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

Fitbit is now officially part of Google

blog.fitbit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 387 posts

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#61

Post by freedomben »

aboringusername wrote: post #42

One thing that confuses me is why this data needs to be stored within the internet at all. Why can't I have an entirely offline driven system? Data stays local, no ability to upload it online at all, and all processing is done without ever needing the internet. That's a key criteria if I ever was thinking of getting a smart wearable, I'm not going to generate even more data that can be profited from and potentially u…

Arguing for jail, aka literally locking a human being in a cage, for any non-violent offense, let-alone getting hacked because your employees mad a mistake, is mindblowing to me.

I'm as irritated as you at data leaks from negligence, but jail? I thought jail was not supposed to be for "punishment" but rather to protect the public from someone too dangerous to allow free, and even then it should mainly target "rehabilitation."

You're now talking about using it clearly just for punishment (which I would argue we do all over the place, totally inconsistent with it's stated purpose). This is before we discuss whether jail is torture. Even if the "jail" is well regulated to prevent thing like violence and sexual abuse, it's terrible to lock a person in a cage. There are plenty of studies about the effects that has on a person's mind. Then you consider that you're soft blackballed from employment (and therefore society) when you get a "record" and can't pass a background check, and that the positive feedback loop leads to a life of poverty, crime, and suffering that is avoidable.

Please consider the significance of what you are arguing for here.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#62

Post by sitkack »

oops wrote: post #25
karimtr wrote: post #5

Anyone stopped using Fitbit as a result of this?

I did and I also deleted my account and data. I’ll probably get an Apple Watch but I’d prefer something eink and “dumber” with just clock, heartrate, steps, stairs and GPS, no accounts and no forced uploading to their servers would be ideal. I love the FitBit device though. If there’s some opensource way to keep using it without Google being involved I’ll probably try that.

It would be possible to DIY this, it might be clunkier than most would expect and have worse battery life.

*edit, found this eval kit by maxim

https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/maxim-integrated/...

Kinda expensive and not very open for an eval kit. The only somewhat difficult part is implementing the pulse oximetry signal chain and analysis software. Everything else is basic integration.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#63

Post by that_guy_iain »

breck wrote: post #33
that_guy_iain wrote: post #10

I was about to buy a new fitbit as my current one is basically dead after 4 years. But the way Google handles things they buy doesn't inspire confidence. I guess I'll investigate others and probably end up with an Apple Watch.

I have the Versa 2 and absolutely love it. Just gave the Apple Watch another spin but returned it. If you want an iPad on your wrist that's the way to go. If you just want health features I'd recommend the FitBits. Will probably upgrade to the Versa 3 or Sense, but the 2 is just awesome. I've also had the Charge 2, Charge, Ionic, Microsoft Band 2, and Microsoft Band 1. Versa 2 was a major leap. Finally, I still consi…

That is the thing, FitBit does exactly what I need. Tho considering my last one lasted me 4 years, even if I get a new one and Google destroy everything I'll still have 3-4 years of usage so it might be worth still buying a new FitBit.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#64

Post by ocdtrekkie »

PaulHoule wrote: post #3

Didn't they merge with Fitbit a long time ago?

They announced the acquisition in 2019 but it had to get regulatory approval first. A lot of people expected regulators to reject the acquisition.

I consider it a massive failure of our governments that whilst acknowledging Google is a monopoly and engaging in antitrust cases against them, they also permitted Google to buy a multibillion dollar company that will expand their monopoly.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#65

Post by brlewis »

sitkack wrote: post #54
aboringusername wrote: post #42

One thing that confuses me is why this data needs to be stored within the internet at all. Why can't I have an entirely offline driven system? Data stays local, no ability to upload it online at all, and all processing is done without ever needing the internet. That's a key criteria if I ever was thinking of getting a smart wearable, I'm not going to generate even more data that can be profited from and potentially u…

What really disappointed me about the fitbit was that it required it to be tethered to the phone and my account before it would function as a pedometer. It seems broken that I also have to have a phone, app store access to get a device to drive the pixels for data it already has. Every piece of hardware that does this is effectively "app store locked", your phone is now your software dongle for your hardware.

