3 ms·

I kind of like this. It's already in my email, which they host. I don't see why I should not want this feature, where they aggregate helpful information for me

by beaner 8y ago

I kind of like this. It's already in my email, which they host. I don't see why I should not want this feature, where they aggregate helpful information for me.

ve55 8y ago
You can't think up a single reason why you might not want every purchase you've made in your entire life to be logged in a centralized database completely outside of your control and view which will be kept forever and shared with an unknowable amount of unknown powerful entities that do not care about your well-being? Some people are going to have a very rough time when reality finally strikes them with all of its might. Perhaps it won't be you, but it will happen.
- beaner 8y ago
  They already have my email receipts, what's the difference? I use venmo - they have it too. My credit card companies are private companies. Where's the outrage regarding them? Google does not reveal my identity to partners; What you're spreading is fake news.
  - ve55 8y ago
    >Google does not reveal my identity to partners; What you're spreading is fake news. We know for a fact data was at least shared with the NSA in the past. We also know Google complies with legal requests, could have a partial data breach in the future, could change terms or undergo some type of merger or acquisition which would include your data, etc. The point here is that it is completely outside of your control. If you want to give all of the control in your life to Google because they have treated you (mostly) well (so far), that's up to you. But as for myself and others, we will refrain because we can think up many reasons why it might not be a smart choice in the long run.
    - beaner 8y ago
      Yeah, but now you're changing the argument from selling data for profit to simply complying with the law. If Google complying with the law is something someone feels at-risk for, then I understand not choosing to use them. But that's really a lesson that goes for any centralized service.
      - ve55 8y ago
        I haven't claimed that Google sells your data for a profit. Other centralized services carry risks as well, but some of them have profit models that are focused on something other than scooping up every bit of data possible, with some even having profit models specifically focused on the opposite.
  - colanderman 8y ago
    > What you're spreading is fake news. I suggest avoiding this phrase if you are trying to have a serious debate. It's overused to the point of obnoxiousness, and doesn't even apply here. (The person you replied to posed a question. Questions are not "news", nor can be described as "fake".)
    - beaner 8y ago
      The question was based on an assumption that the data is shared. It was that assumption that I was calling out, an assumption that is very much in the news, and which is untrue, but also known to be untrue by some and still promoted, making it fake.
- charlesism 8y ago
  > when reality finally strikes them with all of its might. In case someone accuses @ve55 of melodrama, "reality" could be as banal as your most embarrassing personal emails leaking to the world.
  - beaner 8y ago
    That seems like an argument against centralized mail hosts, which is a very different thing that what this thread is ostensibly for.
    - charlesism 8y ago
      If third parties have access your mail db, it's more like a "decentralized mail host" ;) That said, I see someone changed the title of the post. Now discussion here will be about two completely different subjects.
  - ve55 8y ago
    It could, but an email leak can be much more than it sounds. We have already had data breaches that have resulted in multiple deaths[1]. Just wait until we have one many times worse than this. Data breaches of the future will cause more than just a few suicides. Some may eventually cause war. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashley_Madison_data_breach#Impact_and_ethics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashley_Madison_data_breach#Imp....
- AndrewKemendo 8y ago
  Retailers and Credit Card companies have been trading your purchasing data for decades. Acxiom has made billions doing exactly that since the 90s. "Database marketing" companies are just ad networks based on consumer purchasing behavior they buy from retailers and CC companies. The difference is that those data brokers are just terrible at actually delivering products and value from the data they are getting. At least Google can make their "free" services better as a result.
onion2k 8y ago
If all they're doing is presenting your data in a better way then it's great. However, it's very likely that they're also selling adverts based on that data, and possibly selling the data itself. Do you really want your health insurance provider to be able to buy a list of restaurant bookings you've made? Or how about the airline you're about to book with knowing what you paid a competitor last time so they don't need to discount their prices for you to buy? Would you be happy paying more for things because you use Gmail?
- beaner 8y ago
  I think this comment is a great example of why I think most of the privacy concerns, especially around Google these days, are mostly overblown. I am not afraid of that example happening because that is not how Google operates. Google makes money by connecting ads to search queries. An advertiser makes an ad, says "make it appear for the term 'xbox'", and it shows up on Google for searches of Xbox. The advertiser has absolutely no idea who I am, and google never "sold my data". Who would even by such data in any volume meaningful enough for Google to consider it as a source of revenue compared to ads, especially given the privacy concerns? I don't know for sure, but I suspect that Google's own terms even explicitly prevent them from revealing my identity in such a way. To be Frank, I have a suspicion that HN has been bamboozled by a continuous Apple smear campaign. When Android started becoming more of a threat, and they pretty obviously couldn't take on things like Maps, they defaulted to an argument that they sort of have by default, by virtue of the fact that they sell hardware, not software: Privacy. And they're not even that good at it. Remember the mac root mistake not too long ago? Google actually has to maintain strict data privacy to survive. Apple, not so much. It's an easy argument for them to promote, and people are lapping it up. Google had a "data extraction team" (I forget what it was actually called), before it was even cool. It was a team internally years ago that was like, "people have a right to view, export, and remove their own data, so we're going to build that into Google products." And they were allowed to do that. Like, years ago. A long time before this recent wave of skepticism started. I always appreciated that. You heard stories of that kind of thing from Google, then. Hardly ever competitors.
  - romed 8y ago
homero 8y ago
Because it stays even if you delete the email

by beaner 8y ago

I kind of like this. It's already in my email, which they host. I don't see why I should not want this feature, where they aggregate helpful information for me.

