▲ 423 points
back
461 comments
Google owns my soul. Their boxes know when I sleep, when I wake, how much I exercise, what I listen to, my innermost thoughts, my chats with loved ones, what I watched on Netflix last night, what my company does, the flu I have at the moment, what the hypochondriac in me looks up in the middle of the night, what I buy, whom I call, what I spend money on, where I spend it...
I nominally pay for these services, but I suspect it makes me a vassal instead of a serf. Google consumes. Google contemplates. Google cognates. Google knows. Google sees me while I will never get to see it.
At face value, as long as Google is Google, everything is okay but what happens when google is Google no more? When it goes to join the great corporate farm in the sky? What happens to the exabytes of data they’ll have gathered by then? Who will own it once Google is Google no more? What will happen to our lives once the data changes hands a decade or four from now?
Are there any contingency plans for the largest dataset on Earth? Do we get to know these plans?
Who the fuck owns MySpace now?
Say what you will about Apple (and I’ve said a lot), at least I know where we stand. I have switched to iOS and I recommend that you should do the same. At the very least, Google will no longer know when you sleep.
Google is already not Google.
The "Don't Be Evil" corporation that valued open source rather than open-washing, that valued openstandards over "oops, we didn't mean to break that for you!" isn't here anymore.
The company that bends over backwards, much farther than the law requires, to enable the surveillance state.
I despise Apple. Especially on mobile. No SDCards, no headphone jack, walled garden app stores. Ugh ugh ugh.
I have applications that does E2E for contacts and calendars that I'll have to find an iOS solution for.
I loathe the notch.
But my next phone will be an iPhone.
Google collects so much absurd amount of data - that all the Proton-mail, DuckduckGo, Wire/Signal, Firefox (loaded with adblocking and tracking plugins) apps in the world can't keep you totally from it as long as you're on Android. You disable things, you opt out of stuff and it just keeps on collecting anyways.
And i don't believe for a second the data they're allowing you to "autodelete" genuinely gets deleted. It just gets removed from your view.
Rupert Murdoch and criminals own MySpace data.
From Wikipedia:
2013–present: Time Inc. and Meredith Corporation ownership
On February 11, 2016, it was announced that MySpace and its parent company had been bought by Time Inc.[18] Time Inc. was in turn purchased by the Meredith Corporation on January 31, 2018.[20]
In May 2016, the data for almost 360 million MySpace accounts was offered on the "Real Deal" dark market website. The leaked data included email addresses, usernames and weakly encrypted passwords (SHA1 hashes of the first 10 characters of the password converted to lowercase and stored without a cryptographic salt[68]).[69] The exact data breach date is unknown, but analysis of the data suggests it was exposed around eight years before being made public, around mid-2008 to early-2009.[70]
On March 18, 2019, it was revealed that MySpace lost all of their user content from 2016 and earlier in "a server migration gone wrong". It was widely reported that over 50 million songs and 12 years worth of content was permanently lost, and there was no backup.[71]
and there was no backup
and there was no backup
and there was no backup
Wow.
This already happened to me. Around 14 years ago I created a MySpace musician page and apparently I put in my real birthday. It must have been public although I surely didn't intend it to be, and some sort of large data aggregator site picked it up. Later I deleted my MySpace page but the data aggregator still had my info.
The data site had tools to remove your data, but before I knew my data was even there, Google bought the site sometime around 2011 and shut it down, and added the data to their own system.
Today, if you search my full name on Google, it shows an infobox on the side with my real birthday. Google considers birthdays non-private enough that they won't let me remove it. I'm no celebrity but I get that info box because I had a MySpace musician page once over a decade ago.
My birthday now appears nowhere on the internet except that Google search infobox. MySpace, the original aggregator, all gone - but the data lives on.
We don't have a Right To Be Forgotten law where I live but if we ever get one, I know where I'll be going first.
The blatant disregard for privacy is what bothers me the most.
Like when I started getting push notifications from Android for my credit card payment with my exact balance due, which they could only have gathered by parsing my emails from the bank. It's easy to resolve that by changing the contact info/settings with the bank, but just the fact that engineers at Google thought users would appreciate having their private financial information parsed and stored by Google services is absurd.
It should never have crossed anyone's mind to even do that, let alone advertise it as a feature.
Can't we make the same argument about Apple. What happens when apple stops being apple, when they don't have the smart phone dominance and decides to venture back into Ads. Or who owns apple when someone else has to.
I understand why anyone would want ios now but your argument is about the future.
