7 ms·

Are people really surprised about this anymore? I can't say that I am. Google is a company which makes a lot of money off of their platforms. I expect them to b

by jswny 10y ago

Are people really surprised about this anymore? I can't say that I am. Google is a company which makes a lot of money off of their platforms. I expect them to be collecting data wherever and whenever they can. I see stories like this every day but I've become accustomed to it because it's such a normal practice nowadays, especially from a company like google which provides so many advertising services. I'm not saying this is a good thing, absolutely not. I'm just saying that I've come to expect this kind of thing in the current day and age.

supernovae 10y ago
Maybe not surprised, but they begrudge everyone else for this more than they do google, and that's what I think sucks. It seems OK for Apple/Google to do whatever they need to do to have a competitive app store with all its analytics and understanding its customer to sell it advertising but if other companies do it, its all the sudden the sky is falling
- toyg 10y ago
  It's probably because Google is perceived as giving you something like search, email, maps etc, which is very valuable, and "in exchange" it does stuff that does not directly impact your life. Similarly with Apple, which also works as a status symbol. The sequence is also important: first they build services and products, sell (or give away) them on their merits, and then turn the analytics to 11. Doing both at the same time is a no-no, but once a user is dragged in, natural laziness and other migration costs kick in. They are long cons, and to be fair, the products are pretty nice.
  - KeepFlying 10y ago
    The products are very nice. And to a point I have started to trust Google innately. Not that that is necessarily a good thing. I understand their need for data. It makes business and technical sense. I just wish they made more of an effort to anonymous it. (but that won't happen as long as ads are the primary market of the web)
    - bdcravens 10y ago
      I think Google has done a great job of convincing us they're a tech company as opposed to an advertising company.
  - lostlogin 10y ago
    Apple service vary rarely suck people in. They usually start as unreliable nightmare and slowly grow into something usable, eventually rewarding user persistence with near on days of almost completely bug free usage.
- dredmorbius 10y ago
  Slack shown Google is lessenning markedly. With very good cause.
whamlastxmas 10y ago
I make the same assumption and the chilling effect is frustrating. I assume everything I type on the internet is able to be tied back to me if anyone at the NSA etc wanted to look at me specifically. Unless you always use a VPN (or Tor) for all of your accounts and go through the unreasonable efforts of preventing browser fingerprinting, chances are this is true for everyone. And even those efforts are thwarted if they seize your devices, unless you use something like Tails OS. Anonymity on the internet is dead for the regular user and it sucks. I wish something like Freenet was better and had more users/content.
- retox 10y ago
  >Anonymity on the internet is dead All thanks to advertising companies. What a rotten state of affairs.
  - nickpsecurity 10y ago
    All thanks to the users of advertising companies who trade privacy for free or cheaper stuff. We used to have paid, more private tech. Still do actually. Almost no money in it with bankruptcies and acquisitions by shady firms more common than getting on Global 2000.
    - throwaway7767 10y ago
      This feels a bit like blaming unsafe working conditions and 12-hour work days at the beginning of the industrial revolution on workers, because they signed the contracts (this was the prevailing narrative from factory owners at the time too). At some point, society came to the conclusion that the workers and factory owners were not on equal footing, and so rules were instated, despite strong protests from the factory owners that contract law was sacrosanct and workers should be free to agree to anything. Perhaps it's time for regulation to solve this dilemma?
      - cmdrfred 10y ago
        Also remember that the factory owners at the time screamed that they could not afford any changes and it would bankrupt them and destroy the economy.
techthroway443 10y ago
Sad state of affairs when an article about encroaching users privacy is met with such indifference.
- voidz 10y ago
  Personally I'm not indifferent about any of this; it's very worrying, but I usually just have no idea what to say that contributes. So I, like most people I assume, prefer to lurk rather than to be vocal and emotional about what's going on. Besides all of that, the older I get, the more I realise the following two things: #1 that we're entirely in the dark ages of technology (and science to a lesser extent), regardless of the technology we have acquired, because society, governance and the public discourses all seem so very crude - we don't know how to handle our newly found powers and dogmas are still very existent: they've just moved from religion to science and technology; and #2: that the entire ordeal we find ourselves in is wholly inevitable, and, for the most part, much less important than it appears to be, perhaps even insignificant in the grand scheme of things. I don't believe that there is going to be a global doom scenario, or at least, not more than medieval witch hunts and the rise (and 'fall' of sorts) of the Roman Catholic power and influence structure. Historically speaking I'm inclined to think that the only element of humanity that survives everything that's happened, is human bonding and the forming of relationships and communities. In Roman Catholic wording, I'd say that everything else is a lot more temporal, and also very volatile and subject to change. If that comes across as indifference, so be it. But that's just how I see things now, so feel free to poke holes in my theory.
intopieces 10y ago
>Are people really surprised about this anymore? There is a significant portion of the population that doesn't know what metadata even is, much less that a company they use collects it and why that might be a problem.
devy 10y ago
Being a platform company doesn't necessarily mean you need to do surveillance on everyone who's on your platform! Apple's big move to differential privacy is one example of that.
- cLeEOGPw 10y ago
  You sincerely believe Apple doesn't collect every single message, every single site you ever visit and doesn't sell that information to advertisers? You are cute. Apple's push for "privacy" has only one purpose - to cash in on government from the information. Now government gets it for free, so when there will be "privacy" they will need to pay money to Apple to read it. If there wouldn't be profit, Apple wouldn't push for any "privacy".
pjmlp 10y ago
I now expect the world to fall down on Google as they did on Microsoft with Windows 10, or will the SV darling be forgiven?
selmat 10y ago
Few years ago i worked in security software company (antivirus, firewall etc). We collected almost all possible data about users. You can imagine what kind of data...system uptime, configuration, web searching history, even bank payment details. From those days i am not surprised with this practice.
x2398dh1 10y ago
Personally I am not surprised in the sense that we could anticipate the coming occurrence of Google attempting to collect data in a reasonable manner, with the definition of reasonable tracking what people's current expectations actually are. When you say, "wherever and whenever," I would be surprised if I found out that Google had put up a bunch of thermal webcams around my house and were just looking at where I was inside of the house at all times. That would fall under the definition of, "wherever and whenever they can," but I don't believe they are doing that. However, they could be...and if an article comes out showing that they do, I will be surprised by that, yes. I was surprised to learn that Google was logging on to passwordless WiFi networks through the Streetview car. If they make a similarly high jump in their spying activity according to what people think they might be doing, I will be surprised. However if they just sort of track people's normal expectations, I won't be surprised. I think Google is still abiding by their, "don't be evil," mantra still applies, but what is considered evil by the majority of Google users changes over time. Does that make sense or no?
cLeEOGPw 10y ago
I just treat all my calls and SMS and whatever that goes through any phone or computer as publicly accessible information. Because that's what it basically is. If you want privacy, meet the person and talk to him, don't expect corporations to do anything in your interest that they are not forced to do.

