.

That's different. People can easily be unethical at scale when incentives align. What they almost never can be is coordinated at scale against the individual incentives - whether for good or bad.