Your point is well taken, but 100 years will anyone care that you had the flu on May 7 2019?
>Who the fuck owns MySpace now?
It's all deleted. https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/18/18271023/myspace-music-vi...
You think Apple is less evil than Google?
Remember that Apple has been cracked by the FBI, has proprietary connectors, and charges more than anyone.
I couldn't disagree more. Apple is horrible to customers and developers.
> "I nominally pay for these services..."
you give them all that valuable personal and private data and then also pay them? why are you so resigned to this? the tradeoff for knowing everything about you gives you what, a few less taps on your phone?
people ignored or minimized it then, but their direction was abundantly clear by 2004 or so: search -> adwords -> adsense -> gmail ---> all-your-data-everywhere (gmail seemed cool at the time until the realization of where all this was going). how is it that so many people are just now waking up to the dangers of google (and facebook, incidentally)?
Indeed, the contract we sign is not “do I trust Google,” it is “do I trust Google in perpetuity.”
I can think of many, many outcomes wherein Google’s collected data is more valuable for uses other than “helpful”.
I'm impressed with the direction Google is taking, and how they've pivoted in the face of public awareness of privacy concerns.
I like the Google products and services that I use. There are some that I miss (Reader) and some that just confuse me (Bookmarks), but the core works for me.
Based on commentary I've seen, I may be the only person on Hacker News to think so. Regardless, I'm hopeful for the future.
>It all begins with our mission to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful, and today, our mission feels as relevant as ever.
I said this 15 years ago and I will repeat it again. Google is like a man selling boats after a dam brake. They are profiting by managing the problem, not by fixing it. It is to their benefit if the problem actually gets worse. In other words, looking at their long-running effects and initiatives, I see that they aim to change the Internet so that it's completely unusable without their services. (The recent stunts with AMP and Gmail are great, obvious examples, but it didn't start there. It was going on for a very long while.)
This not the kind of thing that I want to spread to my offline life.
I think this is all just a PR stunt and Google's business model goes against user privacy.
It's quite interesting the way people are more willing to trust Google than Facebook with their data though. I think this might come from Google actually offering more "useful/needed/can't live without" offerings vs facebook's more vanity based services.
For example, Google takes your very privacy sensitive location data but also returns you amazing mapping capabilities (google maps), transit information, nearby points of interests etc.
They might have access to all your text messages, emails, contacts etc but returns you useful features like the last year's Duplex feature or auto reply suggestions in emails etc.
Facebook's vanity based offerings are quite shallow imo - Instagram is just hyper edited pictures to scroll through, messenger/whatsapp might be useful but it has quite good competition from iMessage or simple text messaging. So for people who actually care about privacy, they are still okay with Google having their data but are not okay with Facebook having their data because FB doesn't really offer much of real value. This could be because Google being a much older company than FB. FB has also had quite major privacy issues (Cambridge Analytica being one of the major ones) and they have shown that they really don't care at all about privacy.
One thing to note though, I still don't think Google should operate the way they do and I am not willing to compromise so much of my privacy. That's why I stick with iOS even though I know Android offers more power (especially since I am an iOS and Android Developer). iOS's AI might be inferior but it gets the job done for me and I appreciate the privacy stance of Apple over Google.
Say what you will about Google, they're really good at PR. They and Facebook share the most indefensible tech business model in today's political climate (at least in the west), but Google does such a better job of obscuring and re-framing that fact than Facebook does.
Every company has two mission statements: The stated one and the real one. Google's real mission statement is "make shitloads of money selling everyone's personal information to advertisers."
The noises Google makes about being "useful" are just cover for the fact that being useful is the only way they can entice everyone to give them that personal information for free. If Google could get a law passed that required everyone to have a grain-of-rice sized Android tracker implanted in their body, Google would do it in a heartbeat. And then the need for all that expensive "usefulness" would be over.
I appreciate the fact that they are being transparent about the nature of the deal they are offering. I suppose my own naivete was partly to blame, but I might not have wasted my time going to work there back in 2011-2012 if they had been clearer about their value proposition. I remain convinced that Google is full of intelligent, thoughtful, well-intentioned people who are shackled to a business model I will not participate in, and all of their beautiful technical achievements therefore remain irrelevant to my life.
This article is uncritical.
In particular it doesn't mention the critical problem that Google makes its money from advertising, not from people who pay for premium phones or premium services. That is, you are still the product.
I recognize social positives from advertising, but there is a fundamental conflict when you are dependent on "free" services paid for by a third party.
