7 ms·

I have a Fitbit and I love this acquisition. I want to be able to put my fitness data in the rest of the Google ecosystem. The more data Google has on me, the m

by m00x 6y ago

I have a Fitbit and I love this acquisition. I want to be able to put my fitness data in the rest of the Google ecosystem. The more data Google has on me, the more use I get out of Google's tools. I really don't care that it has tons of data on me, Google has been super responsible of my data and its uses. The risk/reward is 100% worth.

judge2020 6y ago
The assurance that it's not going to be used for Ads is the only thing that makes this acceptable. Instead of it being on some random fitbit server on someone's Cloud, it'll be held securely on Google servers.
- eins1234 6y ago
  Really though, how long do we expect that arrangement to last? The Facebook WhatsApp thing makes it pretty clear to me that they can afford to walk back on that arrangement as soon as they feel they can afford to take the PR hit. For something with as small of a market share as Fitbit, I suspect that won't take very long at all.
  - ocdtrekkie 6y ago
    Google/Fitbit has a legally-binding commitment for ten years. However, there are probably ways they can leap around that. For instance, new devices and a new platform, using the Fitbit talent and technology, but marketed as a new thing, could probably be used for advertising. Then they just need to get everyone over to their new health platform. I also think a ten year commitment is a very poor concession for the EU to have extracted: It just means they're punting off society being harmed a while. For a company that will likely be around in 100 years or more, IBM-style, that's not a good concession.
    - Marsymars 6y ago
      > I also think a ten year commitment is a very poor concession for the EU to have extracted: It just means they're punting off society being harmed a while. For a company that will likely be around in 100 years or more, IBM-style, that's not a good concession. I agree, but if they were in the business of extracting significant pro-consumer concessions, I can see some weird incentives building up: imagine a dystopian future in several decades where the only semi-pro-consumer companies are the goliaths that have decades’ worth of accumulated concessions, and consumer startups nearly-universally act in their own financial interest, making them unusable for people who care about their data/privacy/ads/etc., and regulators who are unwilling to burden startups with regulations that restrict them from competing with AmaGoogleFlix.
- bhk 6y ago
  Are you sure about that? If you click through to the EU site https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_2484 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_... and read "Google's Commitment" on ads: > Google will not use for Google Ads the health and wellness data collected from wrist-worn wearable devices and other Fitbit devices of users in the EEA, including search advertising, display advertising, and advertising intermediation products. This refers also to data collected via sensors (including GPS) as well as manually inserted data. So this only covers European Economic Area, and it only covers Google Ads.
gcblkjaidfj 6y ago
that's some next level abusive relationship whitewashing. "google/apple data control monopolies are killing products i like. But that is fine because that makes those products cheap for google/apple and i love them."
- gretch 6y ago
  The above user is only talking about their personal desires and opinions about Google. They don't speak on behalf of anyone else and don't pass judgement if G is 'good' or 'bad' for society as a whole. You are claiming that their thoughts are only the result of abusive conditioning. IMO, that's an extremely arrogant position - "oh, if you disagree with me, it must be because you are not smart enough to actually think for yourself"
eins1234 6y ago
I read this honestly expecting a /s at the end. If you told me this was a failed attempt at obvious sarcasm now, I'd totally still believe you.
- mav3rick 6y ago
  What has Google done with your data ? Even I was expecting a /s at the end of your comment.
  - mulletbum 6y ago
    isn't it more "what have they done" with your data that makes you think this needs to be /s?
- yomly 6y ago
  It reads like sarcasm but it's more a sign that our views do not leak out of our echo chamber. I have a friend who works for the government and laments at how much red tape there is to acquire or link any dataset and wishes for more data acquisition. To be fair, her use cases were sincerely benign - being able to target people who qualify for more welfare/govt assistance, and being able to make the govt website more helpful/discoverable for support. Though she definitely subscribes to her data being used for helpful purposes from bigtech
  - leokennis 6y ago