See the section "Don't have a mobile device available?" on https://www.fitbit.com/setup for desktop apps.

Some functions, like sleep tracking, are too computationally intensive to do on a wrist computer.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#67

Post by philtar »

Vermeulen wrote: post #15

I don't understand the fear of Google from FitBit users in these comments. Google has a clear user agreement with how they use your data, including not selling it - and they rely on users trusting them. I'd rather my data be with one of the tech giants than a unprofitable start up

This reads like a Google shill wrote it, but if not:

1) the fear of Google owning data is that they will be able to target us more and more. As if our internet behavior data wasn't enough, now they have our biological data.

2) the fact that they don't sell it misses the point because in fact they are the party we don't want the data to get to (along with Facebook et all). And you can bet your ass they'll sell it when they strapped for cash.

3) I would definitely not rather my data he with a tech giant who can map it with all my other data that they currently have.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#68

Post by brlewis »

petercooper wrote: post #28

What is a good lightweight 24/7 heart rate and sleep tracker that's not a Fitbit? I have an Apple Watch but the Fitbit's sleep tracking is way better and I keep it on for days (whereas I charge my Apple Watch overnight). I am super happy with my Fitbit but given Google I assume it will be "sunset" within a year or two so I want to switch early.

> I am super happy with my Fitbit but given Google I assume it will be "sunset" within a year or two

I work for Fitbit. I don't speak for Fitbit, but now that the deal is closed I can share my own opinions and ask my own questions.

What makes you think Google wants Apple to have the only good smart watch? That would be the main effect of sunsetting Fitbit.

Nest still exists after their 2014 acquisition by Google, and Nest is not as important to any other part of Google as Fitbit is to Android. Why would they be more inclined to sunset Fitbit?

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#69

Post by Sander3Utile »

freedomben wrote: post #61
aboringusername wrote: post #42

One thing that confuses me is why this data needs to be stored within the internet at all. Why can't I have an entirely offline driven system? Data stays local, no ability to upload it online at all, and all processing is done without ever needing the internet. That's a key criteria if I ever was thinking of getting a smart wearable, I'm not going to generate even more data that can be profited from and potentially u…

Arguing for jail, aka literally locking a human being in a cage, for any non-violent offense, let-alone getting hacked because your employees mad a mistake, is mindblowing to me. I'm as irritated as you at data leaks from negligence, but jail? I thought jail was not supposed to be for "punishment" but rather to protect the public from someone too dangerous to allow free, and even then it should mainly target "rehabil…

Well in that case the person would be going to jail because he can't be trusted with not exposing private information, so another form of protection

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#70

Post by aboringusername »

freedomben wrote: post #61
aboringusername wrote: post #42

One thing that confuses me is why this data needs to be stored within the internet at all. Why can't I have an entirely offline driven system? Data stays local, no ability to upload it online at all, and all processing is done without ever needing the internet. That's a key criteria if I ever was thinking of getting a smart wearable, I'm not going to generate even more data that can be profited from and potentially u…

Arguing for jail, aka literally locking a human being in a cage, for any non-violent offense, let-alone getting hacked because your employees mad a mistake, is mindblowing to me. I'm as irritated as you at data leaks from negligence, but jail? I thought jail was not supposed to be for "punishment" but rather to protect the public from someone too dangerous to allow free, and even then it should mainly target "rehabil…

Jail is used for a lot of "non-violent" crime, such as fraud if the judge/court thinks it's warranted. Jun Ying, Equifax's previous CIO did 4 months in jail and another did 8 months of home confinement.

Handling data is a privilege, not a right, and can come at a huge cost. Just look at Parler for example, they weren't even stripping EXIF data which depending on how you look at is is either great for those involved to be tracked and arrested or a terrifying oversight that will lead to huge repercussions...

Data can end lives, this has been proven time and again, it's just as dangerous as a knife or gun in certain circumstances and the crime of having it leaked must have an appropriate punishment

Post reply on HN