10 ms·

I think Google is a lot less creepy than Facebook. Yes, they vacuum a lot of data, but I do get directly related benefits from it, as well as controls that I tr

by dannyw 9y ago

I think Google is a lot less creepy than Facebook. Yes, they vacuum a lot of data, but I do get directly related benefits from it, as well as controls that I trust. Example: Location history. It is turned off by default. I chose to turn it on, so I can know places I’ve been to previously (if I forget the name). It’s like a journal that writes itself. Google has its privacy issues, but on a whole I voluntarily choose to give them permission to collect my data, because I get direct value from it.

lucideer 9y ago
> controls that I trust. I think this trust might be misplaced. > Example: Location history. It is turned off by default. Displaying your location history to you is turned off by default. Google's own recording of your location, for their purposes, cannot be turned off.
- crankylinuxuser 9y ago
  > Example: Location history. It is turned off by default. Do you want to turn Location History on? Are you suuuuure you don't want to turn location history on? To use maps effectively you need location history on. Turn on? Location history may affect ____ you wanna turn it on? How about now, location history is a great thing to turn on.... EDIT: for those of you who downmodded this, the point was that if you have location history off, Google spams you constantly with requests to turn it on. You'll get this request for opening up maps, using Google Now, or a dozen other things generated from many apps. There is also no option to temporarily turn on for app. Not so nice uses of LocHis: https://www.androidauthority.com/google-android-location-history-tracking-832849/ https://www.androidauthority.com/google-android-location-his... Explains how LocHis tendrils are everywhere: https://qz.com/1183559/if-youre-using-an-android-phone-google-may-be-tracking-every-move-you-make/ https://qz.com/1183559/if-youre-using-an-android-phone-googl...
  - majormajor 9y ago
    I couldn't set a fucking timer with the Assistant on my Pixel without being told I need location history. Seemed like a low enough bar.
  - abawany 9y ago
    This. The repeated prompts almost seem intent on ensuring that one will click yes inadvertently at some point.
- lern_too_spel 9y ago
  > Google's own recording of your location, for their purposes, cannot be turned off. Citation needed. Android even lets you turn off AGPS, which collects anonymous location data to update itself. As far as I know, this is not even possible on iOS.
  - lmkg 9y ago
    I assume OP is talking about geo information inferred from IP Address.
    - Infernal 9y ago
      Or cell tower... or WiFi SSIDs... or NFC payments...
  - Froyoh 9y ago
    They do track it and will prevent logins from unusual locations. Happened to me when using a VPN.
    - pgeorgi 9y ago
      Yes, but not through GPS, or the location information compiled about my logins would be way more accurate than it is (often off by 100-200 km in any direction). Probably IP based geo location (that would naturally trigger with VPNs that give you an IP in $whereever). That has nothing to do with the GPS setting of your phone.
      - lucideer 9y ago
        I don't think anyone mentioned anything about GPS until now. We're talking about Google recording your location, which can be inferred from a number of sources, including GPS, WiPS/WFPS, IP, and others. WiPS/WFPS is the most commonly used by Google.
        pgeorgi 9y ago
- mda 9y ago
  This is not true.
  - lucideer 9y ago
    It is true. Firstly, I was pointing out one small example of Google's privacy settings being non-obvious, which the GP mentioned in their post. There are many, many others one could go into, but we'll stick with just user location privacy for now. Also, minor disclaimer: What Google does or doesn't collect varies over time (as their policies and regulation changes, and in response to various court-cases). What they might have done according to one source a certain number of weeks/months ago they might have since stopped doing. But my point is that they cannot be trusted to follow the implied behaviour of high-level settings. However, since you've refuted my statement, some examples: 1. Google's own terms at [0] > some information (such as the association of your Google Account to your Google Wifi network) is stored by Google even if all privacy controls are turned off. This is bundled with Google's tracking of the geographic location of each Wifi network to feed their WiPS/WFPS services. 