4 ms·

Google: We never sell your personal information

19 points by ohmyblock 5y ago

ehnto 5y ago
Which is like the butcher telling me he won't sell animal carcasses, whilst displaying his fine selection of sausages for sale. Of course he won't, he is the one who uses them. He will sell me the sausages though. Google is a data consumer, and from it they formulate products and services that they sell.
- utopcell 5y ago
  What a tasteless analogy..
  - ljm 5y ago
    I'm not sure what's wrong with it; many people find sausages to be quite delicious.
  - ehnto 5y ago
    For a tasteless topic. I'm not about to pour sprinkles on a cupcake of eroding privacy.
  - utucuro 5y ago
    It is a very appropriate analogy. You know that historically, you usually did not want to know what went into sausages. Kinda like FLoC, come to think of it... Just trust your butcher.
- habosa 5y ago
  (Googler here, but speaking just for myself) I agree with you but I will say that most of my non-tech-savvy family members think that the big companies are selling their data and that’s what they need to worry about. It’s important that they understand the difference between the big companies which collect and use your data but keep it safe from others vs the little ones who buy and sell your data from a ton of shady operators and cause all your spam emails.
  - ehnto 5y ago
    I'd agree that is an important distinction for Google to make.
  - blakesterz 5y ago
    Does Google limit where it buys from? That is, does Googly buy from "the little ones who buy and sell your data from a ton of shady operators" ?
  - giomasce 5y ago
    Your family members might be wiser than you in believing that data owned by large monopolistic operators are not safe at all, and that Google is far from being above suspects of shadiness. Little operators cannot do more then some harm: they are little, they possess relatively little data, they don't have the ability to capture a significant share of the aspects of my life. Google can, and can escape regulations on how such data can be used. This is what is really dangerous.
    - candiodari 5y ago
      Luckily everyone else can be trusted with sensitive data: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/06/police-backdoor-access-nhs-health-records https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/06/police-backd... https://www.aclu.org/other/faq-government-access-medical-records https://www.aclu.org/other/faq-government-access-medical-rec... https://www.themdu.com/guidance-and-advice/case-studies/divorce-and-disclosure-of-medical-records https://www.themdu.com/guidance-and-advice/case-studies/divo... https://www.divorcemag.com/blog/are-medical-records-private https://www.divorcemag.com/blog/are-medical-records-private https://www.plaintiffmagazine.com/recent-issues/item/unrelated-medical-issues-can-hurt-your-case https://www.plaintiffmagazine.com/recent-issues/item/unrelat... So let's just stop pretending that all the data Google has is even remotely problematic compared to the cases described above, supported by US/UK/EU governments. Apparently disrupting someone's medical and/or mental health treatment is a perfectly acceptable way to deal with an unpaid traffic ticket. Using a woman's gynecologist and/or psychiatrist visits and what medication was prescribed is a perfectly valid argument to be used in alimony or child custody proceedings. It can apparently be used in simple commercial conflicts about unpaid bills too, or for eviction. That IS the standard we are using. This is not "what might happen". This is what happens. This is what we have democratically decided is the protection afforded to private information. In other words: no protection whatsoever. Evicting a wife and kids because the husband got help for an alcohol addiction is how we ARE doing things. Is Google/Apple/Facebook/... remotely problematic compared to that? No. Just ... Just no. Are governments arguing the evilness of Amazon collecting information to suggest a birthday present for your niece 2 weeks before her birthday ... when they themselves send armed policemen into houses to take kids into CPS custody, to be rendered onto her ex (you know, doing it this way "to avoid trauma") based on the mother's medical file? Yes. Yes they are. And let's not talk about the effects of that on kids, because if there's one thing such actions do NOT do, it's avoiding trauma in anyone. Even the fucking police officers are complaining it takes them days to recover from the screams of such children. THAT is what we ARE using everyone's private information for.
gojomo 5y ago
"…because selling it might enable competition. We rent your personal information, for only those limited marketing purposes, within our own managed markets, that further cement our monopolies."
decasteve 5y ago
Dairy farmers don't sell cows, they milk them.
tgv 5y ago
For specific values of never, sell, personal and information.
thedanbob 5y ago
Frankly, I don’t care if what they’re doing with my information is considering selling, renting, repackaging, remixing, displaying in an art gallery, or anything else. As long as they’re using it to try to shove more ads into my eyeballs I will do everything I can to deny them that information. As well as to prevent said ads from entering said eyeballs.
rognjen 5y ago
They will buy it tho.

