If I disable most of Google's privacy settings on Android - is the big G still spying?

[anon(50597)]

Except we do. The ToS are different, the data they allow themselves to collect is different, and the number of sources they use and combine are different, not to mention that their main business models are entirely different.

I have no idea how you can claim not to know weather they are all equal. They simply aren't. Again, that doesn't mean MS or anyone else is so much better, but they certainly aren't equal.

Let me know if I misunderstand what you’ve said.
You said no one knows exactly what Google collects.
You also said you know Google collects more than anyone by reading the TOS. Which is it?
Im not sure any of us know for sure, but I believe Google is more open than anyone and if we found out they were doing more than they say, their business model would be doomed.
I’m not saying I trust any of them explicitly, but I don’t understand the focus on Google being the worst and I don’t know how we can avoid all this without crawling under a rock.
Now it’s time for a beer!

 

[tgp]

OK @a5cent, you are of course correct. I don't know why I was way out in left field here. I am now convinced that Google is by far the "worst" at data collection, and should be avoided at all costs, at least if you care about that type of thing.

However, I personally couldn't care less what data Google or Microsoft or Facebook collects about me. Maybe that's why I am indifferent. I trust them.

To me, the difference between Google and say Microsoft is inconsequential. It's like getting hit by a car or by the TGV. Sure, the train is going to hit you harder, but you're dead either way. Am I more dead if I am hit by the TGV?

I realize that you and many other users here are from Europe, which is very socialist compared to the United States. I lived in Europe for awhile, and I was surprised by citizens' skepticism relating to government and corporations. I was not used to that, and it was an eye opener for me. You basically don't trust anyone.

Unfortunately the US is becoming more socialist, but it is still far more democratic. Americans have never experience Communism like Europe has. I suppose your skepticism has some roots where we've never seen that type of thing.

Also, all the big tech companies are American, which is probably why Europeans think about it more. Maybe we're used to bending over and taking it, but at least it's people from home.

 

[a5cent]

Let me know if I misunderstand what you’ve said.
You said no one knows exactly what Google collects.
You also said you know Google collects more than anyone by reading the TOS. Which is it?

Yup, you've misunderstood. I try to choose my words carefully.

We do know what data Google collects. What we don't know is what Google can derive from that data, a.k.a. what they do with it. Those are two very different things. There is no contradiction.

 

[anon(50597)]

Yup, you've misunderstood. I try to choose my words carefully.

We do know what data Google collects. What we don't know is what Google can derive from that data, a.k.a. what they do with it. Those are two very different things. There is no contradiction.

But like I said, isn’t it apparent what they do with it? If they were doing things we disagreed with, they would be out of business. It’s because we know they aren’t giving it away, selling it, etc. that makes it acceptable to most.

I don’t use a Google, but have in the past, so I have no reason to defend them. Everyone can choose based on their perceptions. It seems their model works and it’s not because people are dumb or don’t know what a Google is doing.

Interesting conversation though.

 

[a5cent]

To me, the difference between Google and say Microsoft is inconsequential. It's like getting hit by a car or by the TGV. Sure, the train is going to hit you harder, but you're dead either way. Am I more dead if I am hit by the TGV?

You keep making this a Google vs MS thing. It's really not, or at least to me it isn't. You're the one always going back to that. How many times do I have to state that MS isn't so much better?

To me it's starting to feel like you have a Google bias and are somehow offended by the idea that these companies aren't all the same. Of course it's fine to just not care about the differences. I completely get that, and that's fine. That doesn't mean differences don't exist.

In regard to your remarks on Europe I think you're painting with a very broad brush, so broad that it's hard for me to agree with you. Europe is not just one country, but U.S. media can't seem to wrap their brains around that. The government and economic models can vary drastically from one country to the next. I live in Switzerland, which isn't even part of Europe (politically).

Western Europe has never experienced communism either, and I'd say none of your remarks apply to Switzerland, neither in regard to socialism or democracy. Switzerland is a direct democracy, which is far closer to the ideal of a real democracy than the U.S.' representational system, which even many Americans argue is not really a democracy at all. Either way... this is a huge topic and I'm not sure it's really related to any of this ;-)

Sorry if I'm getting under your skin. I always appreciate your views, even when we don't agree.

 

[nate0]

On a lighter note (debate aside)....One thing I beleive google does with our data, especially if you use the Android platform, is it provides AI/machine learning experiences from the cloud. The google photos app is one and the google now experience is a second app experience that ties into your account and information. Both apps/services provide output based on info, data, etc. it collects.

To second and also add to a point made earlier...I would not be so concerned about what data they collect or how. But rather what that data produces. Google has a lot. And with having much comes much responsibility.

Also just a side note from my own thinking: I'm not certain on how long Google's quantum systems have been live, but one things certain...when haveing large databases of information it requires great computing systems to be able achieve even anything with such large amounts of data.

 

[a5cent]

But like I said, isn’t it apparent what they do with it? If they were doing things we disagreed with, they would be out of business. It’s because we know they aren’t giving it away, selling it, etc. that makes it acceptable to most.

Disclaimer:
This isn't necessarily just about Google. It's just an example I use as I consider Google to be running one of the most advanced data monetization operations while also being the hardest (impossible?) to avoid.

I'm not sure I can explain my position any better.

As I already asked, do you have any idea what information Google can discern about you from the data they collect? Do you know what their behavioral profile on you looks like? If not, then I'd say it's not apparent to you what Google is doing with that data. All you know is how they are monetizing it. I'm not sure if we agree or disagree on this, but you'll surely agree that "what they derive" and "how they monetize it" are two very different things.

