4 ms·

> The problem I have is Google is doing this A/B testing on their public apps in the wild. I don't know if I'm getting the best interface at this moment or am b

> The problem I have is Google is doing this A/B testing on their public apps in the wild. I don't know if I'm getting the best interface at this moment or am being a guinea pig for some experiment. My problem with that reasoning is that you're assuming that there is a best interface and that what it is is already known. A/B testing is usually done to determine which choice is the best, how will they know if they don't test? Also who decides what is best? Does best mean that it's incredibly easy to use for 90% of tasks but terribly hard for the other 10% for some reason, or that it's moderately easy to use for 100% of tasks? > I think experiments should be done in controlled conditions with mock data and informed participants. The problem with this is that the mock data won't get you applicable results in a lot of cases. Along with that, an informed participant affects the selection further reducing how well the results reflect the real population of users. You've also likely agreed to this kind of testing in the TOS, so you might be considered to be the informed participant that you mention.

pdkl95 11y ago
Just because your experiment is difficult doesn't mean it's ethical to use other people's data without their informed consent.
- arebop 11y ago
  Businesses have experimented with "other people's data" forever. The clerk at the video store chats with customers, learns which ones are chatty, what recommendations work out, etc. This is considered to be good service. But a cloud software company does the same thing with an algorithm and a CPU and suddenly it's an outrageous violation of privacy. Suddenly we need informed consent protocols to change the signage on the store front or the font on the web page. Seems like an overreaction to me, assuming that all cloud companies are out to take zero-sum advantage of you.
  - pdkl95 11y ago
    Do you seriously not see a difference between the video store clerk recording people who voluntarily information and personal data such as browsing history? Nobody cares about Amazon using their own sales records and server logs to generate recommendations. The problem comes when technology companies decide that means they get to use any data. If you're fine with google using personal data, are you also fine with FedEx opening up every package they deliver to you? > take zero-sum advantage of you Nobody said "all" or "zero sum", which doesn't apply here, but "take advantage of you:" is pretty much a description of capitalism. On HN, this is usually called "monetizing".
    - Zigurd 11y ago
      Do you think fedex doesn't run analytics capable of telling them, based on parameters of your packages, some pretty deep things about you?
      - pdkl95 11y ago
        Of course they do. Traffic analysis is always a problem. They obviously know the src/dst addresses and the package dimensions (including weight), as those features are necessary for the the delivery. They still don't know what's inside the package. I really don't see why this boundary is hard to understand. With snail-mail (fedex, usps, etc) there are even laws that protect the boundary between the envelope and the private contents. Why would you think software would be different?
    - gohrt 11y ago
      Why is the boundary of a firm relevant? If Amazon buys a shoe store, does that make them more legitimate in their use of your shoe shoppng data than before? This seems like an arbitary choice that is biased in favor of big companies.
      - pdkl95 11y ago
        Incorporation isn't the boundary. Again, why are you conflating business data with the personal data of someone using a product that has nothing whatsoever to do with the business transaction. If Amazon buys a shoe store, they get the sales records and any other related data. They do not get to know where you walk with their shoes. If there is any confusion here, it is because of the recent trend in Services as a Software Substitute that makes the business's server necessary for normal use of their product. Some people seem to think this lets them open the packages they are conveying or storing.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

pdkl95 11y ago

Just because your experiment is difficult doesn't mean it's ethical to use other people's data without their informed consent.

arebop 11y ago
Businesses have experimented with "other people's data" forever. The clerk at the video store chats with customers, learns which ones are chatty, what recommendations work out, etc. This is considered to be good service. But a cloud software company does the same thing with an algorithm and a CPU and suddenly it's an outrageous violation of privacy. Suddenly we need informed consent protocols to change the signage on the store front or the font on the web page. Seems like an overreaction to me, assuming that all cloud companies are out to take zero-sum advantage of you.
- pdkl95 11y ago
  Do you seriously not see a difference between the video store clerk recording people who voluntarily information and personal data such as browsing history? Nobody cares about Amazon using their own sales records and server logs to generate recommendations. The problem comes when technology companies decide that means they get to use any data. If you're fine with google using personal data, are you also fine with FedEx opening up every package they deliver to you? > take zero-sum advantage of you Nobody said "all" or "zero sum", which doesn't apply here, but "take advantage of you:" is pretty much a description of capitalism. On HN, this is usually called "monetizing".
  - Zigurd 11y ago
    Do you think fedex doesn't run analytics capable of telling them, based on parameters of your packages, some pretty deep things about you?
    - pdkl95 11y ago
      Of course they do. Traffic analysis is always a problem. They obviously know the src/dst addresses and the package dimensions (including weight), as those features are necessary for the the delivery. They still don't know what's inside the package. I really don't see why this boundary is hard to understand. With snail-mail (fedex, usps, etc) there are even laws that protect the boundary between the envelope and the private contents. Why would you think software would be different?
  - gohrt 11y ago
    Why is the boundary of a firm relevant? If Amazon buys a shoe store, does that make them more legitimate in their use of your shoe shoppng data than before? This seems like an arbitary choice that is biased in favor of big companies.
    - pdkl95 11y ago
      Incorporation isn't the boundary. Again, why are you conflating business data with the personal data of someone using a product that has nothing whatsoever to do with the business transaction. If Amazon buys a shoe store, they get the sales records and any other related data. They do not get to know where you walk with their shoes. If there is any confusion here, it is because of the recent trend in Services as a Software Substitute that makes the business's server necessary for normal use of their product. Some people seem to think this lets them open the packages they are conveying or storing.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]