2. As @lern_to_spell has alluded to, "Location Reporting" and "Location History" are separate settings; the former does allow you to turn off some (though not quite all) location recording for your Android device at least, but the latter setting is still very misleading, and the former setting comes with a sacrifice (some apps become unusable). See [1] 3. Even with all of the above granular settings and admissions in terms, Google still have demonstrated in the past that they cannot be trusted to follow even their own loose promises w.r.t. respecting user privacy. e.g. [2] [3] [4] - note these articles are spread over 3 years, and are about events from 6 years previous; not exactly a promising sign of Google's policies being corrected by the court actions. - [0] https://support.google.com/wifi/answer/6246642?hl=en https://support.google.com/wifi/answer/6246642?hl=en - [1] https://www.howtogeek.com/195647/googles-location-history-is-still-recording-your-every-move/ https://www.howtogeek.com/195647/googles-location-history-is... - [2] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/may/15/google-admits-storing-private-data https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/may/15/google-ad... - [3] https://www.wired.com/2012/05/google-wifi-fcc-investigation/ https://www.wired.com/2012/05/google-wifi-fcc-investigation/ - [4] http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-24047235 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-24047235
    - 9y ago
knuththetruth 9y ago
Google is helping the Pentagon kill people with drones. How could they be “less creepy” than Facebook(who I otherwise agree is awful)?
4684499 9y ago
Why doesn't such logic apply to Facebook? It’s like a journal that writes itself. Yes it's good, ONLY IF the data is solely used for this purpose. Same thing goes to Facebook. How could you possibly know what they did with your data? Google is actually creepier to me than Facebook just by comparing their market share in online advertising (Google is twice as much as Facebook), and how actively their officials engaged in political issues.
sharcerer 9y ago
Yeah. Basically there are 2 issues : security,privacy. With any data vased company privacy eill always be a concern so they should try to assure users by giving them top notch security. Google does that. Their security is great. Facebook: a big NO. Just a question. Does google listen through the microphone? Some people show demos on youtube that they talk on phone about something or even say something out loud and then see ads about it.
- ocdtrekkie 9y ago
  Google's security is as good as they cover their own rear on it. For instance, Google Chrome is hailed as being incredible at security, but they allow extensions which can read and modify the contents of every website you visit with little to no scrutiny. Malware is rampant and distributed directly from Google's extension market, but Chrome is "secure", because by definition, Chrome permits the extensions to be malicious, so it isn't a break in Chrome's definition of security. In this case, they just blame you for installing an extension that behaves badly.
  - cromwellian 9y ago
    Firefox extensions can be malicious too, but this has nothing at all to do with backend data security, a red herring. If you create an open system that allows users to do anything to their systems, you create footguns. I don’t see you whining that this is universally true for desktop computers as well.
    - icebraining 9y ago
      I agree with you, though it should be noted that Mozilla does review the addons submitted to AMO, including - if this hasn't changed in the past few years - reviewing the code. I don't know how effective those are in preventing malware, though.
      - UncleMeat 9y ago
        Human reviewers are not fabulous at detecting make are sight unseen. This is also wildly unscalable.
laythea 9y ago
Who says Google and Facebook don't share data?
throw2016 9y ago
That is misplaced. Android for instance is intentionally designed to leak like a sieve. The permission system is convoluted and designed to confuse lay users. Google search itself creepily insists on telling you your location on every search when it has nothing to do with it and is completely irrelevant. In this way it constantly seeks to legitimize creepy behavior and has gone all out to make stalking and hoovering up data look as if it is ok and harmless. Combine Google's massive access to data across properties and their creepy behavior and the results are far more sinister.

