3 ms·

Yes, true. But "learning" about this public secret from Apple seems somewhat disingenuous. If Android is a cheap rip off device for collecting user data, what

Yes, true. But "learning" about this public secret from Apple seems somewhat disingenuous. If Android is a cheap rip off device for collecting user data, what device is it a rip off of?! And doesn't Apple collect over 25 billion annually for offering similar services to Google? [Added from article] > Ironically, despite Apple describing Android as a massive tracking device, an internal Google email from 2016 about Apple and Google’s deal shows how Apple wanted data sharing with Google to be reciprocal. > In the email, the Google exec notes that they told Apple that Google doesn’t share information about what users click on in Google Search. > However, a reply to that email includes a redacted data exchange proposal, raising questions about what user data Google could be sharing with Apple.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
al_borland 3y ago
>If Android is a cheap rip off device for collecting user data, what device is it a rip off of? The device is a rip off of iPhone/iOS, obviously, but the intent behind them is different. Gmail didn't invent email, Google Maps didn't invent internet maps, Google Drive didn't invent cloud storage, Chrome didn't invent the browser... Google cloning and offering these products/services up was done with tracking added for the purpose of boosting AdWords revenue. Google has ripped off many products, from many companies, adds in a bunch of tracking, and it becomes another arm of their data collection beast. The products they rip off may have not been used for collecting user data, but Google ripped them off and continues offering the services, because of the data collection possibilities. > In the email, the Google exec notes that they told Apple that Google doesn’t share information about what users click on in Google Search. They don't need to share the information, because all the Google products collecting the data, and the services using it for profit, are all in-house. This doesn't mean they aren't collecting and using the data, just that it's their competitive advantage for AdWords and it's far more valuable for them to keep and use themselves.
- repelsteeltje 3y ago
  > The device is a rip off of iPhone/iOS, obviously, but the intent behind them is different. As a developer I care a lot about intent, too: if we confuse what a program does with what it's supposed to be doing it gets hard to see what bug to fix. And I also agree that in all those cases Google was motivated by the fear of being locked out. Locked out by open standards, ousted by Apple as they did with facebook, kept in the dark by Mozilla for refusing third party cookies or choosing a competing default search engine. ...Except that those fears in case of Apple were unwarranted. Apple sells "secure hardware" to customers, but is equally happy to sell those customers to Google, or anyone that pays a little to be in their app store. There are limits, but there are also limits to what Android allows. So in practice, even though their intent might be different, the outcome barely is. I recently discovered about Stafford Beers' POSIWID [1] and I suppose that from that angle, Apple's attribution of Android is basically describing their iPhone just as well. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_what_it_does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

al_borland 3y ago

>If Android is a cheap rip off device for collecting user data, what device is it a rip off of? The device is a rip off of iPhone/iOS, obviously, but the intent behind them is different. Gmail didn't invent email, Google Maps didn't invent internet maps, Google Drive didn't invent cloud storage, Chrome didn't invent the browser... Google cloning and offering these products/services up was done with tracking added for the purpose of boosting AdWords revenue. Google has ripped off many products, from many companies, adds in a bunch of tracking, and it becomes another arm of their data collection beast. The products they rip off may have not been used for collecting user data, but Google ripped them off and continues offering the services, because of the data collection possibilities. > In the email, the Google exec notes that they told Apple that Google doesn’t share information about what users click on in Google Search. They don't need to share the information, because all the Google products collecting the data, and the services using it for profit, are all in-house. This doesn't mean they aren't collecting and using the data, just that it's their competitive advantage for AdWords and it's far more valuable for them to keep and use themselves.

repelsteeltje 3y ago
> The device is a rip off of iPhone/iOS, obviously, but the intent behind them is different. As a developer I care a lot about intent, too: if we confuse what a program does with what it's supposed to be doing it gets hard to see what bug to fix. And I also agree that in all those cases Google was motivated by the fear of being locked out. Locked out by open standards, ousted by Apple as they did with facebook, kept in the dark by Mozilla for refusing third party cookies or choosing a competing default search engine. ...Except that those fears in case of Apple were unwarranted. Apple sells "secure hardware" to customers, but is equally happy to sell those customers to Google, or anyone that pays a little to be in their app store. There are limits, but there are also limits to what Android allows. So in practice, even though their intent might be different, the outcome barely is. I recently discovered about Stafford Beers' POSIWID [1] and I suppose that from that angle, Apple's attribution of Android is basically describing their iPhone just as well. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_what_it_does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...