15 ms·

> Stay evil. Wow. Google went a full 180 from being a company that promoted itself by saying "Don't be evil" to something evil. Couldn't Google have made its b

by vbcr 10y ago

> Stay evil. Wow. Google went a full 180 from being a company that promoted itself by saying "Don't be evil" to something evil. Couldn't Google have made its billions still being not evil, without its privacy issues, without its obnoxious desire for tracking everything. Did they turn to this evil for the money or just because they can do it (or if not someone else will).

romanovcode 10y ago
>Couldn't Google have made its billions still being not evil No. Google is advertising company and advertisement companies need a lot of user data for targeted ads.
- tanqueray 10y ago
  How does it benefit by keeping data forever though? Of what use is aged data?
  - hiddenkrypt 10y ago
    It doesn't. They need a constant stream of new data for their business model to work. Thus, they benefit from continuously collecting data on users.
    - tanqueray 10y ago
      So why do they store indefinitely? If they stated a retention period openly they'd get much less criticism over privacy.
      - yellow_postit 10y ago
        I'd assume for machine learning developments, specifically as training data and back testing. Build a new model with 3x the data you had before or be able to retrospectively see how a model would have performed over 3 years rather than 1.
      - miend 10y ago
        Don't forget that they're also entirely complicit to NSA demands for live access to data as well, per the somewhat-recent leaks. That's another level of evil above regular profit motivations.
- nzp 10y ago
  Even if they weren't (mainly) an advertising company, even if they charged for all the free things, they'd still need all the data they suck in to provide services they provide.
  - Sylos 10y ago
    That's simply not true. They collect a ton of data which they wouldn't have to collect, if they wouldn't run advertisements or could even just delete this data much earlier. There's even crap like Android not allowing you to selectively turn off the Internet Permission for apps, for which there is no good reason other than Google needing an internet connection to display their ads.
    - nzp 10y ago
      It's not true that machine learning and AI needs a lot of data to do what it does with Google's services? I guess you know something their engineers don't, so I'm looking forward to Sylos' Dataless AI & Co. I bet a lot of us would even pay good money for such a thing. Sigh, I'm not arguing that they don't collect for advertising, I'm not even defending them at all. It's just that the things they do are impossible to do without a huge amount of data, regardless of advertising. Again, if you're so sure that it is “simply not true”, here we are, YC is your oyster. Or any other tech VC fund for that matter.
thrillgore 10y ago
Google is a company that uses algorithms to sell ad space to you. How is a company not evil when you are the product?

by vbcr 10y ago

romanovcode 10y ago

>Couldn't Google have made its billions still being not evil No. Google is advertising company and advertisement companies need a lot of user data for targeted ads.

tanqueray 10y ago
How does it benefit by keeping data forever though? Of what use is aged data?
- hiddenkrypt 10y ago
  It doesn't. They need a constant stream of new data for their business model to work. Thus, they benefit from continuously collecting data on users.
  - tanqueray 10y ago
    So why do they store indefinitely? If they stated a retention period openly they'd get much less criticism over privacy.
    - yellow_postit 10y ago
      I'd assume for machine learning developments, specifically as training data and back testing. Build a new model with 3x the data you had before or be able to retrospectively see how a model would have performed over 3 years rather than 1.
    - miend 10y ago
      Don't forget that they're also entirely complicit to NSA demands for live access to data as well, per the somewhat-recent leaks. That's another level of evil above regular profit motivations.
nzp 10y ago
Even if they weren't (mainly) an advertising company, even if they charged for all the free things, they'd still need all the data they suck in to provide services they provide.
- Sylos 10y ago
  That's simply not true. They collect a ton of data which they wouldn't have to collect, if they wouldn't run advertisements or could even just delete this data much earlier. There's even crap like Android not allowing you to selectively turn off the Internet Permission for apps, for which there is no good reason other than Google needing an internet connection to display their ads.
  - nzp 10y ago
    It's not true that machine learning and AI needs a lot of data to do what it does with Google's services? I guess you know something their engineers don't, so I'm looking forward to Sylos' Dataless AI & Co. I bet a lot of us would even pay good money for such a thing. Sigh, I'm not arguing that they don't collect for advertising, I'm not even defending them at all. It's just that the things they do are impossible to do without a huge amount of data, regardless of advertising. Again, if you're so sure that it is “simply not true”, here we are, YC is your oyster. Or any other tech VC fund for that matter.

thrillgore 10y ago

Google is a company that uses algorithms to sell ad space to you. How is a company not evil when you are the product?