15 ms·

Chinese browser collects your data? Spyware. American company collects your data? $1,400,000,000,000 valuation. This reminds me of how we call Russian billi

by cwhiz 6y ago

Chinese browser collects your data? Spyware. American company collects your data? $1,400,000,000,000 valuation. This reminds me of how we call Russian billionaires "oligarchs" but we just call American billionaires...billionaires.

mads 6y ago
Yes, I think everyone got the memo about American companies. Thanks though..
yumraj 6y ago
Chinese browser collects data for CCP which will use it for spying and for action against you, your family and your country. American company will collect data to show you ads and profit. Are they really same?
- serf 6y ago
  American agencies routinely collect data from the internet that results in actions against people. One could say the motives are different, but to act as if American groups collect data purely for profit isn't true. >Are they really the same? No, but acting similarly doesn't imply identical similarity.
- itsoktocry 6y ago
  >American company will collect data to show you ads and profit Unless you get a target on your back, in which case the American company will provide the American law enforcement agencies with whatever data they want to take action against you and your family. Your assertion is just a variation of "if you're not doing anything wrong you shouldn't worry about spying".
  - godelski 6y ago
    FWIW I didn't read the gp as supporting data collection, only noting a difference between corporations gathering data and governments. I don't support data collection, but I do think the distinction is useful.
  - yumraj 6y ago
    > Your assertion is just a variation of "if you're not doing anything wrong you shouldn't worry about spying". Really, that is what you got from my comment. In the case of CCP it can even be who you are, as in Tibetan, Uighur and so on.. Or, a national of a different country that China wants to spy on, or a relative of someone that China thinks has a differing opinion from CCP and so on.. It's not even on the same planet, let along in the same ballpark..
    - zeusk 6y ago
      well under the trump administration, we were at the state where ICE was getting tips from unlawful traffic stops and deporting said immigrants/refugees. They're both evil, just that US is less so.
      - aww_dang 6y ago
        Immigration violations are crimes the world over. Disliking the CCP's policies, not so much.
- godelski 6y ago
  I think this point is very debatable, but I do think there's at least 2 good distinctions. 1) there's a difference between a corporate entity gathering data and a government. There's a difference those entities could potentially have on your life. In the latter case there is a bit of an arms race, like Google trying to grab all your data but also not sharing it with Facebook. In the latter case a government can consolidate all the data. 2) There's a big difference between your government collecting my data and my government collecting my data. This can go both ways too, but there's a lot of factors that dictate this: are our governments friendly with one another? Do I trust my government? How much? Do I trust your government? Etc. They really aren't the same and personally I'd rather not have my data collected, but I'd rather it be dispersed with a corporate arms race who aren't allowed to set laws than an aggregate that belongs to a party that has much more control over my life.
- AlexandrB 6y ago
  > American company will collect data to show you ads and profit. 7 years later and it's like Snowden never even existed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)
  - yumraj 6y ago
    Fair enough, if we want argue along those lines - if you're in country X, would you like to be spied on by your country's gov AND China? I, for one, would prefer, if I have a choice, it to be just my Gov and not a foreign Gov that I consider to be hostile..
    - wbsun 6y ago
      > I, for one, would prefer, if I have a choice, it to be just my Gov and not a foreign Gov that I consider to be hostile.. This seems intuitive at first sight but doesn't make sense to me: is it your Gov or a foreign Gov that can more likely bother your life?
    - Daho0n 6y ago
      Would I rather have some data harvested by the local three letter agency and some by a random Chinese company versus all my data harvested by an American entity (most western three letter agencies share with the US)? I would most definitely rather have them out of the reach of US spying even if it means sending it to China instead. You might consider PRC hostile but how much do you think it takes for your data to get US agents come knocking on your door versus PRC agents? Sure today it might not happen but in your parents youth it could have. In your children's lifetime your words today might harm them. The short version is that unless you live inside the PRC data harvested on you is highly unlikely to matter no matter what you do. Inside the US or US allies? Be careful.
    - yibg 6y ago
      I would go the other way. What can China do to me unless I go there? Vs what can the US do to me since I live there, and even if I don’t live there, the US government reach is a lot wider.
- nuker 6y ago
  > American company will collect data to show you ads and profit. Are they really same? And your kids data. Grades, searches, web history, pics, diaries. I can totally see new private APIs for recruiters, banks, insurances - like personal assessment scores.
- approxim8ion 6y ago
  to show you ads and profit, filter what you see online, decide your eligibility for housing and credit, imply your guilt by association or poor classification... and so on. Don't try to whitewash it.
- frashelaw 6y ago
  Remember anything about Snowden's leaks? American companies happily share all the data they collect with local police departments and intelligence agencies, in bulk, with absolute impunity. If anything, you face a much greater threat from the American intelligence apparatus than one in a foreign country.
chomp 6y ago
1.) Xiaomi worth billions of dollars, not 1.4 trillion, but way more than most companies. 2.) People call out Google all. the. time. There's an article here weekly about dumping Google, finding alternatives, praying for antitrust regulation, etc. 3.) We don't commonly call billionaires who live in the middle east, china, and other non-western countries "oligarchs", do you know why? Why are you so upset about Xiaomi getting called out?
