6 ms·

Any company with a business model that takes your money and gives you service is inherently more secure than one that sells your eyeballs to advertisers in exch

by gary_0 4y ago

Any company with a business model that takes your money and gives you service is inherently more secure than one that sells your eyeballs to advertisers in exchange for giving you free stuff. The former companies have a direct incentive to keep giving you service as part of their core business. The latter are really only paying attention to the money they get from advertisers.

411111111111111 4y ago
This comment is so ironic considering that Apple has just lost their lawsuit in the EU for doing exactly the same. Wherever you paid for the product seems to have little impact, the reality is that all tech giants carelessly invade your privacy with no recourse for the user.
the_snooze 4y ago
>Any company with a business model that takes your money and gives you service is inherently more secure than one that sells your eyeballs to advertisers in exchange for giving you free stuff. If anything, companies try to double-dip and serve multiple masters. See: the security and privacy mess in smart TVs. Last I checked, LG wasn't giving their TVs away.
- efsavage 4y ago
  > If anything, companies try to double-dip and serve multiple masters. See: the security and privacy mess in smart TVs. Last I checked, LG wasn't giving their TVs away. This is true, and you transition from customer to eyeballs once you take delivery of the product, but it is also tempered by the fact that they would like to sell you your next TV as well.
  - c22 4y ago
    Google has the same incentive to consider users. If your eyeballs go away they have no recourse for tomorrow. This is no doubt why they give their services away. If they thought they could achieve similar market share while also charging you they certainly would. (And they do whenever they see the chance.)
    - morpheos137 4y ago
      Google certainly could charge a very small fee for existing gmail, youtube, etc, accounts and make a bunch of money. In fact there is a pretty strong argument that they are leaving money on the table by not doing so. Imagine you like your gmail and you have had it for the past decade. If Google charges only $1 per year across say a billion users that is a billion dollars. Even if they lose some users at the margin it may makes sense... According to wikipedia gmail had 1.5 billion active users in 2019. As internet services mature and stop growing exponentially it makes sense to charge for them. Yes it is true that some might switch but what makes more sense from the perspective of most users?
      - berniedurfee 4y ago
        Charge for the service and show you ads and sell your data like cable. It’s a win, win, win! I long for a post advertising world. What cataclysmic event or human evolutionary change could cause that, I wonder. Is there any sci-fi that has a world without advertising or is that so far-fetched it’s unimaginable to even futurists?
        morpheos137 4y ago
        Funny enough advertising was relatively small part of the economy until the last several decades. Now it is an "industry" in the multi-trillion dollar range. Even funnier, if Google search worked effectively for product discovery the vast majority of advertising would not be necessary.
        berniedurfee 4y ago
        Good point. Maybe the death of advertising comes when some entity knows us so perfectly well it automagically provides the exact thing we want/need exactly when we want/need it.
        morpheos137 4y ago
        Google used to for me at least from around 2010-2015 +/- a few years. It was incredible. Now it is usually very hard to find anything I want via search. I suppose a certain amount of defect in search results is optimal for the ad business.
  - t0bia_s 4y ago
    Why not a projector connected to NAS or RPi as media center that is free of ad craps?
- Forgeties79 4y ago
  The amount of nonsense on my LG C1 is nonsense given what I paid for it. Seriously considering getting an Apple TV or Nvidia Shield to run all my stuff on. Their UI is so bloated with crap.
  - Darrengineer 4y ago
