4 ms·

Not sure I would put much weight in an article with a click-bait label like "Google’s smart home Trojan horse". I know there are many that are suspicious of thi

Not sure I would put much weight in an article with a click-bait label like "Google’s smart home Trojan horse". I know there are many that are suspicious of this, but a site like arstechnica putting this in the title when it's, at best, speculation seems a bit sensationalist.

kuschku 11y ago
It’s not meant as in "takes all your data out", but as being the first step to make people use Google’s Smart Home devices.
- jader201 11y ago
  Maybe I'm being cynical, but it seems like the motive behind that wording was more likely to attract the privacy-conscious users -- as this phrase often implies -- rather than it being a hook for their other products. That's why I feel it's click-baity. Especially considering the talk around the device collecting data when it was announced.
  - simoncion 11y ago
    I think you're being overly cynical. After getting part-way through the article I understood that the "trojan horse" was inbuilt hooks for Google's (presumably) impending home automation hardware.
    - Kapow 11y ago
      If you're partway through the article, you've already taken the clickbait. The point is to confuse you with possibly misleading terms, so you click to read the article and see what they really meant.
      - simoncion 11y ago
        Kapow, I don't agree with your assessment.
nl 11y ago
In context the Trojan part of the title is: Google’s smart home Trojan horse. It's a Trojan horse because it is their way of rolling out "connected-home" devices without people having to decide to "move to a connected home". That's what all the non-enabled sensors and hardware are for. It's a smart play on Google's part, and Ars is correct to note it. It doesn't mean it is malicious in anyway.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  Smart or connected home stuff has never been about moving to such a home, its always been ways to enhance an existing home, so its bizarre to describe what you put out as unusual in anyway. And, "Trojan horse" always implies malicious deception; its an inappropriate metaphor for any other intended message. So, I'd say this is doubly misguided.
  - nl 11y ago
    >Smart or connected home stuff has never been about moving to such a home, its always been ways to enhance an existing home, so its bizarre to describe what you put out as unusual in anyway. [0] would disagree: "more elaborate systems could easily reach up to $1000 if you have a lot of hardware to install and don't shoot for the cheapest units you can get. Putting in a smart switch in three bedrooms, a living room and a kitchen can be $200-250 by itself, and that assumes a fairly spartan set up and excludes any power outlet installations. Be sure to tally up all of the parts you'll need before you start buying anything." >"Trojan horse" always implies malicious deception; its an inappropriate metaphor for any other intended message. It's commonly used in this way. [1][2][3] are good examples. [0] http://lifehacker.com/how-can-i-get-started-with-home-automation-510246491 http://lifehacker.com/how-can-i-get-started-with-home-automa... [1] http://www.taniaellis.com/blog/the-trojan-horse-changing-business-from-within/ http://www.taniaellis.com/blog/the-trojan-horse-changing-bus... [2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-schachner/a-trojan-horse-called-tidal_b_7163438.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-schachner/a-trojan-horse-... [3] http://www.techrepublic.com/article/microsofts-trojan-horse-strategy-to-rule-the-world/ http://www.techrepublic.com/article/microsofts-trojan-horse-...
- 11y ago

kuschku 11y ago

It’s not meant as in "takes all your data out", but as being the first step to make people use Google’s Smart Home devices.

jader201 11y ago
Maybe I'm being cynical, but it seems like the motive behind that wording was more likely to attract the privacy-conscious users -- as this phrase often implies -- rather than it being a hook for their other products. That's why I feel it's click-baity. Especially considering the talk around the device collecting data when it was announced.
- simoncion 11y ago
  I think you're being overly cynical. After getting part-way through the article I understood that the "trojan horse" was inbuilt hooks for Google's (presumably) impending home automation hardware.
  - Kapow 11y ago
    If you're partway through the article, you've already taken the clickbait. The point is to confuse you with possibly misleading terms, so you click to read the article and see what they really meant.
    - simoncion 11y ago
      Kapow, I don't agree with your assessment.

nl 11y ago

In context the Trojan part of the title is: Google’s smart home Trojan horse. It's a Trojan horse because it is their way of rolling out "connected-home" devices without people having to decide to "move to a connected home". That's what all the non-enabled sensors and hardware are for. It's a smart play on Google's part, and Ars is correct to note it. It doesn't mean it is malicious in anyway.

dragonwriter 11y ago
Smart or connected home stuff has never been about moving to such a home, its always been ways to enhance an existing home, so its bizarre to describe what you put out as unusual in anyway. And, "Trojan horse" always implies malicious deception; its an inappropriate metaphor for any other intended message. So, I'd say this is doubly misguided.
- nl 11y ago
  >Smart or connected home stuff has never been about moving to such a home, its always been ways to enhance an existing home, so its bizarre to describe what you put out as unusual in anyway. [0] would disagree: "more elaborate systems could easily reach up to $1000 if you have a lot of hardware to install and don't shoot for the cheapest units you can get. Putting in a smart switch in three bedrooms, a living room and a kitchen can be $200-250 by itself, and that assumes a fairly spartan set up and excludes any power outlet installations. Be sure to tally up all of the parts you'll need before you start buying anything." >"Trojan horse" always implies malicious deception; its an inappropriate metaphor for any other intended message. It's commonly used in this way. [1][2][3] are good examples. [0] http://lifehacker.com/how-can-i-get-started-with-home-automation-510246491 http://lifehacker.com/how-can-i-get-started-with-home-automa... [1] http://www.taniaellis.com/blog/the-trojan-horse-changing-business-from-within/ http://www.taniaellis.com/blog/the-trojan-horse-changing-bus... [2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-schachner/a-trojan-horse-called-tidal_b_7163438.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-schachner/a-trojan-horse-... [3] http://www.techrepublic.com/article/microsofts-trojan-horse-strategy-to-rule-the-world/ http://www.techrepublic.com/article/microsofts-trojan-horse-...
11y ago