3 ms·

pushing adds is a service that means it is a 'product' that advertisers are buying. Of course google is also buying our data: its the price for using free produ

pushing adds is a service that means it is a 'product' that advertisers are buying. Of course google is also buying our data: its the price for using free products such as search, android and gmail; google is then reselling this data; this takes place either by reselling it directly or by using it as part of their service .

drb91 8y ago
Terms of service should not imply consent to a transaction: that is inherently a dishonest and exploitative method of running a business. Also, the idea of paying to use a free service is an oxymoron. Google is not and has never been free, it is ad supported, and it has ruined the internet by normalizing this behavior.
saiya-jin 8y ago
well the whole 'product' is a net loss for humanity in long term and made the whole internet worse for everybody probably forever, so no tears shed for this a-hole
TheOtherHobbes 8y ago
If a fast food chain recorded all customer conversations at its tables and then mined that information for profit, most people would consider that unconscionable - even if the conversations were anonymised. Similarly most people wouldn't be too happy about a physical newspaper or a TV that tracked their eyeballs as they read/watched it - at least not without an opt-out option. And yet this is very close to what Google does, albeit hidden behind the distancing effect of a search engine and a web browser. Should we really be grateful?
- mercer 8y ago
  I don't like Google. Possibly I'd prefer to live in a world without a Google. That said, your comparison strikes me as rather reductive. Google Search, Maps, Chrome, YouTube, Android, and so on, are all things that have had a measurable impact on my life, and quite a bit of it positive. I'd like to think these things could've happened without all the bad stuff that funds it, but at the very least I can't just dismiss all of it.
- cwillu 8y ago
  If they let you eat there for free, I suspect you'd find that significant chunk of the population would consider it to be an acceptable trade.

drb91 8y ago

Terms of service should not imply consent to a transaction: that is inherently a dishonest and exploitative method of running a business. Also, the idea of paying to use a free service is an oxymoron. Google is not and has never been free, it is ad supported, and it has ruined the internet by normalizing this behavior.

saiya-jin 8y ago

well the whole 'product' is a net loss for humanity in long term and made the whole internet worse for everybody probably forever, so no tears shed for this a-hole

TheOtherHobbes 8y ago

If a fast food chain recorded all customer conversations at its tables and then mined that information for profit, most people would consider that unconscionable - even if the conversations were anonymised. Similarly most people wouldn't be too happy about a physical newspaper or a TV that tracked their eyeballs as they read/watched it - at least not without an opt-out option. And yet this is very close to what Google does, albeit hidden behind the distancing effect of a search engine and a web browser. Should we really be grateful?

mercer 8y ago
I don't like Google. Possibly I'd prefer to live in a world without a Google. That said, your comparison strikes me as rather reductive. Google Search, Maps, Chrome, YouTube, Android, and so on, are all things that have had a measurable impact on my life, and quite a bit of it positive. I'd like to think these things could've happened without all the bad stuff that funds it, but at the very least I can't just dismiss all of it.
cwillu 8y ago
If they let you eat there for free, I suspect you'd find that significant chunk of the population would consider it to be an acceptable trade.