    Have you looked into displays built around the raspberry pi compute module? I don't have experience with them but I've heard them mentioned (here iirc but it's been some time). I don't know much about them so I'm sure the implementation varies between manufacturers. An example from Sharp: https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/system-on-a-chip https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/system-on-a-chip
  - AdmiralAsshat 4y ago
    Unfortunately, the Nvidia Shield hasn't been the community darling for some time. Ever since there was an OS update that started putting ads on the homescreen.
    - ziml77 4y ago
      I stopped using the Shield when I realized that my LG C9 runs the streaming applications much better than the Shield. The Shield has always been slow for me and Hulu on it never worked right. Every time it went to the next episode of a TV show, the screen would be black while the audio played. I don't think it was consistent how long it stayed like that for but it could be up to a few minutes. I'll just let LG collect my viewing habits if that's what it takes for a good experience. But I did decline all of the agreements that have anything to do with data collection, so hopefully they're not being overly intrusive anyway.
      - Forgeties79 4y ago
        I just hate that I can only download a few apps unless I make an LG account. I don't want an account to log into my tv so I can access my accounts I log in to. That's some Xzibit nonsense.
    - 4y ago
- parker_mountain 4y ago
  > LG wasn't giving their TVs away. No, but they're selling them at cost, and using monetization tactics to make up for that over the long term.
  - InCityDreams 4y ago
    Well, that's lg off the list then. Thanks, that saved me a bunch of time, money, and eyestrain.
    - RussianCow 4y ago
      Pretty much every modern TV manufacturer does this. Don't kid yourself into thinking it's just one company.
    - parker_mountain 4y ago
      I've got bad news for you, it's all of them. Fortunately, it's not so bad, just run firmware updates after you get the new tv, and then disconnect it from the internet.
jasmer 4y ago
"is inherently more secure than one that sells your eyeballs to advertisers in exchange for giving you free stuff. " Not necessarily, and in fact this case I would disagree. I trust Google's security 10x more than that of FastMail. The 'advertising company' reaps in billions of $ with which they can get all sorts of good engineers for 0-day research, exploits, updates. They have a lot more of a reputation to defend. Without hard evidence, I suggest that Google is probably 'more secure' than FastMail. Certainly more than 'Mom and Pop Mail'. Except for the bit where they read my email and advertise to me on that basis, which is admittedly an ugly tradeoff.
- wintogreen74 4y ago
  >> Except for the bit where they read my email and advertise to me on that basis, which is admittedly an ugly tradeoff. If you are paying for google apps this is not a trade-off. I dislike how (as a paying) customer they continually push me towards google-only <everything> but they don't require it.
- creata 4y ago
  gary_0 seems to be using "security" to mean "sureness of their continued existence", as in "food security". I don't think there's any question that Gmail is more secure in the computing sense. > Except for the bit where they read my email and advertise to me on that basis, which is admittedly an ugly tradeoff. Iirc, Google reads your email, but explicitly says they do not use what they read to personalize your ads.
  - theturtletalks 4y ago
    So what’s the reason for reading it then?
    - creata 4y ago
      Probably the relevant bit: > To provide you features like smart inbox categories, Smart Compose, and spam detection, we use Gmail data to provide a more intelligent email experience and keep you safe. - https://support.google.com/mail/answer/10434152?hl=en https://support.google.com/mail/answer/10434152?hl=en Famously, a while back, at some Google subdomain, you could see a list of all of your payments extracted from your emails, but I'm not sure that still exists.
stickfigure 4y ago
> Any company with a business model that takes your money and gives you service is inherently more secure I just finished reading Postmail For Dummies. Since I'm charging $5/mo for email accounts, you'll obviously want to migrate your gmail over since my solution is so much more secure.
somerandomness 4y ago
The solution is to subscribe to Google One

