5 ms·

Consolidation of the services is nice, but I feel like this is just getting creepier and creepier. It’s like “put your entire digital existence onto our platfo

Consolidation of the services is nice, but I feel like this is just getting creepier and creepier. It’s like “put your entire digital existence onto our platform” Oh and by the way took “don’t be evil” out. Now give us all of your data, look at this beautiful UI! Sorry Google, I don’t trust you anymore, I used to love you, it used to be about the ideals and ideas, but now avarice has possessed and consumed you. No thanks.

mrhappyunhappy 8y ago
I’m surprised I had to scroll this far to see a privacy concern comment. Totally agree with you by the way. It feels like there is an ever growing privacy awareness yet companies like google keep pushing the cloud storage for typical consumer. I’d be curious to know how average person feels about storing their private photos in google’s servers.
- wstrange 8y ago
  My biggest fear is accidentally losing or deleting all my family photos. I don't trust myself to run proper backups and archival. I think the average consumer is in the same boat. They want someone else to take care of this problem.
nwellnhof 8y ago
They could win privacy-conscious users back by offering an ad and tracking free Google experience with the paid plans.
- Jnr 8y ago
  Disabling ad tracking is not going to change how they scan all the file contents and categorize them using AI. It might be even more effective for them than tracking you on web.
- xiphias2 8y ago
  They tried to do e2e encryption with Allo, then they integrated all the crappy smileys from it to their other messagong products, and got rid of Allo. The scary thing is that in theory they don't have ads on messaging, but if it would be true, they would have gone farther with e2e
- chappi42 8y ago
  They would need to compartmentalize their services to win me back. Some tracking I'd accept but I don't want them to aggregate my 'whole life'.
- Rjevski 8y ago
  Would anyone trust them to not silently still collect personal data? For example, even if they don't need the data now because you're paying not to see ads, they might still collect it so that they can show you "better" ads if/when you stop paying.
  - skybrian 8y ago
    I don't really get why people assume they're chaotic evil rather than lawful evil. This is a large company with lots of lawyers. Modulo bugs, they're going to make sure anything they do is covered by the privacy policy rather than leave an opening to be sued. So the answer is that I would trust that it (mostly) doesn't happen if the legal terms say it won't.
    - Yizahi 8y ago
      It is not illegal to spy on users, you just need to call it "metadata".
      - dmix 8y ago
        And as long as it has a warrant for one individual + multiple hops from that person you potentially legally sweep up hundreds/thousands of other innocent people's information - often full bore, not just metadata.
    - Rjevski 8y ago
      Isn't there a consistent history of shady practices from such companies, like purposely ambiguous language in the Android location activity preferences, or similar stuff from Facebook when they try to make you share more data with them like contacts?
  - xelhark 8y ago
    There would be no economic advantage to that kind of behavior. I'm a fan of paid services rather than ad-based services because it switches the focus. The customer is the person that pays, not the advertising company, so the company will have an economic advantage to give a better service to you, not to the ad companies. Something like that would just jeopardise the customer for no particular economic gain, so yeah, I'd trust them.
omeid2 8y ago
The more interesting part is that the line between "digital existence" and real life is getting blurrier everyday.
mark_l_watson 8y ago
I basically agree with you, but my behavior is not consistent in regards to Google and privacy: I use Fastmail, DuckDuckGo, use Firefox containers for Google (and FB and Twitter), use Siri, etc. But, I have put all my pictures on Google Photos (used to be Picasa) since they rolled out the service and I buy a bulk of entertainment from Google Play movies/books and use GCP. So I do let them track me in some ways.
kyrra 8y ago
To quote Google's code of conduct as it exists today: > And remember… don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up! https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/ https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/ Media headlines from the time gave the impression that it was removed, which was absolutely false.
- dmix 8y ago
  Strange, I remember one person who spoke up at Google with what he believed was a legitimate problem and was subsequently tarred, feathered, and fired. Sets a good precedent for this culture they're promoting.
- o_____________o 8y ago
  Virtue signaling in a generic slogan all but guarantees the peanut gallery has a petty grenade to throw at you for the rest of time. Google does something unfavorable: "don't be evil, HUH?" Google takes away the slogan: "so now you're evil, HUH?"
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- malux85 8y ago
  Factually correct, but missing the point entirely. Classic Robot. It's ok Google, I'm not angry, I'm just disappointed. You can go back to relentlessly optimizing the max($) function, but everyone is wising up to you. I'm actually more worried about Amazon, Amazon are an aggressive weed with reaching tendrils, you are more like an aging billionaire, wealthy, unable to innovate, jaded, your spark has gone. Your questionable activity means you no longer command the respect you once did. The greats are ambivalent about working for you, and the ones you hold - you only hold with money. When you have to pay all the time, it's not love (that's a joke, stand down the database queries) Incidentally, don't you sometimes wonder why your founders are gone? Why Schmidt is gone? The greats have left, because of who you have become.
  - techsin101 8y ago
kodablah 8y ago
To be fair, this stuff is probably not for the privacy conscious (and neither is FB). I doubt they mind you not signing up, you are not their target. Lots of other people are happy to give them all of their data, and that's ok.

