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

Google’s GDPR Workaround

brave.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 629 posts

Re: Google’s GDPR Workaround

#431

Post by specialist »

philwelch wrote: post #155
Aunche wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no marketing expert, but I doubt that the best way Google can think of to sway public opinion is to call people privacy nuts. Google employs over 100,000 people and even more people work at similar companies like Facebook or buy targeted ads. Many of these people browse Hackernews and get offended if others accuse their livelihoods of being evil.

Every company I've worked at has had an explicit policy of not commenting on that company's business on the internet.

Of course. Most every employer wants you to do the job you're paid to do, aka stay in your lane.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/nov/21/facebook-...

Re: Google’s GDPR Workaround

#432

Post by superturkey650 »

drusepth wrote: post #418
tgragnato wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, a Google account shouldn’t be required.

Why not? How else would Google know who not to track? It's not like they can identify you and remember that preference without a Google account...

Yes, that's why targeted ads shouldn't be a thing unless it's opt-in (not necessarily my opinion but it seems to be the point the parent was making). At that point, to opt-in you can create a google account. Currently though, Google will attempt targeted ads on people without a Google account by trying to identify and track them through other means.

Ideally you would have site-specific or content-specific ads normally and personalized ads if you created an account and chose to opt-in.

Re: Google’s GDPR Workaround

#433

Post by salawat »

rvz wrote: post #8

It's really funny to see that yesterday, I was branded as a 'privacy nut' after the release of Android 10 as I was concerned about the privacy issues that are in Android. Then the Go modules proxy issue around the Go Programming language that raised suspicions about tracking usage statistics around downloading modules turned on by default without any consent and now this. I think there are some folks at Google who ha…

Obligatory post:

https://cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm

It's just as valid a technique for large organizations as it is for governments.

Active Perception Management is most definitely a thing. Of course it only works because most people aren't aware it is a thing.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perception_management

Re: Google’s GDPR Workaround

#434

Post by dang »

paul7986 wrote: post #152
Aunche wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm no marketing expert, but I doubt that the best way Google can think of to sway public opinion is to call people privacy nuts. Google employs over 100,000 people and even more people work at similar companies like Facebook or buy targeted ads. Many of these people browse Hackernews and get offended if others accuse their livelihoods of being evil.

I can attest to that as when you point of things like Google gets caught stealing IP from a MIT student they invited for an interview (a popular thread here on HN) it gets downvoted voraciously. Either its employees, hired guns and or something...

You spammed an HN thread with these comments before, which amply explains why you were downvoted.

We've been over this topic a gazillion times on this site: https://hn.algolia.com/?sort=byDate&dateRange=all&type=comme.... Astroturfing exists, but imagined projections of astroturfing are far more common, and whatever the effects of the former may be, the latter has an extremely degrading effect on discussion. In fact it eats up everything if you let it. We don't want that here.

I've personally banned several accounts over the years for propagandizing for Google (for whatever reason—it's impossible to distinguish between a paid agent and an overzealous fan, nor does it particularly matter). But this has been rare, and we don't do it without evidence.

Re: Google’s GDPR Workaround

#435

Post by kipchak »

banana_giraffe wrote: post #388
apexalpha wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard this story numerous times as "haha in America X". Many of these stories go around the Netherlands... "in America someone sued McDonald's because the coffee was hot" "in America it says on the box to not microwave cats because someone once did" "in America you get a gun when you open a bank account" Etc.. Oh well I'm sure similar incorrect stories about Europe float around America.

I had a coworker from the Netherlands over recently. I think by the end of the trip he thought I was making stuff up trying to correct this misconceptions. I do know he never believed me about the hot coffee lawsuit. Sample set of 1, but it was odd for someone not from America, and indeed it was his first time in America, to be as misinformed about things. Not knowing things is fine, but knowing wrong facts, and refu…

Out of curiosity do you have any particular examples other than the coffee lawsuit?

Re: Google’s GDPR Workaround

#437

Post by feanaro »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #220
feanaro wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about systematic, deliberate, deceptive privacy violations in order to increase profits? That seems like a pretty distinct category from the cases you are concerned with.

> systematic, deliberate, deceptive I'll take your word for it, the evidence doesn't look clear cut to me, > privacy violations Again, who cares if it was just your shoe size? We should not send someone to jail for leaking who your favorite pop star is. Did it, or could it, do harm ? This is a nearly universal standard used to assess how someone is punished according to the law. > in order to increase profits Of cour…

The point is simple, though: they cannot do it to increase profits. Doing it for profit makes it more jarring than, say, collecting extraneous personal information through an error.

Your shoe size point is simply a strawman. You've chosen one arbitrary data point in order to make the argument look less important. In any case, I'm of the opinion that neither Google nor the governments of the world should be allowed to do this kind of large scale surveillance and profiling.

And finally,

> We should not send someone to jail for leaking who your favorite pop star is.

I agree with this completely. However if it's not just my favourite pop star, but it also contains all the articles I've read in the last two weeks, and my age, and what I've recently bought... All of these neat little data points about me, neatly filed in a profile made just for me, then the natural question that arises is: Why do you even have this? Who allowed you to start building this profile on me and on thousands of others? The systematicity and scale of it is hard to argue against.

Re: Google’s GDPR Workaround

#438

Post by shanemhansen »

stonogo wrote: post #164
nindalf wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On HN it is taken as gospel that any information sent to a server will absolutely compromise your privacy. If anyone points out that the information is trivial or useless the rebuttal is instant - it can be cross referenced with other sources to build a complete profile of you. If you want to know which Go modules I use, go check out my github. They're listed right there in import statements. If I'm hacking on a proj…

> Literally what else could that man have done? He could have not sent all build-time network accesses to Google by default. It's that simple.

Is there any meaningful difference between what google knows about your modules and what npm knows about js modules? Or what a Debian mirror operator knows about your packages?

I get that Google changed the way go packages work, but I don't understand the difference between that and literally every package manager in existence.

Re: Google’s GDPR Workaround

#439

Post by redder2 »

Note: Brave boasts itself with helping you against tracking. Yet they build their own crypto to specifically let advertisers TRACK YOU! Oh the iroty. They may newer get your name and very personal details but your interests and browsing habits are BEING SOLD by Brave if you use BAT. Its quite the irony really.

Re: Google’s GDPR Workaround

#440

Post by rdbell »

ryan93 wrote: post #414
amelius wrote: post #64

Targeted ads are already a serious leak of information. If somebody looks over my shoulder and sees the ads presented to me, they can infer things about me. Also, if a malicious actor targets an ad to a group of people, and some of these people buy the advertised items, then the actor can infer things about those people not necessarily related to the items sold.

Why are so many people that paranoid. No one is gonna destroy your life because they saw your ads

Imagine someone giving a presentation to room full of co-workers and a web ad comes up saying something like "Resubscribe to Cannabis Weekly Delivery and get 10% off."

It's not hard to imagine a person's career being affected by something like that.

Post reply on HN