19 points by ohmyblock 5y ago

Which is like the butcher telling me he won't sell animal carcasses, whilst displaying his fine selection of sausages for sale. Of course he won't, he is the one who uses them. He will sell me the sausages though. Google is a data consumer, and from it they formulate products and services that they sell.

utopcell 5y ago
What a tasteless analogy..
- ljm 5y ago
  I'm not sure what's wrong with it; many people find sausages to be quite delicious.
- ehnto 5y ago
  For a tasteless topic. I'm not about to pour sprinkles on a cupcake of eroding privacy.
- utucuro 5y ago
  It is a very appropriate analogy. You know that historically, you usually did not want to know what went into sausages. Kinda like FLoC, come to think of it... Just trust your butcher.
habosa 5y ago
(Googler here, but speaking just for myself) I agree with you but I will say that most of my non-tech-savvy family members think that the big companies are selling their data and that’s what they need to worry about. It’s important that they understand the difference between the big companies which collect and use your data but keep it safe from others vs the little ones who buy and sell your data from a ton of shady operators and cause all your spam emails.
- ehnto 5y ago
  I'd agree that is an important distinction for Google to make.
- blakesterz 5y ago
  Does Google limit where it buys from? That is, does Googly buy from "the little ones who buy and sell your data from a ton of shady operators" ?
- giomasce 5y ago
  Your family members might be wiser than you in believing that data owned by large monopolistic operators are not safe at all, and that Google is far from being above suspects of shadiness. Little operators cannot do more then some harm: they are little, they possess relatively little data, they don't have the ability to capture a significant share of the aspects of my life. Google can, and can escape regulations on how such data can be used. This is what is really dangerous.
  - candiodari 5y ago
    Luckily everyone else can be trusted with sensitive data: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/06/police-backdoor-access-nhs-health-records https://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/06/police-backd... https://www.aclu.org/other/faq-government-access-medical-records https://www.aclu.org/other/faq-government-access-medical-rec... https://www.themdu.com/guidance-and-advice/case-studies/divorce-and-disclosure-of-medical-records https://www.themdu.com/guidance-and-advice/case-studies/divo... https://www.divorcemag.com/blog/are-medical-records-private https://www.divorcemag.com/blog/are-medical-records-private https://www.plaintiffmagazine.com/recent-issues/item/unrelated-medical-issues-can-hurt-your-case https://www.plaintiffmagazine.com/recent-issues/item/unrelat... So let's just stop pretending that all the data Google has is even remotely problematic compared to the cases described above, supported by US/UK/EU governments. Apparently disrupting someone's medical and/or mental health treatment is a perfectly acceptable way to deal with an unpaid traffic ticket. Using a woman's gynecologist and/or psychiatrist visits and what medication was prescribed is a perfectly valid argument to be used in alimony or child custody proceedings. It can apparently be used in simple commercial conflicts about unpaid bills too, or for eviction. That IS the standard we are using. This is not "what might happen". This is what happens. This is what we have democratically decided is the protection afforded to private information. In other words: no protection whatsoever. Evicting a wife and kids because the husband got help for an alcohol addiction is how we ARE doing things. Is Google/Apple/Facebook/... remotely problematic compared to that? No. Just ... Just no. Are governments arguing the evilness of Amazon collecting information to suggest a birthday present for your niece 2 weeks before her birthday ... when they themselves send armed policemen into houses to take kids into CPS custody, to be rendered onto her ex (you know, doing it this way "to avoid trauma") based on the mother's medical file? Yes. Yes they are. And let's not talk about the effects of that on kids, because if there's one thing such actions do NOT do, it's avoiding trauma in anyone. Even the fucking police officers are complaining it takes them days to recover from the screams of such children. THAT is what we ARE using everyone's private information for.

gojomo 5y ago

"…because selling it might enable competition. We rent your personal information, for only those limited marketing purposes, within our own managed markets, that further cement our monopolies."

decasteve 5y ago

Dairy farmers don't sell cows, they milk them.

tgv 5y ago

For specific values of never, sell, personal and information.

thedanbob 5y ago

Frankly, I don’t care if what they’re doing with my information is considering selling, renting, repackaging, remixing, displaying in an art gallery, or anything else. As long as they’re using it to try to shove more ads into my eyeballs I will do everything I can to deny them that information. As well as to prevent said ads from entering said eyeballs.

rognjen 5y ago

They will buy it tho.