    But that’s the thing. I work for a bank. If I had unlimited access to all transaction data without needing to request elevated access and jumping some more hoops, it would greatly speed up my daily work. But...it would also greatly increase the damage any hacker could do. Same applies to Google. It’s super convenient to have everything “on Google”. Until the day Google is exposed/hacked/turns evil. Then it’s a disaster. Hoping the above won’t happen is not a strategy but a gamble.
    - Tijdreiziger 6y ago
      > Until the day Google [...] turns evil You mean this hasn't already happened?
dr_dshiv 6y ago
Lol, I totally agree. I actually believe that they care a lot about protecting my data -- more than any other data caretaker. Probably because if they abuse our data it would be financially costly. But that's the beautiful thing about capitalism...
- IgorPartola 6y ago
  Apple has entered the chat. I am sure you’ve heard the argument before: Google is an advertising company. Using your data to sell you products is why they have your data. The more they can get, the higher their profits. Apple is a hardware company. They don’t want your data and store it begrudgingly because to them it’s nothing but liability. Whenever they can, they will encrypt your data in a way they can’t access in order to not be liable. Their devices are the product, not you. Based on the above, which company would you trust more?
  - gman83 6y ago
    Based on what you wrote I would say Google, because they have so much more to lose. That data is really really valuable to them, whereas to Apple it isn't really.
    - confiq 6y ago
      exactly this ^! remember thefappening? Imagine what shitstorm would be if that would happen to google...
      - IgorPartola 6y ago
        The point isn’t which protects your data better from outside breaches (though I would argue Apple does a better job of protecting its phones), but how they use your data and who they can expose it to. Apple provides storage. Google sifts through your data to help them direct you towards products from which they can get kickbacks. It’s not some external entity that you have to worry about. It’s the company to whom you send all your data. And this isn’t conjecture. The only reason Google collects all that data is so they can advertise to you better. The only question is whether you trust that they’ll keep that data usage on the right side of your personal ethical line in the sand. I don’t think Google would sell your dick pics to a third party to make a quick buck. But I also wouldn’t put it past them to use them to figure out what kind of porn you like and help sex toy manufacturers to target you in their ads.
yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
> I want to be able to put my fitness data in the rest of the Google ecosystem. The more data Google has on me, the more use I get out of Google's tools. It's good to be able to integrate that information. It's bad to be forced to let Google integrate that information. I dislike it because Google isn't known for letting users choose.
xnx 6y ago
I'm replying in agreement that this is also my opinion. Google could do bad things with my data in the future, but, to date, there is no company I trust more. Contrary to a very vocal crowd on HN, rankings of most loved brands show that many people like Google https://morningconsult.com/most-loved-brands-2020/ https://morningconsult.com/most-loved-brands-2020/
- at-fates-hands 6y ago
  Liking a company != trusting a company with your data.
  - xenihn 6y ago
    I would argue there is a correlation between liking and trusting. Not just data specifically, but overall trust. I'd think data would fall under the umbrella.
bootlooped 6y ago
I have an Android phone and use multiple fitness apps/services. Google Fit would be the natural place for me to aggregate all that, so I'm sold on the utility of that. Sadly I think it's at risk of being Google abandonware. I don't recall them ever having added functionality, but I recall at least one time functionality disappeared (they removed the website where you could view your data). The app seemed to keep getting simplified over time.
GeekyBear 6y ago
No company with surveillance capitalism as their business model should be allowed access to health data from an acquired company without the user explicitly opting in. However, I sincerely doubt Fitbit would have been worth anywhere near as much under those conditions.
- at-fates-hands 6y ago
  This is the moral razors edge companies have to walk on nowadays. Do they sell their company out and get rich, or do they stick to their principles and safeguard their users data? I don't have the right answer. What I do know is when you're facing down a multi-million dollar payout, principles tend to get tossed out the window.
- nradov 6y ago
  Fitbit doesn't sell medical devices. The data they gather is health related but legally it's not "protected health information".
kobalsky 6y ago
Google can now cross reference your historic heart rate against your ad exposure. I'm pretty sure they will responsibly use that info to tune them out for your enjoyment. They also know what you searched, watched or visited before and after having sex. There's a lot of info they can pull out of that little device. The database they bought is worth every penny.