ve55 8y ago

You can't think up a single reason why you might not want every purchase you've made in your entire life to be logged in a centralized database completely outside of your control and view which will be kept forever and shared with an unknowable amount of unknown powerful entities that do not care about your well-being? Some people are going to have a very rough time when reality finally strikes them with all of its might. Perhaps it won't be you, but it will happen.

beaner 8y ago
They already have my email receipts, what's the difference? I use venmo - they have it too. My credit card companies are private companies. Where's the outrage regarding them? Google does not reveal my identity to partners; What you're spreading is fake news.
- ve55 8y ago
  >Google does not reveal my identity to partners; What you're spreading is fake news. We know for a fact data was at least shared with the NSA in the past. We also know Google complies with legal requests, could have a partial data breach in the future, could change terms or undergo some type of merger or acquisition which would include your data, etc. The point here is that it is completely outside of your control. If you want to give all of the control in your life to Google because they have treated you (mostly) well (so far), that's up to you. But as for myself and others, we will refrain because we can think up many reasons why it might not be a smart choice in the long run.
  - beaner 8y ago
    Yeah, but now you're changing the argument from selling data for profit to simply complying with the law. If Google complying with the law is something someone feels at-risk for, then I understand not choosing to use them. But that's really a lesson that goes for any centralized service.
    - ve55 8y ago
      I haven't claimed that Google sells your data for a profit. Other centralized services carry risks as well, but some of them have profit models that are focused on something other than scooping up every bit of data possible, with some even having profit models specifically focused on the opposite.
- colanderman 8y ago
  > What you're spreading is fake news. I suggest avoiding this phrase if you are trying to have a serious debate. It's overused to the point of obnoxiousness, and doesn't even apply here. (The person you replied to posed a question. Questions are not "news", nor can be described as "fake".)
  - beaner 8y ago
    The question was based on an assumption that the data is shared. It was that assumption that I was calling out, an assumption that is very much in the news, and which is untrue, but also known to be untrue by some and still promoted, making it fake.
charlesism 8y ago
> when reality finally strikes them with all of its might. In case someone accuses @ve55 of melodrama, "reality" could be as banal as your most embarrassing personal emails leaking to the world.
- beaner 8y ago
  That seems like an argument against centralized mail hosts, which is a very different thing that what this thread is ostensibly for.
  - charlesism 8y ago
    If third parties have access your mail db, it's more like a "decentralized mail host" ;) That said, I see someone changed the title of the post. Now discussion here will be about two completely different subjects.
- ve55 8y ago
  It could, but an email leak can be much more than it sounds. We have already had data breaches that have resulted in multiple deaths[1]. Just wait until we have one many times worse than this. Data breaches of the future will cause more than just a few suicides. Some may eventually cause war. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashley_Madison_data_breach#Impact_and_ethics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashley_Madison_data_breach#Imp....
AndrewKemendo 8y ago
Retailers and Credit Card companies have been trading your purchasing data for decades. Acxiom has made billions doing exactly that since the 90s. "Database marketing" companies are just ad networks based on consumer purchasing behavior they buy from retailers and CC companies. The difference is that those data brokers are just terrible at actually delivering products and value from the data they are getting. At least Google can make their "free" services better as a result.

onion2k 8y ago

If all they're doing is presenting your data in a better way then it's great. However, it's very likely that they're also selling adverts based on that data, and possibly selling the data itself. Do you really want your health insurance provider to be able to buy a list of restaurant bookings you've made? Or how about the airline you're about to book with knowing what you paid a competitor last time so they don't need to discount their prices for you to buy? Would you be happy paying more for things because you use Gmail?

beaner 8y ago
I think this comment is a great example of why I think most of the privacy concerns, especially around Google these days, are mostly overblown. I am not afraid of that example happening because that is not how Google operates. Google makes money by connecting ads to search queries. An advertiser makes an ad, says "make it appear for the term 'xbox'", and it shows up on Google for searches of Xbox. The advertiser has absolutely no idea who I am, and google never "sold my data". Who would even by such data in any volume meaningful enough for Google to consider it as a source of revenue compared to ads, especially given the privacy concerns? I don't know for sure, but I suspect that Google's own terms even explicitly prevent them from revealing my identity in such a way. To be Frank, I have a suspicion that HN has been bamboozled by a continuous Apple smear campaign. When Android started becoming more of a threat, and they pretty obviously couldn't take on things like Maps, they defaulted to an argument that they sort of have by default, by virtue of the fact that they sell hardware, not software: Privacy. And they're not even that good at it. Remember the mac root mistake not too long ago? Google actually has to maintain strict data privacy to survive. Apple, not so much. It's an easy argument for them to promote, and people are lapping it up. Google had a "data extraction team" (I forget what it was actually called), before it was even cool. It was a team internally years ago that was like, "people have a right to view, export, and remove their own data, so we're going to build that into Google products." And they were allowed to do that. Like, years ago. A long time before this recent wave of skepticism started. I always appreciated that. You heard stories of that kind of thing from Google, then. Hardly ever competitors.
- romed 8y ago

homero 8y ago

Because it stays even if you delete the email