by jswny 10y ago

supernovae 10y ago

Maybe not surprised, but they begrudge everyone else for this more than they do google, and that's what I think sucks. It seems OK for Apple/Google to do whatever they need to do to have a competitive app store with all its analytics and understanding its customer to sell it advertising but if other companies do it, its all the sudden the sky is falling

toyg 10y ago
It's probably because Google is perceived as giving you something like search, email, maps etc, which is very valuable, and "in exchange" it does stuff that does not directly impact your life. Similarly with Apple, which also works as a status symbol. The sequence is also important: first they build services and products, sell (or give away) them on their merits, and then turn the analytics to 11. Doing both at the same time is a no-no, but once a user is dragged in, natural laziness and other migration costs kick in. They are long cons, and to be fair, the products are pretty nice.
- KeepFlying 10y ago
  The products are very nice. And to a point I have started to trust Google innately. Not that that is necessarily a good thing. I understand their need for data. It makes business and technical sense. I just wish they made more of an effort to anonymous it. (but that won't happen as long as ads are the primary market of the web)
  - bdcravens 10y ago
    I think Google has done a great job of convincing us they're a tech company as opposed to an advertising company.
- lostlogin 10y ago
  Apple service vary rarely suck people in. They usually start as unreliable nightmare and slowly grow into something usable, eventually rewarding user persistence with near on days of almost completely bug free usage.
dredmorbius 10y ago
Slack shown Google is lessenning markedly. With very good cause.

whamlastxmas 10y ago

I make the same assumption and the chilling effect is frustrating. I assume everything I type on the internet is able to be tied back to me if anyone at the NSA etc wanted to look at me specifically. Unless you always use a VPN (or Tor) for all of your accounts and go through the unreasonable efforts of preventing browser fingerprinting, chances are this is true for everyone. And even those efforts are thwarted if they seize your devices, unless you use something like Tails OS. Anonymity on the internet is dead for the regular user and it sucks. I wish something like Freenet was better and had more users/content.