by m00x 6y ago

judge2020 6y ago

The assurance that it's not going to be used for Ads is the only thing that makes this acceptable. Instead of it being on some random fitbit server on someone's Cloud, it'll be held securely on Google servers.

eins1234 6y ago
Really though, how long do we expect that arrangement to last? The Facebook WhatsApp thing makes it pretty clear to me that they can afford to walk back on that arrangement as soon as they feel they can afford to take the PR hit. For something with as small of a market share as Fitbit, I suspect that won't take very long at all.
- ocdtrekkie 6y ago
  Google/Fitbit has a legally-binding commitment for ten years. However, there are probably ways they can leap around that. For instance, new devices and a new platform, using the Fitbit talent and technology, but marketed as a new thing, could probably be used for advertising. Then they just need to get everyone over to their new health platform. I also think a ten year commitment is a very poor concession for the EU to have extracted: It just means they're punting off society being harmed a while. For a company that will likely be around in 100 years or more, IBM-style, that's not a good concession.
  - Marsymars 6y ago
    > I also think a ten year commitment is a very poor concession for the EU to have extracted: It just means they're punting off society being harmed a while. For a company that will likely be around in 100 years or more, IBM-style, that's not a good concession. I agree, but if they were in the business of extracting significant pro-consumer concessions, I can see some weird incentives building up: imagine a dystopian future in several decades where the only semi-pro-consumer companies are the goliaths that have decades’ worth of accumulated concessions, and consumer startups nearly-universally act in their own financial interest, making them unusable for people who care about their data/privacy/ads/etc., and regulators who are unwilling to burden startups with regulations that restrict them from competing with AmaGoogleFlix.
bhk 6y ago
Are you sure about that? If you click through to the EU site https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_2484 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_... and read "Google's Commitment" on ads: > Google will not use for Google Ads the health and wellness data collected from wrist-worn wearable devices and other Fitbit devices of users in the EEA, including search advertising, display advertising, and advertising intermediation products. This refers also to data collected via sensors (including GPS) as well as manually inserted data. So this only covers European Economic Area, and it only covers Google Ads.

gcblkjaidfj 6y ago

that's some next level abusive relationship whitewashing. "google/apple data control monopolies are killing products i like. But that is fine because that makes those products cheap for google/apple and i love them."

gretch 6y ago
The above user is only talking about their personal desires and opinions about Google. They don't speak on behalf of anyone else and don't pass judgement if G is 'good' or 'bad' for society as a whole. You are claiming that their thoughts are only the result of abusive conditioning. IMO, that's an extremely arrogant position - "oh, if you disagree with me, it must be because you are not smart enough to actually think for yourself"

eins1234 6y ago

I read this honestly expecting a /s at the end. If you told me this was a failed attempt at obvious sarcasm now, I'd totally still believe you.

mav3rick 6y ago
What has Google done with your data ? Even I was expecting a /s at the end of your comment.
- mulletbum 6y ago
  isn't it more "what have they done" with your data that makes you think this needs to be /s?
yomly 6y ago
It reads like sarcasm but it's more a sign that our views do not leak out of our echo chamber. I have a friend who works for the government and laments at how much red tape there is to acquire or link any dataset and wishes for more data acquisition. To be fair, her use cases were sincerely benign - being able to target people who qualify for more welfare/govt assistance, and being able to make the govt website more helpful/discoverable for support. Though she definitely subscribes to her data being used for helpful purposes from bigtech
- leokennis 6y ago
  But that’s the thing. I work for a bank. If I had unlimited access to all transaction data without needing to request elevated access and jumping some more hoops, it would greatly speed up my daily work. But...it would also greatly increase the damage any hacker could do. Same applies to Google. It’s super convenient to have everything “on Google”. Until the day Google is exposed/hacked/turns evil. Then it’s a disaster. Hoping the above won’t happen is not a strategy but a gamble.
  - Tijdreiziger 6y ago
    > Until the day Google [...] turns evil You mean this hasn't already happened?

dr_dshiv 6y ago

Lol, I totally agree. I actually believe that they care a lot about protecting my data -- more than any other data caretaker. Probably because if they abuse our data it would be financially costly. But that's the beautiful thing about capitalism...