The problem with google’s mission is that it doesn’t say which information has to be accessible to whom and in what way it’s going to be useful.
Given that google’s income is mostly from advertising, it feels like the mission is about making my information available to someone else, and useful for them to make money.
Google is not too evil presently, but nothing is guaranteed and the amount of data they have gives them more power than most nation states. So on principle I've been degoogling. Here are my approaches:
search: duckduckgo
android: copperheados (dead ended, waiting for puri.sm librem 5 on order)
chrome: firefox, containers, uMatrix. Isolated usages of chrome w/o logging in.
gmail: fastmail
youtube: peertube
docs/sheets: local software (libreoffice)
reCaptcha: isolated chrome usage w/o logging in, or I avoid the website and email the webmaster.
fonts: uMatrix block them, I live with the fallback fonts. On my sites I host the fonts locally.
analytics: uMatrix blocks it. I don't need it myself.
maps: OSM or other mapping websites
earth: [never needed it]
sky?: [never needed it], stellarium
Privacy is going to be the most valuable commodity of the 21st century.
Google is doing everything in its power to buy/take/borrow that commodity from people (just like FB. Amazon, MS, etc...) They can say things like "We are moving from a company that helps you find answers to a company that helps you get things done…We want our products to work harder for you in the context of your job, your home, and your life, and they all share a single goal: to be helpful, so we can be there for you in moments big and small over the course of your day. "
But I don't buy it.
Regarding that lady. I am from India and I see 100s of people everyday struggling with this exact problem, unable to read what's written. BUT as awesome the technology is it doesn't solve the advertised problem. The very same people, almost everyone I know/see are above the age of 20 and don't even bother to learn the language when they easily can from the $.01 books available almost everywhere. You can give them a tool but how will you give them the motivation?
So if I am using an ad blocker and dont see any ads at all, dont I just _cost_ google, facebook, etc. money from using their services and having them store my data?
What if the majority of people would block all ads? Wouldnt data collection become meaningless?
In the video, they say they have compressed translate, vision and speech into "just over 100kb."
That seems pretty magical. Perhaps it is all server-side?
The author is naive about monetization. Google should not care if making a better product hurts its existing revenue sources. If Google doesn't do it, someone else will. A smart company worries about having the best products that people want to use first and about monetizing those products second, and unlike a startup, Google has the luxury of being able to wait to monetize new products until the ecosystem around them becomes clearer.
The author's simple-minded reasoning is why Microsoft was late to the Internet search engine game.
I wonder if someone can explain to me why I should be upset about Google collecting my data. I would pay money for Google to continue collecting my data and improving its predictive model of my behavior, in order to better address my needs as they arise. They're getting better and better at this over time. It has improved my quality of life.
Yeah I don’t buy any of it (full disclosure I and my household are an Apple only household). I’ve been moving away from google services. It’s slow. And it’s tough because most everything they do is so damn good: google search, amazing; google maps, gold standard imo; gmail — eh? It’s rather good. But I would rather a company like Apple study me because currently they’re not in the business of monetizing my every thought, action, or whim. I pay a premium for the hardware and in return I get a company hellbent on privacy so much so that they refused to unlock an iPhone used by a terrorist.
So while I often hate that DuckDuckGo’s results are sometimes wildly laughable compared to Google’s I’ll continue supporting privacy first companies and pay a premium to do so before I let my phone be a Google phone.
The inline translate text using your camera, right from search was in windows phone circa 2010. Just sayin'. This feature plus offline maps caching & offline routing with subway info was incredibly useful for a European vacation my wife and I took.
RIP WP8
I would love to pick all of the arguments in this topic and fit them in this: https://maxwellito.github.io/tilt/
Not sure if I'm the only one but I don't see a perfect solution on the smartphone part: - iOS is privacy focussed but walled garden and overpriced and impossible to repair. - Android is affordable and hackable but Google powered. - Cyanogen alternative: not easy to access and remain dependant to the Play Store to get apps (so back to Google power)
So we live in a society that isn't able to find the resources to teach someone how to read and get free... Instead that people can buy an Android phone and become a slave of the technology... what a shame
I see a lot of comparison of device makers, with regards to privacy, in this thread. I think this is a moot point, in that data is collected regardless of what company, service, device is used. The fact that the data is being collected is key; your anonymity is compromised regardless. Google is an easy target due to their size and market share, but many people here work for tech companies of all sizes. Reflect on what data that company collects, how it is leveraged, and if the semantics is much different. Collect, leverage, repeat.