by gary_0 4y ago

411111111111111 4y ago

This comment is so ironic considering that Apple has just lost their lawsuit in the EU for doing exactly the same. Wherever you paid for the product seems to have little impact, the reality is that all tech giants carelessly invade your privacy with no recourse for the user.

the_snooze 4y ago

>Any company with a business model that takes your money and gives you service is inherently more secure than one that sells your eyeballs to advertisers in exchange for giving you free stuff. If anything, companies try to double-dip and serve multiple masters. See: the security and privacy mess in smart TVs. Last I checked, LG wasn't giving their TVs away.

efsavage 4y ago
> If anything, companies try to double-dip and serve multiple masters. See: the security and privacy mess in smart TVs. Last I checked, LG wasn't giving their TVs away. This is true, and you transition from customer to eyeballs once you take delivery of the product, but it is also tempered by the fact that they would like to sell you your next TV as well.
- c22 4y ago
  Google has the same incentive to consider users. If your eyeballs go away they have no recourse for tomorrow. This is no doubt why they give their services away. If they thought they could achieve similar market share while also charging you they certainly would. (And they do whenever they see the chance.)
  - morpheos137 4y ago
    Google certainly could charge a very small fee for existing gmail, youtube, etc, accounts and make a bunch of money. In fact there is a pretty strong argument that they are leaving money on the table by not doing so. Imagine you like your gmail and you have had it for the past decade. If Google charges only $1 per year across say a billion users that is a billion dollars. Even if they lose some users at the margin it may makes sense... According to wikipedia gmail had 1.5 billion active users in 2019. As internet services mature and stop growing exponentially it makes sense to charge for them. Yes it is true that some might switch but what makes more sense from the perspective of most users?
    - berniedurfee 4y ago
      Charge for the service and show you ads and sell your data like cable. It’s a win, win, win! I long for a post advertising world. What cataclysmic event or human evolutionary change could cause that, I wonder. Is there any sci-fi that has a world without advertising or is that so far-fetched it’s unimaginable to even futurists?
      - morpheos137 4y ago
        Funny enough advertising was relatively small part of the economy until the last several decades. Now it is an "industry" in the multi-trillion dollar range. Even funnier, if Google search worked effectively for product discovery the vast majority of advertising would not be necessary.
        berniedurfee 4y ago
        Good point. Maybe the death of advertising comes when some entity knows us so perfectly well it automagically provides the exact thing we want/need exactly when we want/need it.
        morpheos137 4y ago
        Google used to for me at least from around 2010-2015 +/- a few years. It was incredible. Now it is usually very hard to find anything I want via search. I suppose a certain amount of defect in search results is optimal for the ad business.
- t0bia_s 4y ago
  Why not a projector connected to NAS or RPi as media center that is free of ad craps?
Forgeties79 4y ago
The amount of nonsense on my LG C1 is nonsense given what I paid for it. Seriously considering getting an Apple TV or Nvidia Shield to run all my stuff on. Their UI is so bloated with crap.
- Darrengineer 4y ago
  Have you looked into displays built around the raspberry pi compute module? I don't have experience with them but I've heard them mentioned (here iirc but it's been some time). I don't know much about them so I'm sure the implementation varies between manufacturers. An example from Sharp: https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/system-on-a-chip https://www.sharpnecdisplays.us/system-on-a-chip
- AdmiralAsshat 4y ago
  Unfortunately, the Nvidia Shield hasn't been the community darling for some time. Ever since there was an OS update that started putting ads on the homescreen.
  - ziml77 4y ago
    I stopped using the Shield when I realized that my LG C9 runs the streaming applications much better than the Shield. The Shield has always been slow for me and Hulu on it never worked right. Every time it went to the next episode of a TV show, the screen would be black while the audio played. I don't think it was consistent how long it stayed like that for but it could be up to a few minutes. I'll just let LG collect my viewing habits if that's what it takes for a good experience. But I did decline all of the agreements that have anything to do with data collection, so hopefully they're not being overly intrusive anyway.
    - Forgeties79 4y ago
      I just hate that I can only download a few apps unless I make an LG account. I don't want an account to log into my tv so I can access my accounts I log in to. That's some Xzibit nonsense.
  - 4y ago
parker_mountain 4y ago
> LG wasn't giving their TVs away. No, but they're selling them at cost, and using monetization tactics to make up for that over the long term.
- InCityDreams 4y ago
  Well, that's lg off the list then. Thanks, that saved me a bunch of time, money, and eyestrain.
  - RussianCow 4y ago
    Pretty much every modern TV manufacturer does this. Don't kid yourself into thinking it's just one company.
  - parker_mountain 4y ago
    I've got bad news for you, it's all of them. Fortunately, it's not so bad, just run firmware updates after you get the new tv, and then disconnect it from the internet.

jasmer 4y ago

"is inherently more secure than one that sells your eyeballs to advertisers in exchange for giving you free stuff. " Not necessarily, and in fact this case I would disagree. I trust Google's security 10x more than that of FastMail. The 'advertising company' reaps in billions of $ with which they can get all sorts of good engineers for 0-day research, exploits, updates. They have a lot more of a reputation to defend. Without hard evidence, I suggest that Google is probably 'more secure' than FastMail. Certainly more than 'Mom and Pop Mail'. Except for the bit where they read my email and advertise to me on that basis, which is admittedly an ugly tradeoff.

wintogreen74 4y ago
>> Except for the bit where they read my email and advertise to me on that basis, which is admittedly an ugly tradeoff. If you are paying for google apps this is not a trade-off. I dislike how (as a paying) customer they continually push me towards google-only <everything> but they don't require it.
creata 4y ago
gary_0 seems to be using "security" to mean "sureness of their continued existence", as in "food security". I don't think there's any question that Gmail is more secure in the computing sense. > Except for the bit where they read my email and advertise to me on that basis, which is admittedly an ugly tradeoff. Iirc, Google reads your email, but explicitly says they do not use what they read to personalize your ads.
- theturtletalks 4y ago
  So what’s the reason for reading it then?
  - creata 4y ago
    Probably the relevant bit: > To provide you features like smart inbox categories, Smart Compose, and spam detection, we use Gmail data to provide a more intelligent email experience and keep you safe. - https://support.google.com/mail/answer/10434152?hl=en https://support.google.com/mail/answer/10434152?hl=en Famously, a while back, at some Google subdomain, you could see a list of all of your payments extracted from your emails, but I'm not sure that still exists.

stickfigure 4y ago

> Any company with a business model that takes your money and gives you service is inherently more secure I just finished reading Postmail For Dummies. Since I'm charging $5/mo for email accounts, you'll obviously want to migrate your gmail over since my solution is so much more secure.

somerandomness 4y ago

The solution is to subscribe to Google One