IgorPartola 6y ago
Apple has entered the chat. I am sure you’ve heard the argument before: Google is an advertising company. Using your data to sell you products is why they have your data. The more they can get, the higher their profits. Apple is a hardware company. They don’t want your data and store it begrudgingly because to them it’s nothing but liability. Whenever they can, they will encrypt your data in a way they can’t access in order to not be liable. Their devices are the product, not you. Based on the above, which company would you trust more?
- gman83 6y ago
  Based on what you wrote I would say Google, because they have so much more to lose. That data is really really valuable to them, whereas to Apple it isn't really.
  - confiq 6y ago
    exactly this ^! remember thefappening? Imagine what shitstorm would be if that would happen to google...
    - IgorPartola 6y ago
      The point isn’t which protects your data better from outside breaches (though I would argue Apple does a better job of protecting its phones), but how they use your data and who they can expose it to. Apple provides storage. Google sifts through your data to help them direct you towards products from which they can get kickbacks. It’s not some external entity that you have to worry about. It’s the company to whom you send all your data. And this isn’t conjecture. The only reason Google collects all that data is so they can advertise to you better. The only question is whether you trust that they’ll keep that data usage on the right side of your personal ethical line in the sand. I don’t think Google would sell your dick pics to a third party to make a quick buck. But I also wouldn’t put it past them to use them to figure out what kind of porn you like and help sex toy manufacturers to target you in their ads.

yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago

> I want to be able to put my fitness data in the rest of the Google ecosystem. The more data Google has on me, the more use I get out of Google's tools. It's good to be able to integrate that information. It's bad to be forced to let Google integrate that information. I dislike it because Google isn't known for letting users choose.

xnx 6y ago

I'm replying in agreement that this is also my opinion. Google could do bad things with my data in the future, but, to date, there is no company I trust more. Contrary to a very vocal crowd on HN, rankings of most loved brands show that many people like Google https://morningconsult.com/most-loved-brands-2020/ https://morningconsult.com/most-loved-brands-2020/

at-fates-hands 6y ago
Liking a company != trusting a company with your data.
- xenihn 6y ago
  I would argue there is a correlation between liking and trusting. Not just data specifically, but overall trust. I'd think data would fall under the umbrella.

bootlooped 6y ago

I have an Android phone and use multiple fitness apps/services. Google Fit would be the natural place for me to aggregate all that, so I'm sold on the utility of that. Sadly I think it's at risk of being Google abandonware. I don't recall them ever having added functionality, but I recall at least one time functionality disappeared (they removed the website where you could view your data). The app seemed to keep getting simplified over time.

GeekyBear 6y ago

No company with surveillance capitalism as their business model should be allowed access to health data from an acquired company without the user explicitly opting in. However, I sincerely doubt Fitbit would have been worth anywhere near as much under those conditions.

at-fates-hands 6y ago
This is the moral razors edge companies have to walk on nowadays. Do they sell their company out and get rich, or do they stick to their principles and safeguard their users data? I don't have the right answer. What I do know is when you're facing down a multi-million dollar payout, principles tend to get tossed out the window.
nradov 6y ago
Fitbit doesn't sell medical devices. The data they gather is health related but legally it's not "protected health information".

kobalsky 6y ago

Google can now cross reference your historic heart rate against your ad exposure. I'm pretty sure they will responsibly use that info to tune them out for your enjoyment. They also know what you searched, watched or visited before and after having sex. There's a lot of info they can pull out of that little device. The database they bought is worth every penny.