- sneak 6y ago
  I see people calling out Google regularly but rarely is Chrome explicitly termed "spyware", although it very much is: I had to configure G Suite managed browser settings recently and there are like 4 different backdoor ways that big G can "incidentally" process your web traffic and keystrokes: enhanced safe browsing, image alt text accessibility service, uploading your downloads to a scanning service, browser profile history sync, "make the web better" history upload opt-in, et c et c et c. We should be more consistent in our terminology.
- stevewodil 6y ago
  >1.) Xiaomi worth billions of dollars, not 1.4 trillion, but way more than most companies. They're referring to Alphabet's (Google) market cap, not Xiaomi's.
  - totalZero 6y ago
    Pretty clear that GP understands this, since his next point specifically addresses Google. I think he's saying that Xiaomi is also a big company, albeit less big. Seems like a fair point.
    - stevewodil 6y ago
      Actually, it's certainly not "pretty clear". The GP responded to each line in the original comment with a number. So, their point about Google (point #2) was seemingly unrelated to their point about Xiaomi's market cap (point #1) as they addressed different parts of the original comment. The GP mentioned Google perhaps not because of the market cap mentioned in point #1, but rather as a response to the original comment's mention of American companies. This is further evidenced by their use of point #3 to refer to the term oligarch, which was the third topic raised in the original comment. You can see how not clear this is based on other replies to the comment as well.
theropost 6y ago
But does the Chinese company fund your pension plans, pay wealth back to the government, and employ tax paying citizens in America? Where do you want to asset valuations to be located - in your own nation, or another?
passivate 6y ago
They're just labels. Good polls are hard to do, and so it is quite hard to know whether these labels hold value in mainstream thought. For e.g. Do people under oppressive/spying regimes see Google in the same light when it comes to data collection?
somethingwitty1 6y ago
I'm not sure oligarch means what you are thinking it does. Here is a wiki article which might help clarify why you'll sometimes hear the term used when describing certain Russian billionaires and why you won't generally hear the term used for billionaires from other countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_oligarch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_oligarch Note: it also isn't a derogatory term, as it appears to be implied here, it just is an identifier of how wealth was accumulated.
wendyshu 6y ago
"What about..."
tpmx 6y ago
> This reminds me of how we call Russian billionaires "oligarchs" but we just call American billionaires...billionaires. Seriously, this is what you're going with? Russigan oligarchs are people who just straight out stole national assets from the Soviet Union/Russia, with the help of the current ruler. There's a relatively clear definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_oligarch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_oligarch
- oblio 6y ago
  I don't know why you're being downvoted, the word has a very precise meaning. As much as we can whine about Google and such, all of them solved a valid problem many people were facing, and they did it brilliantly. For a really long time Google Search really was the only game in town. The problem we have is with their externalities. For oligarchs, the main line of business <<is>> the problem.
karaterobot 6y ago
I don't grant your premise that the U.S. government's level of access to Google data is the same as the Chinese government's access to Xiaomi's. I also don't grant that the two governments are equivalent threats to privacy. You would need to demonstrate both of those things for me to be on board with your argument. But, the point I actually want to make is that this implies that people aren't concerned with Google's use of their private data, which I think is demonstrably not true, given that they've got multiple open lawsuits against them over it.
- Daho0n 6y ago
  > I also don't grant that the two governments are equivalent threats to privacy So for someone like me, living in a 14 eyes country, are you saying it is worse for my privacy that a government on the other side of the earth that my government doesn't really like might have access to some of my data is better compared to a country my government are sharing data with who also have access to pretty much everything that happens online? I know for a fact that no matter what I say or do online PRC agents will never knock down my door. US agents? That would be quite a lot easier. In less serious waters, privacy is also worse as we know from Snowden that the US not only harvest everything it can but it also share it with US businesses. Will I ever see ads based on an algorithm trained on data from both sides? No idea, but I know which one would be worse for me by a long shot.
burntoutfire 6y ago
> This reminds me of how we call Russian billionaires "oligarchs" but we just call American billionaires...billionaires. Russian billionaires came to their wealth purely through corruption - i.e. using via their connections during the crucial years of transformation to market economy to buy huge state-owned industrial companies for 0.1-1% of their real value.
emptyparadise 6y ago
I find both to be disturbing and wrong. What do I win?
- sexy_seedbox 6y ago
  You can start championing for a resource-based economy?
toss1 6y ago
Ummm, Xaomi also has a high valuation, and Google gets called out on privacy all the time, including many times in this very discussion. Russian Oligarchs are called that because they are about two dozen people who looted about 95% of the country's wealth and are basically a transnational crime syndicate masquerading as a govt. I can't tell of you are deeply clueless, trolling, or spreading dezinformatziya. Either way, perhaps you should remember this quote from famous American author Mark Twain: "It is better to remain silent and let people think you are a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt".

