4 ms·
As magicalist points out in his response, you are taking Schmidt's quote completely out of context. Don't feel bad, you're not the only one. Schmidt (and Googl
by zak_mc_kracken 11y ago
As magicalist points out in his response, you are taking Schmidt's quote completely out of context. Don't feel bad, you're not the only one.
Schmidt (and Google) are extremely pro-privacy and against sharing information with the government. Google must have like ten lawsuits going on at all times on the entire planet trying to fight intrusive data request from governments. They spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year to prevent governments from gaining access to their data.
At least with Android being open source, they have a reasonable track record of transparency (obviously, that doesn't apply to their search logs, which are still proprietary).
- stephenr 11y ago> Schmidt (and Google) are extremely pro-privacy and against sharing information with the government. Privacy doesn't mean "don't share my data with the government". > They spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year to prevent governments from gaining access to their data Funny how you say "Google are extremely pro-privacy" and then describe the vast amassed personal information of users as "their data", referring to Google.
- zak_mc_kracken 11y agoYou seem to think that "pro-privacy" is equivalent to "don't collect any private information". It's not. Not at all.
- millstone 11y agoSo then why does Google collect my private information, if they are "extremely pro-privacy?" You're going to run out of superlatives by the time you reach DuckDuckGo.
- eps 11y agoYou seem to be operating with some Newspeak definition of privacy. Privacy is seclusion. Ruffling through someone's dirty laundry, but keeping all the findings to themselves is not "pro-privacy".
- weland 11y agoThat's exactly what privacy means. When I'm dancing naked in my house, I don't care if the guy holding the IR camera across the road is a government employee or a company's employee. All I care is that he has a camera. If some private data of mine (including, but not limited to pictures of my genitalia) ended up someplace other than on a medium I own, that data is no longer private. I.e. it was a privacy breach.
- sangnoir 11y agoThis is exactly what "Apple-is-better" people on this thread do not get. They are suggesting that the Apple IR camera is good because it improves the user "experience by syncing with itunes to play a song with the right tempo as you dance" as opposed to the Google IR camera which will result in sun-burn cream ads. What the typical person would want is no IR camera at all.
- stephenr 11y agoApple collects far less personal data than Google/etc. In this stupid analogy, Apple don't even have an IR camera.
- sangnoir 11y ago> Apple collects far less personal data than Google/etc Agreed. I don't know if we are disagreeing. Or perhaps you disagree with the notion that the ideal situation for privacy is when no personal collection is done?
- rimantas 11y agoIs Google Now open source? Google search? Google ads?
- glogla 11y agoAndroid is becoming less and less open source by the minute. Google used the opensourcedness as a trojan horse to get the OEMs, but now it's pulling it away.
- MichaelGG 11y agoIgnore that: Google had to rein shitty OEMs in because they were trashing the brand as bad as OEMs screwed Windows. Bad OOBE, inconsistent, buggy, etc. Using GApps as a carrot/stick is something they should have had from the beginning. There may be other reasons, but the QA aspect is enough that Google would have to hit the OEMs, even if Google wanted to promote open source.