The first thing that comes to mind here is Google trying to remove the edge they themselves required to get into the position they are now in. They used and abused data for two decades (and will continue to do so) to become an absolute behemoth.
If they now play the "privacy" card it will stifle competition even more, as there will forever be a compromise on either the amount of data they are able to gather, or the public perception due to being less "privacy" focused than big G.
They get the most elementary thing wrong in their “mission.” The very first search link should be the most relevant, right? Now the entire first PAGE is often bought and paid for.
Yet another hit piece. It's disgusting how obvious and desperate these are getting.
> To put it more succinctly: “Yes, we collect a lot of data. But that data makes amazing things possible.”
I don't like Google, but stating that collecting data is bad just because, doesn't sell it for me. Oh, and this refers to data already available to the general public.
It makes me wonder if there is something behind. What's the agenda behind all these hit pieces? I really don't know.
Mission statement at I/O "be helpful for everyone" They showed how their improved software helps diabled and illiterate people around the world.
The other day I sent my nephew a text on my smartphone:
As Morphius said, "Now do you believe?"
My Android phone decided what I really meant was "As Amorphous said..." So maybe before they decide they want to control everything in my life with all the data they are collecting, they should figure out spell correction first. I got the spelling wrong, but their correction was completely stupid.
I changed my default search engine and homepage to DuckDuckGo. Two weeks later, I didn't even realize I was still using DuckDuckGo -> it's that good. Once people realize this, and how easy it is to switch, google may be in trouble.
i don't have anything against google. I just think, having only 1 search engine is too much power for any 1 company, no matter how benevolent.
Most of the things demoed existed before in Translate app. I have used it and as far as I know someone good hearted at Google did this in his/her 20% time. The speaker, who seems to be some sort of executive, pretended that this is new achievement from her side and Google is suddenly socially responsible. I don't get this article and its author.
Can Google become privacy focused faster than Apple can develop decent software/services, thats the question.
If only this technology could actually educate people, instead of being used as a crutch. This is what Google wants, to have you so dependent on their technology that living life without them is nearly impossible without them.
For me, a timely discussion. Early this year I signed up for GSuite, copied stuff over from the free gmail account I have had for about 15 years, decided Cloud Search, etc. made the privacy hit worthwhile.
Well, I got fed up this week because release of new GSuite services lags the free offerings, and sometimes just aren't released. I lived with switching between free and paid accounts depending on what I was doing (made OK by using Firefox containers).
So, I switched my ProtonMail account to a paid for account, applied my custom domain, and flipped back to using Apple's Calendar, Siri, Maps, etc.
Literally Google lost a tiny bit of my business because their paid for product in some ways was worse than the free offerings.
I can see myself going back to Google paid services in the future but they have to up their game.
This is a painfully well contrived bit of PR.
When companies start peddling poor people in need from some desperate place to pull on our heartstrings ... it's a problem.
If this were something related to their core product - maybe.
But this is virtue signalling at it's ugly finest.
Surely, they mean well. Kudos for that - it's good they're spending a tiny portion of their trillion dollars doing that.
What I object to - strongly - is the attempt to brand themselves by this act, to imbue themselves with some kind of moral fervour, especially in such an emotional way.
"Look at these puppies, they were starving, and then we saved them! Everyone likes puppies, right?" Ok, so they actually saved puppies.
---> Now please fix our privacy problems, which is actually the core of what you're supposed to do.
I will stick to my on device privacy thanks. I know it costs more but its well worth keeping my entire life out of being a lab rat for company that wants to do good for yet to be born rats.
> The implicit message was clear: “Yes, we have all of your data, but the fact we have all of your data is a good thing, because it allows us to make your life easier.”
This is why a) free/libre software and b) Moore's law are important. Trading privacy for convenience is a real trade you can make right now, and nobody benefits from pretending it isn't--the first step to fixing that problem is to admit it exists. But there's no inherent reason this has to be done "on the cloud" (which is just a marketing phrase for "on other people's computers"). As an industry, I would like to see us putting more computing power into end users' hardware and more intelligence into freely available software so that more of this work can be done on people's personal computers without giving their data to amoral corporations.
What exactly is the fighting back in this article?
Apart from the privacy concerns I'm rather hesitant to switch to anything they make, only to see them kill it off again later. But well that also happens all the time when they buy other companies, so you cannot really avoid that from happening to you. Just like the nest news from yesterday.
Good job Google. Nicely done.
Google has become so evil, their whitewash attempts are a sad joke.
how does illiterate pass through driving license test that they can rent a car?
The F'ing Circle.