by cwhiz 6y ago

mads 6y ago

Yes, I think everyone got the memo about American companies. Thanks though..

yumraj 6y ago

Chinese browser collects data for CCP which will use it for spying and for action against you, your family and your country. American company will collect data to show you ads and profit. Are they really same?

serf 6y ago
American agencies routinely collect data from the internet that results in actions against people. One could say the motives are different, but to act as if American groups collect data purely for profit isn't true. >Are they really the same? No, but acting similarly doesn't imply identical similarity.
itsoktocry 6y ago
>American company will collect data to show you ads and profit Unless you get a target on your back, in which case the American company will provide the American law enforcement agencies with whatever data they want to take action against you and your family. Your assertion is just a variation of "if you're not doing anything wrong you shouldn't worry about spying".
- godelski 6y ago
  FWIW I didn't read the gp as supporting data collection, only noting a difference between corporations gathering data and governments. I don't support data collection, but I do think the distinction is useful.
- yumraj 6y ago
  > Your assertion is just a variation of "if you're not doing anything wrong you shouldn't worry about spying". Really, that is what you got from my comment. In the case of CCP it can even be who you are, as in Tibetan, Uighur and so on.. Or, a national of a different country that China wants to spy on, or a relative of someone that China thinks has a differing opinion from CCP and so on.. It's not even on the same planet, let along in the same ballpark..
  - zeusk 6y ago
    well under the trump administration, we were at the state where ICE was getting tips from unlawful traffic stops and deporting said immigrants/refugees. They're both evil, just that US is less so.
    - aww_dang 6y ago
      Immigration violations are crimes the world over. Disliking the CCP's policies, not so much.
godelski 6y ago
I think this point is very debatable, but I do think there's at least 2 good distinctions. 1) there's a difference between a corporate entity gathering data and a government. There's a difference those entities could potentially have on your life. In the latter case there is a bit of an arms race, like Google trying to grab all your data but also not sharing it with Facebook. In the latter case a government can consolidate all the data. 2) There's a big difference between your government collecting my data and my government collecting my data. This can go both ways too, but there's a lot of factors that dictate this: are our governments friendly with one another? Do I trust my government? How much? Do I trust your government? Etc. They really aren't the same and personally I'd rather not have my data collected, but I'd rather it be dispersed with a corporate arms race who aren't allowed to set laws than an aggregate that belongs to a party that has much more control over my life.
AlexandrB 6y ago
> American company will collect data to show you ads and profit. 7 years later and it's like Snowden never even existed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)
- yumraj 6y ago
  Fair enough, if we want argue along those lines - if you're in country X, would you like to be spied on by your country's gov AND China? I, for one, would prefer, if I have a choice, it to be just my Gov and not a foreign Gov that I consider to be hostile..
  - wbsun 6y ago
    > I, for one, would prefer, if I have a choice, it to be just my Gov and not a foreign Gov that I consider to be hostile.. This seems intuitive at first sight but doesn't make sense to me: is it your Gov or a foreign Gov that can more likely bother your life?
  - Daho0n 6y ago