by dannyw 9y ago

lucideer 9y ago

> controls that I trust. I think this trust might be misplaced. > Example: Location history. It is turned off by default. Displaying your location history to you is turned off by default. Google's own recording of your location, for their purposes, cannot be turned off.

crankylinuxuser 9y ago
> Example: Location history. It is turned off by default. Do you want to turn Location History on? Are you suuuuure you don't want to turn location history on? To use maps effectively you need location history on. Turn on? Location history may affect ____ you wanna turn it on? How about now, location history is a great thing to turn on.... EDIT: for those of you who downmodded this, the point was that if you have location history off, Google spams you constantly with requests to turn it on. You'll get this request for opening up maps, using Google Now, or a dozen other things generated from many apps. There is also no option to temporarily turn on for app. Not so nice uses of LocHis: https://www.androidauthority.com/google-android-location-history-tracking-832849/ https://www.androidauthority.com/google-android-location-his... Explains how LocHis tendrils are everywhere: https://qz.com/1183559/if-youre-using-an-android-phone-google-may-be-tracking-every-move-you-make/ https://qz.com/1183559/if-youre-using-an-android-phone-googl...
- majormajor 9y ago
  I couldn't set a fucking timer with the Assistant on my Pixel without being told I need location history. Seemed like a low enough bar.
- abawany 9y ago
  This. The repeated prompts almost seem intent on ensuring that one will click yes inadvertently at some point.
lern_too_spel 9y ago
> Google's own recording of your location, for their purposes, cannot be turned off. Citation needed. Android even lets you turn off AGPS, which collects anonymous location data to update itself. As far as I know, this is not even possible on iOS.
- lmkg 9y ago
  I assume OP is talking about geo information inferred from IP Address.
  - Infernal 9y ago
    Or cell tower... or WiFi SSIDs... or NFC payments...
- Froyoh 9y ago
  They do track it and will prevent logins from unusual locations. Happened to me when using a VPN.
  - pgeorgi 9y ago
    Yes, but not through GPS, or the location information compiled about my logins would be way more accurate than it is (often off by 100-200 km in any direction). Probably IP based geo location (that would naturally trigger with VPNs that give you an IP in $whereever). That has nothing to do with the GPS setting of your phone.
    - lucideer 9y ago
      I don't think anyone mentioned anything about GPS until now. We're talking about Google recording your location, which can be inferred from a number of sources, including GPS, WiPS/WFPS, IP, and others. WiPS/WFPS is the most commonly used by Google.
      - pgeorgi 9y ago
mda 9y ago
This is not true.
- lucideer 9y ago
  It is true. Firstly, I was pointing out one small example of Google's privacy settings being non-obvious, which the GP mentioned in their post. There are many, many others one could go into, but we'll stick with just user location privacy for now. Also, minor disclaimer: What Google does or doesn't collect varies over time (as their policies and regulation changes, and in response to various court-cases). What they might have done according to one source a certain number of weeks/months ago they might have since stopped doing. But my point is that they cannot be trusted to follow the implied behaviour of high-level settings. However, since you've refuted my statement, some examples: 1. Google's own terms at [0] > some information (such as the association of your Google Account to your Google Wifi network) is stored by Google even if all privacy controls are turned off. This is bundled with Google's tracking of the geographic location of each Wifi network to feed their WiPS/WFPS services. 2. As @lern_to_spell has alluded to, "Location Reporting" and "Location History" are separate settings; the former does allow you to turn off some (though not quite all) location recording for your Android device at least, but the latter setting is still very misleading, and the former setting comes with a sacrifice (some apps become unusable). See [1] 3. Even with all of the above granular settings and admissions in terms, Google still have demonstrated in the past that they cannot be trusted to follow even their own loose promises w.r.t. respecting user privacy. e.g. [2] [3] [4] - note these articles are spread over 3 years, and are about events from 6 years previous; not exactly a promising sign of Google's policies being corrected by the court actions. - [0] https://support.google.com/wifi/answer/6246642?hl=en https://support.google.com/wifi/answer/6246642?hl=en - [1] https://www.howtogeek.com/195647/googles-location-history-is-still-recording-your-every-move/ https://www.howtogeek.com/195647/googles-location-history-is... - [2] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/may/15/google-admits-storing-private-data https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/may/15/google-ad... - [3] https://www.wired.com/2012/05/google-wifi-fcc-investigation/ https://www.wired.com/2012/05/google-wifi-fcc-investigation/ - [4] http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-24047235 http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-24047235
  - 9y ago

knuththetruth 9y ago

Google is helping the Pentagon kill people with drones. How could they be “less creepy” than Facebook(who I otherwise agree is awful)?

4684499 9y ago

Why doesn't such logic apply to Facebook? It’s like a journal that writes itself. Yes it's good, ONLY IF the data is solely used for this purpose. Same thing goes to Facebook. How could you possibly know what they did with your data? Google is actually creepier to me than Facebook just by comparing their market share in online advertising (Google is twice as much as Facebook), and how actively their officials engaged in political issues.

sharcerer 9y ago

Yeah. Basically there are 2 issues : security,privacy. With any data vased company privacy eill always be a concern so they should try to assure users by giving them top notch security. Google does that. Their security is great. Facebook: a big NO. Just a question. Does google listen through the microphone? Some people show demos on youtube that they talk on phone about something or even say something out loud and then see ads about it.

ocdtrekkie 9y ago
Google's security is as good as they cover their own rear on it. For instance, Google Chrome is hailed as being incredible at security, but they allow extensions which can read and modify the contents of every website you visit with little to no scrutiny. Malware is rampant and distributed directly from Google's extension market, but Chrome is "secure", because by definition, Chrome permits the extensions to be malicious, so it isn't a break in Chrome's definition of security. In this case, they just blame you for installing an extension that behaves badly.
- cromwellian 9y ago
  Firefox extensions can be malicious too, but this has nothing at all to do with backend data security, a red herring. If you create an open system that allows users to do anything to their systems, you create footguns. I don’t see you whining that this is universally true for desktop computers as well.
  - icebraining 9y ago
    I agree with you, though it should be noted that Mozilla does review the addons submitted to AMO, including - if this hasn't changed in the past few years - reviewing the code. I don't know how effective those are in preventing malware, though.
    - UncleMeat 9y ago
      Human reviewers are not fabulous at detecting make are sight unseen. This is also wildly unscalable.

laythea 9y ago

Who says Google and Facebook don't share data?

throw2016 9y ago

That is misplaced. Android for instance is intentionally designed to leak like a sieve. The permission system is convoluted and designed to confuse lay users. Google search itself creepily insists on telling you your location on every search when it has nothing to do with it and is completely irrelevant. In this way it constantly seeks to legitimize creepy behavior and has gone all out to make stalking and hoovering up data look as if it is ok and harmless. Combine Google's massive access to data across properties and their creepy behavior and the results are far more sinister.