retox 10y ago
>Anonymity on the internet is dead All thanks to advertising companies. What a rotten state of affairs.
- nickpsecurity 10y ago
  All thanks to the users of advertising companies who trade privacy for free or cheaper stuff. We used to have paid, more private tech. Still do actually. Almost no money in it with bankruptcies and acquisitions by shady firms more common than getting on Global 2000.
  - throwaway7767 10y ago
    This feels a bit like blaming unsafe working conditions and 12-hour work days at the beginning of the industrial revolution on workers, because they signed the contracts (this was the prevailing narrative from factory owners at the time too). At some point, society came to the conclusion that the workers and factory owners were not on equal footing, and so rules were instated, despite strong protests from the factory owners that contract law was sacrosanct and workers should be free to agree to anything. Perhaps it's time for regulation to solve this dilemma?
    - cmdrfred 10y ago
      Also remember that the factory owners at the time screamed that they could not afford any changes and it would bankrupt them and destroy the economy.

techthroway443 10y ago

Sad state of affairs when an article about encroaching users privacy is met with such indifference.

voidz 10y ago
Personally I'm not indifferent about any of this; it's very worrying, but I usually just have no idea what to say that contributes. So I, like most people I assume, prefer to lurk rather than to be vocal and emotional about what's going on. Besides all of that, the older I get, the more I realise the following two things: #1 that we're entirely in the dark ages of technology (and science to a lesser extent), regardless of the technology we have acquired, because society, governance and the public discourses all seem so very crude - we don't know how to handle our newly found powers and dogmas are still very existent: they've just moved from religion to science and technology; and #2: that the entire ordeal we find ourselves in is wholly inevitable, and, for the most part, much less important than it appears to be, perhaps even insignificant in the grand scheme of things. I don't believe that there is going to be a global doom scenario, or at least, not more than medieval witch hunts and the rise (and 'fall' of sorts) of the Roman Catholic power and influence structure. Historically speaking I'm inclined to think that the only element of humanity that survives everything that's happened, is human bonding and the forming of relationships and communities. In Roman Catholic wording, I'd say that everything else is a lot more temporal, and also very volatile and subject to change. If that comes across as indifference, so be it. But that's just how I see things now, so feel free to poke holes in my theory.

intopieces 10y ago

>Are people really surprised about this anymore? There is a significant portion of the population that doesn't know what metadata even is, much less that a company they use collects it and why that might be a problem.

devy 10y ago

Being a platform company doesn't necessarily mean you need to do surveillance on everyone who's on your platform! Apple's big move to differential privacy is one example of that.

cLeEOGPw 10y ago
You sincerely believe Apple doesn't collect every single message, every single site you ever visit and doesn't sell that information to advertisers? You are cute. Apple's push for "privacy" has only one purpose - to cash in on government from the information. Now government gets it for free, so when there will be "privacy" they will need to pay money to Apple to read it. If there wouldn't be profit, Apple wouldn't push for any "privacy".

pjmlp 10y ago

I now expect the world to fall down on Google as they did on Microsoft with Windows 10, or will the SV darling be forgiven?

selmat 10y ago

Few years ago i worked in security software company (antivirus, firewall etc). We collected almost all possible data about users. You can imagine what kind of data...system uptime, configuration, web searching history, even bank payment details. From those days i am not surprised with this practice.

x2398dh1 10y ago

Personally I am not surprised in the sense that we could anticipate the coming occurrence of Google attempting to collect data in a reasonable manner, with the definition of reasonable tracking what people's current expectations actually are. When you say, "wherever and whenever," I would be surprised if I found out that Google had put up a bunch of thermal webcams around my house and were just looking at where I was inside of the house at all times. That would fall under the definition of, "wherever and whenever they can," but I don't believe they are doing that. However, they could be...and if an article comes out showing that they do, I will be surprised by that, yes. I was surprised to learn that Google was logging on to passwordless WiFi networks through the Streetview car. If they make a similarly high jump in their spying activity according to what people think they might be doing, I will be surprised. However if they just sort of track people's normal expectations, I won't be surprised. I think Google is still abiding by their, "don't be evil," mantra still applies, but what is considered evil by the majority of Google users changes over time. Does that make sense or no?

cLeEOGPw 10y ago

I just treat all my calls and SMS and whatever that goes through any phone or computer as publicly accessible information. Because that's what it basically is. If you want privacy, meet the person and talk to him, don't expect corporations to do anything in your interest that they are not forced to do.