    Would I rather have some data harvested by the local three letter agency and some by a random Chinese company versus all my data harvested by an American entity (most western three letter agencies share with the US)? I would most definitely rather have them out of the reach of US spying even if it means sending it to China instead. You might consider PRC hostile but how much do you think it takes for your data to get US agents come knocking on your door versus PRC agents? Sure today it might not happen but in your parents youth it could have. In your children's lifetime your words today might harm them. The short version is that unless you live inside the PRC data harvested on you is highly unlikely to matter no matter what you do. Inside the US or US allies? Be careful.
  - yibg 6y ago
    I would go the other way. What can China do to me unless I go there? Vs what can the US do to me since I live there, and even if I don’t live there, the US government reach is a lot wider.
nuker 6y ago
> American company will collect data to show you ads and profit. Are they really same? And your kids data. Grades, searches, web history, pics, diaries. I can totally see new private APIs for recruiters, banks, insurances - like personal assessment scores.
approxim8ion 6y ago
to show you ads and profit, filter what you see online, decide your eligibility for housing and credit, imply your guilt by association or poor classification... and so on. Don't try to whitewash it.
frashelaw 6y ago
Remember anything about Snowden's leaks? American companies happily share all the data they collect with local police departments and intelligence agencies, in bulk, with absolute impunity. If anything, you face a much greater threat from the American intelligence apparatus than one in a foreign country.

chomp 6y ago

1.) Xiaomi worth billions of dollars, not 1.4 trillion, but way more than most companies. 2.) People call out Google all. the. time. There's an article here weekly about dumping Google, finding alternatives, praying for antitrust regulation, etc. 3.) We don't commonly call billionaires who live in the middle east, china, and other non-western countries "oligarchs", do you know why? Why are you so upset about Xiaomi getting called out?

sneak 6y ago
I see people calling out Google regularly but rarely is Chrome explicitly termed "spyware", although it very much is: I had to configure G Suite managed browser settings recently and there are like 4 different backdoor ways that big G can "incidentally" process your web traffic and keystrokes: enhanced safe browsing, image alt text accessibility service, uploading your downloads to a scanning service, browser profile history sync, "make the web better" history upload opt-in, et c et c et c. We should be more consistent in our terminology.
stevewodil 6y ago
>1.) Xiaomi worth billions of dollars, not 1.4 trillion, but way more than most companies. They're referring to Alphabet's (Google) market cap, not Xiaomi's.
- totalZero 6y ago
  Pretty clear that GP understands this, since his next point specifically addresses Google. I think he's saying that Xiaomi is also a big company, albeit less big. Seems like a fair point.
  - stevewodil 6y ago
    Actually, it's certainly not "pretty clear". The GP responded to each line in the original comment with a number. So, their point about Google (point #2) was seemingly unrelated to their point about Xiaomi's market cap (point #1) as they addressed different parts of the original comment. The GP mentioned Google perhaps not because of the market cap mentioned in point #1, but rather as a response to the original comment's mention of American companies. This is further evidenced by their use of point #3 to refer to the term oligarch, which was the third topic raised in the original comment. You can see how not clear this is based on other replies to the comment as well.

