5 ms·

Sometimes I don't understand all the hatred toward Google having our data on their servers. Most alternative solutions offer fragmented services (as opposed to

Sometimes I don't understand all the hatred toward Google having our data on their servers. Most alternative solutions offer fragmented services (as opposed to the all-in-one experience I get with Google) and are too cumbersome to setup. Yes, I know data is sort of power these days. But before bashing at Google/Apple/Microsoft... and banning their services, people should ask themselves: "What sacrifices are they making and for what?" I mean, I would totally feel convenient when my contacts are synced on my devices and I get a unified experience. Google knowing about my contacts is just the price I pay to get that service and honestly, from my experience, it's better for Google to have my data because they keep adjusting the service I get in return.

kbenson 9y ago
It's the competing incentives of a company that provides data services to end-user customers and a company that mines as much information about people to sell advertising to companies. Without strong controls about what they can do, we are always at the whim of what they might do. Google feels like a fairly bipolar company from the outside, because they present two faces depending on who they are dealing with, end-users or companies looking to advertise. As an end-user, Google knowing all the little details about everything I do and many places I go (because analytics JS, G+ button inclusion, etc) is disconcerting. For a company looking to advertise, them not doing this all of a sudden would be disconcerting, and they would probably look to some other company that is doing so. It isn't just Google. Facebook knows a startlingly large amount about you too. I'm increasingly convinced this is one of those places where the market is failing us because the negative externalities are mostly hidden. Those are good places for targeted regulation. I wouldn't be entirely appeased, but a law about the ability to review all information collected about you from a company and strong controls about the access, sale and use of this information would go a long way towards making me less worried about Google (or whoever) changing quite a bit in the next decade and selling off the information.[1] Because think about it, how far away are Google, Facebook and the umpteen other ad agencies with complex profiles of you from usurping the credit bureaus? 1: Maybe what we need is an interesting billionaire to buy a lot of personal information on all the U.S. politicians from one of the less public agencies and publish it. I'm sure we would get a law passed in record time.
- bjelkeman-again 9y ago
  That is something we could crowdfund. Start with a few.
- AJ007 9y ago
  What happens when someone steals your identity/credentials and gets to see all of that information Google, FB, etc have about you?
  - kbenson 9y ago
    It sucks. Hopefully, they are held accountable. But do you honestly see an outcome where information is not collected at all? Because I don't, so as I see it we need to put the correct incentives in place to not only make it less likely but to handle when it inevitably does. Maybe a fine up to $X per account leaked with a soft cap (but absolutely no less than $1 or $2 per account) is levied. Losing 1 million accounts would hurt, so companies would make real decisions about what and when to collect data for liability reasons, and protect it better in many cases when they did.
cocoa19 9y ago
Great point. Would it be beneficial to create "open databases"? Instead of having companies own data (Google/Facebook), all data resides in public databases. This would work for services that do not need sensitive data and can be anonymized, such as what videos do I watch, what words I type/search, etc. This would help both privacy (I know what data is being recorded) and help small competitors thrive.
mikestew 9y ago
I mean, I would totally feel convenient when my contacts are synced on my devices and I get a unified experience. Google knowing about my contacts is just the price I pay to get that service Well, it's a question of what one is willing to pay. Me, I'm willing to pay actual U. S. dollars to Apple to get that same functionality without giving up (and perhaps I'm naive here) privacy. Personally, I like that well-defined transaction. The transaction that has taken place between yourself (and to some degree, me) and Google is much more fuzzy. Today Google does this with your data, but tomorrow? You call it "adjusting the service", I call it "getting more creepy". No right or wrong, you're happy, I'm happy, but from my POV there is a vast gulf in the price paid for the two competing services. The instant Apple starts doing Googly stuff, I'll dump them for the real thing. But I'll betcha Apple is quite aware of this.
- lern_too_spel 9y ago
  You're making the mistake of confusing collecting data with doing useful things with that data (whether it is useful to the company pr the customer). Apple collects the data. It is simply incapable (for now) of doing anything useful with the data. To the end user, the privacy implications are the same, perhaps worse because a company that isn't able to make use of data is probably less able to secure the data as well.

kbenson 9y ago

It's the competing incentives of a company that provides data services to end-user customers and a company that mines as much information about people to sell advertising to companies. Without strong controls about what they can do, we are always at the whim of what they might do. Google feels like a fairly bipolar company from the outside, because they present two faces depending on who they are dealing with, end-users or companies looking to advertise. As an end-user, Google knowing all the little details about everything I do and many places I go (because analytics JS, G+ button inclusion, etc) is disconcerting. For a company looking to advertise, them not doing this all of a sudden would be disconcerting, and they would probably look to some other company that is doing so. It isn't just Google. Facebook knows a startlingly large amount about you too. I'm increasingly convinced this is one of those places where the market is failing us because the negative externalities are mostly hidden. Those are good places for targeted regulation. I wouldn't be entirely appeased, but a law about the ability to review all information collected about you from a company and strong controls about the access, sale and use of this information would go a long way towards making me less worried about Google (or whoever) changing quite a bit in the next decade and selling off the information.[1] Because think about it, how far away are Google, Facebook and the umpteen other ad agencies with complex profiles of you from usurping the credit bureaus? 1: Maybe what we need is an interesting billionaire to buy a lot of personal information on all the U.S. politicians from one of the less public agencies and publish it. I'm sure we would get a law passed in record time.

bjelkeman-again 9y ago
That is something we could crowdfund. Start with a few.
AJ007 9y ago
What happens when someone steals your identity/credentials and gets to see all of that information Google, FB, etc have about you?
- kbenson 9y ago
  It sucks. Hopefully, they are held accountable. But do you honestly see an outcome where information is not collected at all? Because I don't, so as I see it we need to put the correct incentives in place to not only make it less likely but to handle when it inevitably does. Maybe a fine up to $X per account leaked with a soft cap (but absolutely no less than $1 or $2 per account) is levied. Losing 1 million accounts would hurt, so companies would make real decisions about what and when to collect data for liability reasons, and protect it better in many cases when they did.

cocoa19 9y ago

Great point. Would it be beneficial to create "open databases"? Instead of having companies own data (Google/Facebook), all data resides in public databases. This would work for services that do not need sensitive data and can be anonymized, such as what videos do I watch, what words I type/search, etc. This would help both privacy (I know what data is being recorded) and help small competitors thrive.

mikestew 9y ago

I mean, I would totally feel convenient when my contacts are synced on my devices and I get a unified experience. Google knowing about my contacts is just the price I pay to get that service Well, it's a question of what one is willing to pay. Me, I'm willing to pay actual U. S. dollars to Apple to get that same functionality without giving up (and perhaps I'm naive here) privacy. Personally, I like that well-defined transaction. The transaction that has taken place between yourself (and to some degree, me) and Google is much more fuzzy. Today Google does this with your data, but tomorrow? You call it "adjusting the service", I call it "getting more creepy". No right or wrong, you're happy, I'm happy, but from my POV there is a vast gulf in the price paid for the two competing services. The instant Apple starts doing Googly stuff, I'll dump them for the real thing. But I'll betcha Apple is quite aware of this.

lern_too_spel 9y ago
You're making the mistake of confusing collecting data with doing useful things with that data (whether it is useful to the company pr the customer). Apple collects the data. It is simply incapable (for now) of doing anything useful with the data. To the end user, the privacy implications are the same, perhaps worse because a company that isn't able to make use of data is probably less able to secure the data as well.