3 ms·

Oh come on. There are contracts with GCP customers in place. There is a massive set of regulations around data misuse. Do you really think Google would risk the

Oh come on. There are contracts with GCP customers in place. There is a massive set of regulations around data misuse. Do you really think Google would risk the company-destroying liability of being caught using data improperly (something that‘s not in their T&c)? Who‘s to say there wouldn‘t be whistleblower tomorrow. A company can do more than one thing. It probably would be a decent idea to make GCP a subsidiary, just so it‘s absolutely clear to everyone. Their capabilities in data analysis and ML make this an ideal project. Like why is no one saying Amazon might be misusing data from AWS to benefit themselves. This just seems like the usual HN bias.

tomp 7y ago
Has any company ever been punished for data misuse (i.e. severely, enough to make other companies think twice before doing the same thing)? Apple listens to Siri conversations, whatever. Experian leaks private data, no biggie. Experian gets hacked, oops. Grindr sells your sexual orientation data, business as usual.
- v7p1Qbt1im 7y ago
  Different scenario. Voice assistant customers are regular users. The opposing side is a government agency who collects fines. In a cloud data misuse case the civil liabilities are actually terrible, because you’re going up against other cash-rich corporations. Insert saying: stealing from the poor vs stealing from the wealthy.
ocdtrekkie 7y ago
Actually a lot of people point out that Amazon abuses it's storefront data as market research for it's own first party products on a scale nobody else can match. (And then, in turn, gives its first party products better placement in the store, to then crush the competition.) The difference is, Amazon hasn't demonstrated a massive desire to collect and use health data, and fundamentally, isn't an ad company. The other thing you're forgetting is that Google regularly changes the terms of the agreements it makes. When it bought DoubleClick, it swore that DoubleClick would never be able to access people's Google account data and that there would be a clear firewall of ad personalization information. Up until they changed their terms of service so that they could: https://www.propublica.org/article/google-has-quietly-dropped-ban-on-personally-identifiable-web-tracking https://www.propublica.org/article/google-has-quietly-droppe... Google literally embodies the classic "I am altering the deal. Pray I do not alter it any further." Just because they claim they won't abuse the health data they are zealously collecting today doesn't mean they won't change their mind tomorrow. An ad company should not be allowed to hold your health data.
- v7p1Qbt1im 7y ago
  Amazon using it‘s marketplace data for their own purposes, while obviously also problematic, is not the same thing as going behind their AWS clients back and using their data. The data literally belongs to the client. I‘m pretty sure they are only accessing their data as allowed by the contracts for maintenance for example. Likewise for GCP and Azure. Regarding your second argument. Doubleclick is on the consumer side. That‘s why GCP has it‘s own CEO, it‘s own buildings and org in general. They are seperate from the consumer side. Put yourself in Google‘s shoes. They can make tons of money by revolutionizing the health care sector, improving patient care at the same time. Why would they fuck it up by feeding data to the ad side illegally. The risk is too high. No one would ever trust them again and they‘d probably be sued out of existence. Is it not feasible that they are simply trying everything they can to become less reliant on ads. They have stated several times that the cloud side will be the dominant revenue source in the future. Is that possible? No idea. But strategically it makes sense to push cloud with all possible force.

tomp 7y ago

Has any company ever been punished for data misuse (i.e. severely, enough to make other companies think twice before doing the same thing)? Apple listens to Siri conversations, whatever. Experian leaks private data, no biggie. Experian gets hacked, oops. Grindr sells your sexual orientation data, business as usual.

v7p1Qbt1im 7y ago
Different scenario. Voice assistant customers are regular users. The opposing side is a government agency who collects fines. In a cloud data misuse case the civil liabilities are actually terrible, because you’re going up against other cash-rich corporations. Insert saying: stealing from the poor vs stealing from the wealthy.

ocdtrekkie 7y ago

Actually a lot of people point out that Amazon abuses it's storefront data as market research for it's own first party products on a scale nobody else can match. (And then, in turn, gives its first party products better placement in the store, to then crush the competition.) The difference is, Amazon hasn't demonstrated a massive desire to collect and use health data, and fundamentally, isn't an ad company. The other thing you're forgetting is that Google regularly changes the terms of the agreements it makes. When it bought DoubleClick, it swore that DoubleClick would never be able to access people's Google account data and that there would be a clear firewall of ad personalization information. Up until they changed their terms of service so that they could: https://www.propublica.org/article/google-has-quietly-dropped-ban-on-personally-identifiable-web-tracking https://www.propublica.org/article/google-has-quietly-droppe... Google literally embodies the classic "I am altering the deal. Pray I do not alter it any further." Just because they claim they won't abuse the health data they are zealously collecting today doesn't mean they won't change their mind tomorrow. An ad company should not be allowed to hold your health data.

v7p1Qbt1im 7y ago
Amazon using it‘s marketplace data for their own purposes, while obviously also problematic, is not the same thing as going behind their AWS clients back and using their data. The data literally belongs to the client. I‘m pretty sure they are only accessing their data as allowed by the contracts for maintenance for example. Likewise for GCP and Azure. Regarding your second argument. Doubleclick is on the consumer side. That‘s why GCP has it‘s own CEO, it‘s own buildings and org in general. They are seperate from the consumer side. Put yourself in Google‘s shoes. They can make tons of money by revolutionizing the health care sector, improving patient care at the same time. Why would they fuck it up by feeding data to the ad side illegally. The risk is too high. No one would ever trust them again and they‘d probably be sued out of existence. Is it not feasible that they are simply trying everything they can to become less reliant on ads. They have stated several times that the cloud side will be the dominant revenue source in the future. Is that possible? No idea. But strategically it makes sense to push cloud with all possible force.