theropost 6y ago

But does the Chinese company fund your pension plans, pay wealth back to the government, and employ tax paying citizens in America? Where do you want to asset valuations to be located - in your own nation, or another?

passivate 6y ago

They're just labels. Good polls are hard to do, and so it is quite hard to know whether these labels hold value in mainstream thought. For e.g. Do people under oppressive/spying regimes see Google in the same light when it comes to data collection?

somethingwitty1 6y ago

I'm not sure oligarch means what you are thinking it does. Here is a wiki article which might help clarify why you'll sometimes hear the term used when describing certain Russian billionaires and why you won't generally hear the term used for billionaires from other countries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_oligarch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_oligarch Note: it also isn't a derogatory term, as it appears to be implied here, it just is an identifier of how wealth was accumulated.

wendyshu 6y ago

"What about..."

tpmx 6y ago

> This reminds me of how we call Russian billionaires "oligarchs" but we just call American billionaires...billionaires. Seriously, this is what you're going with? Russigan oligarchs are people who just straight out stole national assets from the Soviet Union/Russia, with the help of the current ruler. There's a relatively clear definition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_oligarch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_oligarch

oblio 6y ago
I don't know why you're being downvoted, the word has a very precise meaning. As much as we can whine about Google and such, all of them solved a valid problem many people were facing, and they did it brilliantly. For a really long time Google Search really was the only game in town. The problem we have is with their externalities. For oligarchs, the main line of business <<is>> the problem.

karaterobot 6y ago

I don't grant your premise that the U.S. government's level of access to Google data is the same as the Chinese government's access to Xiaomi's. I also don't grant that the two governments are equivalent threats to privacy. You would need to demonstrate both of those things for me to be on board with your argument. But, the point I actually want to make is that this implies that people aren't concerned with Google's use of their private data, which I think is demonstrably not true, given that they've got multiple open lawsuits against them over it.

Daho0n 6y ago
> I also don't grant that the two governments are equivalent threats to privacy So for someone like me, living in a 14 eyes country, are you saying it is worse for my privacy that a government on the other side of the earth that my government doesn't really like might have access to some of my data is better compared to a country my government are sharing data with who also have access to pretty much everything that happens online? I know for a fact that no matter what I say or do online PRC agents will never knock down my door. US agents? That would be quite a lot easier. In less serious waters, privacy is also worse as we know from Snowden that the US not only harvest everything it can but it also share it with US businesses. Will I ever see ads based on an algorithm trained on data from both sides? No idea, but I know which one would be worse for me by a long shot.

burntoutfire 6y ago

> This reminds me of how we call Russian billionaires "oligarchs" but we just call American billionaires...billionaires. Russian billionaires came to their wealth purely through corruption - i.e. using via their connections during the crucial years of transformation to market economy to buy huge state-owned industrial companies for 0.1-1% of their real value.

emptyparadise 6y ago

I find both to be disturbing and wrong. What do I win?

sexy_seedbox 6y ago
You can start championing for a resource-based economy?

toss1 6y ago

Ummm, Xaomi also has a high valuation, and Google gets called out on privacy all the time, including many times in this very discussion. Russian Oligarchs are called that because they are about two dozen people who looted about 95% of the country's wealth and are basically a transnational crime syndicate masquerading as a govt. I can't tell of you are deeply clueless, trolling, or spreading dezinformatziya. Either way, perhaps you should remember this quote from famous American author Mark Twain: "It is better to remain silent and let people think you are a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt".