4 ms·

This is a great compilation, but it sort of misses the point. The problem isn't that Google owns all of the services we use. It's that someone owns them and ev

This is a great compilation, but it sort of misses the point. The problem isn't that Google owns all of the services we use. It's that someone owns them and even if you switch to a handful of independent services (which is a worse UX), someone else is snooping on you. Google's value proposition is that if you're inside the Google family of services, each service is made better due to having a unified analytics and user profiling. This is a double-edged sword: 1. A single service has full visibility into your habits 2. The upper bound for the efficacy of each service is higher. Is this worth it to you? That's the question you should be asking yourself.

albertop 6y ago
Related discussion and the biggest counterpoint. If Google disconnects you, you are disconnected from all services. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24965432 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24965432
ricardo81 6y ago
To be fair, many of the alternatives are privacy focused and data collection is more likely to be anonymised.
pessimizer 6y ago
I had to read this comment multiple times because I assumed that "a single service has full visibility into your habits" was obviously an extreme negative compared to many services each having visibility into some of your habits. I'm still not sure I understand your comment, but I would add that that even with multiple services, each can buy data from each other and from brokers, bringing the situation with them closer to a multiple-google situation. Problems like this cannot be solved by technology. edit: Being all Google may ultimately be more similar to the Apple proposition, where they actively fight their users to maximize their own profits, but also actively fight others for the complete possession of their users. As an Apple customer, you know that if your usage is irrelevant to their bottom line, they'll generally protect you from third parties. The reason it's not obvious that Google could be that way is because they're an ad company.

albertop 6y ago

Related discussion and the biggest counterpoint. If Google disconnects you, you are disconnected from all services. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24965432 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24965432

ricardo81 6y ago

To be fair, many of the alternatives are privacy focused and data collection is more likely to be anonymised.

pessimizer 6y ago

I had to read this comment multiple times because I assumed that "a single service has full visibility into your habits" was obviously an extreme negative compared to many services each having visibility into some of your habits. I'm still not sure I understand your comment, but I would add that that even with multiple services, each can buy data from each other and from brokers, bringing the situation with them closer to a multiple-google situation. Problems like this cannot be solved by technology. edit: Being all Google may ultimately be more similar to the Apple proposition, where they actively fight their users to maximize their own profits, but also actively fight others for the complete possession of their users. As an Apple customer, you know that if your usage is irrelevant to their bottom line, they'll generally protect you from third parties. The reason it's not obvious that Google could be that way is because they're an ad company.