mrhappyunhappy 8y ago

I’m surprised I had to scroll this far to see a privacy concern comment. Totally agree with you by the way. It feels like there is an ever growing privacy awareness yet companies like google keep pushing the cloud storage for typical consumer. I’d be curious to know how average person feels about storing their private photos in google’s servers.

wstrange 8y ago
My biggest fear is accidentally losing or deleting all my family photos. I don't trust myself to run proper backups and archival. I think the average consumer is in the same boat. They want someone else to take care of this problem.

nwellnhof 8y ago

They could win privacy-conscious users back by offering an ad and tracking free Google experience with the paid plans.

Jnr 8y ago
Disabling ad tracking is not going to change how they scan all the file contents and categorize them using AI. It might be even more effective for them than tracking you on web.
xiphias2 8y ago
They tried to do e2e encryption with Allo, then they integrated all the crappy smileys from it to their other messagong products, and got rid of Allo. The scary thing is that in theory they don't have ads on messaging, but if it would be true, they would have gone farther with e2e
chappi42 8y ago
They would need to compartmentalize their services to win me back. Some tracking I'd accept but I don't want them to aggregate my 'whole life'.
Rjevski 8y ago
Would anyone trust them to not silently still collect personal data? For example, even if they don't need the data now because you're paying not to see ads, they might still collect it so that they can show you "better" ads if/when you stop paying.
- skybrian 8y ago
  I don't really get why people assume they're chaotic evil rather than lawful evil. This is a large company with lots of lawyers. Modulo bugs, they're going to make sure anything they do is covered by the privacy policy rather than leave an opening to be sued. So the answer is that I would trust that it (mostly) doesn't happen if the legal terms say it won't.
  - Yizahi 8y ago
    It is not illegal to spy on users, you just need to call it "metadata".
    - dmix 8y ago
      And as long as it has a warrant for one individual + multiple hops from that person you potentially legally sweep up hundreds/thousands of other innocent people's information - often full bore, not just metadata.
  - Rjevski 8y ago
    Isn't there a consistent history of shady practices from such companies, like purposely ambiguous language in the Android location activity preferences, or similar stuff from Facebook when they try to make you share more data with them like contacts?
- xelhark 8y ago
  There would be no economic advantage to that kind of behavior. I'm a fan of paid services rather than ad-based services because it switches the focus. The customer is the person that pays, not the advertising company, so the company will have an economic advantage to give a better service to you, not to the ad companies. Something like that would just jeopardise the customer for no particular economic gain, so yeah, I'd trust them.

omeid2 8y ago

The more interesting part is that the line between "digital existence" and real life is getting blurrier everyday.

mark_l_watson 8y ago

I basically agree with you, but my behavior is not consistent in regards to Google and privacy: I use Fastmail, DuckDuckGo, use Firefox containers for Google (and FB and Twitter), use Siri, etc. But, I have put all my pictures on Google Photos (used to be Picasa) since they rolled out the service and I buy a bulk of entertainment from Google Play movies/books and use GCP. So I do let them track me in some ways.

kyrra 8y ago

To quote Google's code of conduct as it exists today: > And remember… don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up! https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/ https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/ Media headlines from the time gave the impression that it was removed, which was absolutely false.

dmix 8y ago
Strange, I remember one person who spoke up at Google with what he believed was a legitimate problem and was subsequently tarred, feathered, and fired. Sets a good precedent for this culture they're promoting.
o_____________o 8y ago
Virtue signaling in a generic slogan all but guarantees the peanut gallery has a petty grenade to throw at you for the rest of time. Google does something unfavorable: "don't be evil, HUH?" Google takes away the slogan: "so now you're evil, HUH?"
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
malux85 8y ago
Factually correct, but missing the point entirely. Classic Robot. It's ok Google, I'm not angry, I'm just disappointed. You can go back to relentlessly optimizing the max($) function, but everyone is wising up to you. I'm actually more worried about Amazon, Amazon are an aggressive weed with reaching tendrils, you are more like an aging billionaire, wealthy, unable to innovate, jaded, your spark has gone. Your questionable activity means you no longer command the respect you once did. The greats are ambivalent about working for you, and the ones you hold - you only hold with money. When you have to pay all the time, it's not love (that's a joke, stand down the database queries) Incidentally, don't you sometimes wonder why your founders are gone? Why Schmidt is gone? The greats have left, because of who you have become.
- techsin101 8y ago

kodablah 8y ago

To be fair, this stuff is probably not for the privacy conscious (and neither is FB). I doubt they mind you not signing up, you are not their target. Lots of other people are happy to give them all of their data, and that's ok.