Our personal information is worth money. The more of it they can gather the more they can earn. Offering free storage for all your pictures, free email, assistants, etc is part of the plan. Giving away Android and selling cheap Chrome books was genius.
We have become the product and at the same time give them money to take our personal information and sell it to who ever wants it.
You are at absolute liberty not to do any of this. Don't like the non-monetary cost of free services? Don't pay! And, as already noted, there is always a trade-off between utility, security and privacy. You want an efficient well-functioning state that talks to you digitally? That assumes you trust the state with some of your private data. Or keep paying for the inefficient services and absorb the cost of identity theft and such. It is your iwn choice.
Can someone please explain why this "Google is evil" meme, is spreading without any concrete evidence?
E.g."in that they are designed to nudge users to share more and think less."
What's the basis behind the claim "think less"? If I get weather at my current location or reminder for my appointment without any friction, how does that makes me "think less"? In fact it frees up my time for other tasks.
Consider the fact that Google already has for more than 10 years, a near real time feed of your interests (via Search) and information over longer time (via GMail)? How does Google Now or Assistant using the same information that has been present for so many years, makes you "think less" or makes it "evil"? How is making an explicit Google Search instead of having recommendation automatically delivered to you (which you can turn off or ignore) is somehow better?
The other part of article is pure rambling, how is Google to be blamed for what seems like a pure market equilibrium. If the author does not likes an Android tab, he can choose another option, get an iPad or a Windows tablet, or use a burner flip phones like they did in The Wire.
The real uncomfortable fact for people (especially those on HN) to admit is the tradeoff between security and privacy. There is a reason why cars have license plates, or that opening a bank account or getting a credit card without providing identification is impossible. The equilibrium between utility, security and privacy that exists in other industries similarly exists in Tech industry.
Why you compare present Google experience with past Google experience as before been OK? It was already invasive, now it is taking another huge step. Common people don't see it, but us developers do.
I am curious whether you work for Google? I also don't think your answer would be honest and why delete your comment suggesting it's OK to monetize a persons private information?
Google is a singular noun. Although it is comprised of a collective of individuals, it is an individual entity.
To use a plural, indicating that those collaborating as part of the team effort that Google, The Company represents, is better termed as those "Googlers" over there.
Googlers represent a plural aspect of the collective efforts of many.
Google isn't a rock band, like The Who.
You might say The Who are touring Europe.
In contrast you'd say Google is creating a new product. Or, alternatively, a team of Googlers are creating a new product, which happens to be evil.
Why anyone should have to spell this out is beyond me, but hey, the internet takes all kinds.
I mean come on. This is not hard stuff. People should just kind of "get it." Oh well.
12 comments
[ 4.8 ms ] story [ 49.1 ms ] threadWe have become the product and at the same time give them money to take our personal information and sell it to who ever wants it.
It's messed up....
Their "slogan" don't be evil was always meant to be ironinc. Google is evil. Always has been.
E.g."in that they are designed to nudge users to share more and think less."
What's the basis behind the claim "think less"? If I get weather at my current location or reminder for my appointment without any friction, how does that makes me "think less"? In fact it frees up my time for other tasks.
Consider the fact that Google already has for more than 10 years, a near real time feed of your interests (via Search) and information over longer time (via GMail)? How does Google Now or Assistant using the same information that has been present for so many years, makes you "think less" or makes it "evil"? How is making an explicit Google Search instead of having recommendation automatically delivered to you (which you can turn off or ignore) is somehow better?
The other part of article is pure rambling, how is Google to be blamed for what seems like a pure market equilibrium. If the author does not likes an Android tab, he can choose another option, get an iPad or a Windows tablet, or use a burner flip phones like they did in The Wire.
The real uncomfortable fact for people (especially those on HN) to admit is the tradeoff between security and privacy. There is a reason why cars have license plates, or that opening a bank account or getting a credit card without providing identification is impossible. The equilibrium between utility, security and privacy that exists in other industries similarly exists in Tech industry.
To use a plural, indicating that those collaborating as part of the team effort that Google, The Company represents, is better termed as those "Googlers" over there.
Googlers represent a plural aspect of the collective efforts of many.
Google isn't a rock band, like The Who.
You might say The Who are touring Europe.
In contrast you'd say Google is creating a new product. Or, alternatively, a team of Googlers are creating a new product, which happens to be evil.
Why anyone should have to spell this out is beyond me, but hey, the internet takes all kinds.
I mean come on. This is not hard stuff. People should just kind of "get it." Oh well.