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

81–90 of 387 posts

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#81

Post by akmarinov »

brlewis wrote: post #79
akmarinov wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have a very clear history of buying companies, carving out what they need from it and reselling it (Boston Dynamics, Motorola, HTC, etc). Chances are that Fitbit won't be around 2-3 years from now, hence no real reason to invest in a product from them now.

Like everyone who has an account on HN, I'm aware that there are companies acquired by Google that no longer exist. But some -- Android, youtube, Nest, etc. -- still exist. What makes you think Fitbit will fall in the former category? Random probability?

Usually the hardware companies they kill off eventually, Nest being the outlier.

I'm not saying that they'll 100% kill off Fitbit, but it's very likely. Google already does hardware and software that does a lot of the same stuff, no point in having 2 brands.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#82

Post by freedomben »

eberkund wrote: post #72
freedomben wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Are you against jail-time for all non-violent white collar crimes or just negligence in the realm of technology companies? Please don't assume that anyone with a different view hasn't considered the significance of their position.

Yes, I am against jail for non-violent crimes. I'm open to modern non-medieval ideas even for violent crimes. I don't have the answers there, but I wish there were more people caring about this. So far it seems to be only the far left (I don't consider that an insult) and anarcho-capitalists, but I wish more people that fall into the middle somewhere (like myself) would think about this. Usually people don't think about stuff that affects strangers all that much until it affects them or a loved one. That's a people problem in general and I don't know how to solve it either.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#83

Post by tristor »

karimtr wrote: post #5

Anyone stopped using Fitbit as a result of this?

I switched to an Apple Watch last year when I got one for my mom because of the fall detection, so that I could know how to use it and support her. The rest of my family still has Fitbits and I still prefer Fitbit for what it does (and the battery life). That said, in the wake of this announcement two people just got an Apple Watch ordered as an upcoming birthday gift because I don't think having Fitbits is a good idea anymore.

Google is not a company that respects their users. It's that simple. Apple doesn't respect developers, but it does respect users. Google respects neither. I'd say the current situation in tech is not especially positive for users generally, but having a product tied to Google, Facebook, or Amazon would be your worst case scenario, and I'm actively trying to excise these products from my life.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#84

Post by slumdev »

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…

Is there any deterrent benefit from potential jail time?

Companies with armies of lawyers are pretty good at establishing plausible deniability, so the "because your employees made a mistake" argument, while you advanced it in good faith, is constantly exploited as an excuse.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#85

Post by eh78ssxv2f »

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

There are many cases where Google has used dark patterns to gather data from users. Now, the ToS may mention those cases clearly, but that's not an excuse for the Google's behavior.

Recent examples: Google tracking users per Chrome installation ID [1], Chrome exempting Google sites from user site data setting [2], Chrome experimenting with silently proxying user traffic through their servers [3].

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22236106 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24817304 [3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25337995

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#87

Post by freedomben »

slumdev wrote: post #84
freedomben wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Is there any deterrent benefit from potential jail time? Companies with armies of lawyers are pretty good at establishing plausible deniability, so the "because your employees made a mistake" argument, while you advanced it in good faith, is constantly exploited as an excuse.

I honestly don't know. I worked with a company once that had regulatory burdens. They were young enough that they hadn't yet hired the first IT person, let alone a security team, so it was just regular devs trying to comply. Needless to say when I came in (as a regular dev that happens to specialize in security) I waved the red flag and pointed out the possible jail time to the executives, and they were not concerned, even though the laws explicitly lay out that "because your employees made a mistake" was unequivocally not an excuse (and this has held up in court by the way). I'm being ambiguous intentionally here so I can't give details.

But regardless whether there is a deterrent benefit, I think the reality is that jails effect non-executives and normal people (especially the closer to poverty you get) far more than they ever would executives. A much better approach IMHO would be to develop alternatives and phase out incarceration altogether (or at least as much as possible) by rolling them out broadly, would be a better, more humane solution.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#88

Post by petercooper »

brlewis wrote: post #68
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…

Google has a perception problem. Even if I can't logically defend how I feel about their likelihood of killing a product, it doesn't mean that image hasn't been built up over time by their actions. That's branding.

That aside, if they end up tying Fitbit accounts to Google accounts, the whole jig is up anyway, because no-one wants to buy a hardware product whose operation depends upon not having Google shut your account down with no recourse other than to raise a stink on sites like HN.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#89

Post by Dig1t »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #64
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.

Agreed, it is a complete disaster for privacy and competition in this space.

Re: Fitbit is now officially part of Google

#90

Post by zaptheimpaler »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #64
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.

Yep. Maybe they'll object to the acquisition a year later after Google has safely 5x 3-AZ replicated all the heart rate, sleep and location data from millions of people. Apparently Google is simultaneously a monopoly due to the market power they gained using data but yet safe enough to trust with pings every minute from people wearing a watch all day. Its nuts.
Post reply on HN