3 ms·

> Google and Amazon spy systems I have only used an Echo in the past but fwiw Google does specify what they store and how they use it. https://store.google.com

> Google and Amazon spy systems I have only used an Echo in the past but fwiw Google does specify what they store and how they use it. https://store.google.com/magazine/google_nest_privacy https://store.google.com/magazine/google_nest_privacy

Nextgrid 6y ago
Why would you trust a company whose bottom line ultimately depends on spying on everyone, in a regulatory environment which demonstrated that breaching your own promises/privacy policy (in the case of Facebook and the 2FA phone numbers they promised not to use for ad targeting purposes) results in nothing more than a slap on the wrist?
- lern_too_spel 6y ago
  Because the alternative (Apple) is a company that produces worse products that breach my privacy even more. You cannot get your location on an Apple device without also sending your location to Apple. You cannot install an app on your iOS device without telling Apple. If you want to make your own apps for your device, you have to deanonymize yourself even further with banking details. If you want better privacy, don't continue to let companies who lie about providing better privacy get away with it. So far, I haven't seen Google deliberately lie about the privacy of their services. That should be the bare minimum that we expect.
  - millstone 6y ago
    Yeah Google deliberately lies. That's why they're being sued by the state of Arizona, for willfully deceiving users and tracking their locations even if they opted out. [1] They said "with Location History off, the places you go are no longer stored" and then did it anyways. Apple, for its part, says "Apple doesn’t retain a history of what you’ve searched for or where you’ve been" and there's no reason to doubt it. 1: https://www.azag.gov/press-release/attorney-general-mark-brnovich-files-lawsuit-against-google-over-deceptive-and-unfair https://www.azag.gov/press-release/attorney-general-mark-brn...
    - actuator 6y ago
      > They said "with Location History off, the places you go are no longer stored" and then did it anyways. I would just apply Hanlon's razor here. It most likely was a bug or oversight, if it had been some malicious evil scheme, I would assume more care would have been taken so that people don't find out. Now, coming to the question of why do they even store it for opted in users? Aside from potential ad relevance, I think it is simply because they power a lot of their features with context and they get better with data. For example, if you search cheesecake on Google, the answer likely will be either a recipe or a restaurant. A restaurant search will likely be helped by data about previous visits and current location. A recipe search will be helped by past search result clicks and again location. Do they really need to store this to serve search results? I don't think so. DDG works without them, but then again DDG performs very poor for queries like this which can be helped with context. Note: I don't know how any of this exactly works, so these are just my assumptions.
      - millstone 6y ago
        "Willfully misleads and deceives" is verbatim from the lawsuit. IANAL but that sounds like "deliberately lies" to me. From the lawsuit: for years, Google has known that the user experience they designed misleads and deceives users. The evidence obtained from within Google—such as internal emails, presentations, and memos—is overwhelming in this regard They knew that they were deceiving users, and liked it that way. An example of of how Google uses this data: Google will track if you click an ad for Cheesecake Factory and later physically visit one. This allows them to charge higher rates for ads. This isn't a secret, they brag about that capability. It's why they use so many dark patterns to push users to enable location tracking. https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/6100636?hl=en https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/6100636?hl=en
  - Nextgrid 6y ago
    Google deliberately lies, like when forcing you to enable location history to be able to store home or work addresses in Google Maps - there is no technical reason for this. The GDPR consent prompt they recently implemented on Google & YouTube is not actually GDPR compliant and does not offer an easy way to opt-out. I can go on and on. I'm not saying Apple is perfect (a lot of the points you raised are valid), but it's sure as hell better than a company whose entire bottom-line is based on stalking people.
    - actuator 6y ago
      > forcing you to enable location history Not defending them but is it forced? I remember being asked about it. I used to keep it off for a long time but keep it on now to keep track of places I visit. > there is no technical reason for this. I have seen them give you best time to leave from home/office for/after work based on developing traffic as notifications. Same for reminders of events in calendar with location context. Also, just my assumption but they might be adding locality context to searches.

Nextgrid 6y ago

Why would you trust a company whose bottom line ultimately depends on spying on everyone, in a regulatory environment which demonstrated that breaching your own promises/privacy policy (in the case of Facebook and the 2FA phone numbers they promised not to use for ad targeting purposes) results in nothing more than a slap on the wrist?

lern_too_spel 6y ago
Because the alternative (Apple) is a company that produces worse products that breach my privacy even more. You cannot get your location on an Apple device without also sending your location to Apple. You cannot install an app on your iOS device without telling Apple. If you want to make your own apps for your device, you have to deanonymize yourself even further with banking details. If you want better privacy, don't continue to let companies who lie about providing better privacy get away with it. So far, I haven't seen Google deliberately lie about the privacy of their services. That should be the bare minimum that we expect.
- millstone 6y ago
  Yeah Google deliberately lies. That's why they're being sued by the state of Arizona, for willfully deceiving users and tracking their locations even if they opted out. [1] They said "with Location History off, the places you go are no longer stored" and then did it anyways. Apple, for its part, says "Apple doesn’t retain a history of what you’ve searched for or where you’ve been" and there's no reason to doubt it. 1: https://www.azag.gov/press-release/attorney-general-mark-brnovich-files-lawsuit-against-google-over-deceptive-and-unfair https://www.azag.gov/press-release/attorney-general-mark-brn...
  - actuator 6y ago
    > They said "with Location History off, the places you go are no longer stored" and then did it anyways. I would just apply Hanlon's razor here. It most likely was a bug or oversight, if it had been some malicious evil scheme, I would assume more care would have been taken so that people don't find out. Now, coming to the question of why do they even store it for opted in users? Aside from potential ad relevance, I think it is simply because they power a lot of their features with context and they get better with data. For example, if you search cheesecake on Google, the answer likely will be either a recipe or a restaurant. A restaurant search will likely be helped by data about previous visits and current location. A recipe search will be helped by past search result clicks and again location. Do they really need to store this to serve search results? I don't think so. DDG works without them, but then again DDG performs very poor for queries like this which can be helped with context. Note: I don't know how any of this exactly works, so these are just my assumptions.
    - millstone 6y ago
      "Willfully misleads and deceives" is verbatim from the lawsuit. IANAL but that sounds like "deliberately lies" to me. From the lawsuit: for years, Google has known that the user experience they designed misleads and deceives users. The evidence obtained from within Google—such as internal emails, presentations, and memos—is overwhelming in this regard They knew that they were deceiving users, and liked it that way. An example of of how Google uses this data: Google will track if you click an ad for Cheesecake Factory and later physically visit one. This allows them to charge higher rates for ads. This isn't a secret, they brag about that capability. It's why they use so many dark patterns to push users to enable location tracking. https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/6100636?hl=en https://support.google.com/google-ads/answer/6100636?hl=en
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  Google deliberately lies, like when forcing you to enable location history to be able to store home or work addresses in Google Maps - there is no technical reason for this. The GDPR consent prompt they recently implemented on Google & YouTube is not actually GDPR compliant and does not offer an easy way to opt-out. I can go on and on. I'm not saying Apple is perfect (a lot of the points you raised are valid), but it's sure as hell better than a company whose entire bottom-line is based on stalking people.
  - actuator 6y ago
    > forcing you to enable location history Not defending them but is it forced? I remember being asked about it. I used to keep it off for a long time but keep it on now to keep track of places I visit. > there is no technical reason for this. I have seen them give you best time to leave from home/office for/after work based on developing traffic as notifications. Same for reminders of events in calendar with location context. Also, just my assumption but they might be adding locality context to searches.