6 ms·

It can be pseudonymous. It doesn't have to undermine anonymity. Google researchers spend time ensuring k-anonymity (for reasonably large k) when using data.

BrenBarn 2y ago
It's doesn't matter if it's anonymous. Some users simply don't want you to keep any record of their activities.
mrmetanoia 2y ago
Forgive my language but I'd expect people here to understand that's horeshit, they absolutely have enough data and patterning to de-anonymize the data. They spent time making it look anonymous.
- tommiegannert 2y ago
  GP explained what a click stream is and said that preserving click sequences undermines anonymity. De-anonymization is not a conclusion you can draw from only mentioning "click stream." De-anonymization would require linking that click stream with something that identifies the user, rather than the click stream. Perhaps that exists, perhaps not. GP didn't provide enough material to go that far. Exactly because Google has these powers is why they have internal processes to avoid it. Of course there are products that use non-anonymous data, but this idea that everything at Google flows around with user-IDs for everyone to use and abuse is a weird stance. Google has a lot of internal auditing and validation systems when e.g. reading logs and doing feature extraction. But I also got way more respect for Google's internal systems after I worked there than before, so I understand your scepticism.
lesostep 2y ago
The data doesn't have to be tied to me directly to affect me directly. If my clicks suggest that I'm a wealthy woman, isn't that the reason enough to try and connect me with advertisers that try to sell overpriced shoes? Let's downrank all the good deals, surely she can't be interested in 10$ sneakers. If my clicks suggest that I'm from Russia|Ukraine, isn't that the reason enough to show me one side of the news more then the other? In some way our interests define us more then social security number assigned.

BrenBarn 2y ago

It's doesn't matter if it's anonymous. Some users simply don't want you to keep any record of their activities.

mrmetanoia 2y ago

Forgive my language but I'd expect people here to understand that's horeshit, they absolutely have enough data and patterning to de-anonymize the data. They spent time making it look anonymous.

tommiegannert 2y ago
GP explained what a click stream is and said that preserving click sequences undermines anonymity. De-anonymization is not a conclusion you can draw from only mentioning "click stream." De-anonymization would require linking that click stream with something that identifies the user, rather than the click stream. Perhaps that exists, perhaps not. GP didn't provide enough material to go that far. Exactly because Google has these powers is why they have internal processes to avoid it. Of course there are products that use non-anonymous data, but this idea that everything at Google flows around with user-IDs for everyone to use and abuse is a weird stance. Google has a lot of internal auditing and validation systems when e.g. reading logs and doing feature extraction. But I also got way more respect for Google's internal systems after I worked there than before, so I understand your scepticism.

lesostep 2y ago

The data doesn't have to be tied to me directly to affect me directly. If my clicks suggest that I'm a wealthy woman, isn't that the reason enough to try and connect me with advertisers that try to sell overpriced shoes? Let's downrank all the good deals, surely she can't be interested in 10$ sneakers. If my clicks suggest that I'm from Russia|Ukraine, isn't that the reason enough to show me one side of the news more then the other? In some way our interests define us more then social security number assigned.