I suspect it might also be difficult to imagine what can be discerned about a person, even from trivial datasets. For example, the company I once worked for had a 96% success rate at identifying stolen credit cards (before they were reported as such) based solely on how a person would dial a number at a public pay phone (yes, that was also a bit before my time but I did get to see it in action). This was impressive 25 years ago. Can you imagine what they can discern now? Probably not... ignorance is bliss I say ;-)

I'd like to know what they can discern and I'd like to have a say in what that profile looks like. Without that I'd favor much stronger privacy protections.

I imagine you might also be more focused on the "here and now", while I'm more focused on the future. I'd agree with you that Google so far has done a very good job at keeping their descriptions of who we are tightly locked up and safe. In contrast to tgp (and maybe you?) I see absolutely no chance of things staying that way. If not unintentionally, it will eventually be made accessible to some in the interest of profitability. At that point it will just be impossible to put the lid back on the box.

 

[anon(50597)]

Here’s another one.
Apple seems to have (perhaps) perfected facial recognition to unlock devices. Doesn’t this mean they are collecting the actual live faces of millions of humans? So does the government, for drivers licenses. Large corporations do for security badges. But Apple sells phones and computers. Should we worry? Does it matter? Again, interesting.

 

[nate0]

Here’s another one.
Apple seems to have (perhaps) perfected facial recognition to unlock devices. Doesn’t this mean they are collecting the actual live faces of millions of humans? So does the government, for drivers licenses. Large corporations do for security badges. But Apple sells phones and computers. Should we worry? Does it matter? Again, interesting.

It's your choice if you decide if it matters or not...

 

[anon(50597)]

It's your choice if you decide if it matters or not...

Oh, of course. I was just interested in others opinions.

To me, you can’t escape the modern world so I don’t worry too much about it. I think it’s up to us to be smart and protect what we want the best we can while enjoying the fruits of modern technology.

 

[a5cent]

Here’s another one.
Apple seems to have (perhaps) perfected facial recognition to unlock devices. Doesn’t this mean they are collecting the actual live faces of millions of humans? So does the government, for drivers licenses. Large corporations do for security badges. But Apple sells phones and computers. Should we worry? Does it matter? Again, interesting.

As far as I know Apple doesn't send any of its face print information "home". It stays on your phone, where it should stay. If that's true, then no, there is nothing to worry about, as they aren't even collecting anything.

None of the fruits of modern technology require anything to be sent back "home"... ever... it works that way because that's what is most profitable to those companies, and as a society we don't care enough to resist it.

 

[N1cks]

In fact, Facebook will know more about you than Google will.

This is true. But the difference is, Facebook is social media. Checking in, posting, adding friends, tagging people etc are deliberate things. FB collects info from the like button embedded in webpages & from cookies, but you can always sign out.

Apparently, LinkedIn profiles are the most valuable.

Microsoft got LinkedIn's users at a discount

What is Your Data Worth?

 

[nate0]

Oh, of course. I was just interested in others opinions.

To me, you can’t escape the modern world so I don’t worry too much about it. I think it’s up to us to be smart and protect what we want the best we can while enjoying the fruits of modern technology.

I gotcha...If I clicked the Accept button on anything it's because I never fully read the ToS or carelessly did it. Nowadays when I click Accept its because I'm testing how the device/services perform while all of it are active. Well knowing most of my info is game. YouTube is the one service I too cannot avoid either way while using W10M or an Android device. It's the era/century we live in too and almost unavoidable.

 

[tgp]

For example, the company I once worked for had a 96% success rate at identifying stolen credit cards (before they were reported as such) based solely on how a person would dial a number at a public pay phone (yes, that was also a bit before my time but I did get to see it in action). This was impressive 25 years ago. Can you imagine what they can discern now? Probably not... ignorance is bliss I say ;-)

Yes it is in the credit card companies' best interest to catch unauthorized usage, because pretty much all cards have $0 liability to the user. They are very good at it. In fact, they're a bit too good. I'm always a bit worried about getting cut off when I'm overseas. Yes, I always report my upcoming travels, but they'll shut them down anyway if they suspect something.

Come to think of it, that is very clever! The credit card companies know about my travels even if I never use the card while on the trip. They have me conditioned to deliberately call them and say, "Hey, I just want you to know that I'm going to be in Spain and Morocco next week."

You are correct that I don't care about tech companies collecting data about me. I question how much less they know about people who try to avoid it. It might make a bit of difference, but probably not much. At least not enough to lose out on the benefits by going all in. Google is the leader in AI, no doubt because of their data collection. Is that good, or bad?

Anyway, I still say it is hypocritical to try to avoid a company like Microsoft or Google or Facebook, and then go out and use a credit card, shop at a department store, or drive on highways, ride subways, or go through airports where your every move is on camera.

 

[Wolfjt]

Let me know if I misunderstand what you’ve said.
You said no one knows exactly what Google collects.
You also said you know Google collects more than anyone by reading the TOS. Which is it?
Im not sure any of us know for sure, but I believe Google is more open than anyone and if we found out they were doing more than they say, their business model would be doomed.
I’m not saying I trust any of them explicitly, but I don’t understand the focus on Google being the worst and I don’t know how we can avoid all this without crawling under a rock.
Now it’s time for a beer!

I agree 100%

 

[a5cent]

Anyway, I still say it is hypocritical to try to avoid a company like Microsoft or Google or Facebook, and then go out and use a credit card, shop at a department store, or drive on highways, ride subways, or go through airports where your every move is on camera.

I don't know tgp. I still think hypocrisy is a very unfair accusation. I consider you to be one of the smartest people in these forums and I'm surprised that even your analysis seems to lack any and all nuance.

Obviously, companies that target adds aren't the only entities interested in collecting information about customers and/or people in general. That doesn't mean all types of tracking are identical or equally egregious. You seem to make no distinction between who is doing the tracking, for what reasons they collect the data, and the amount of information those entities have access to. In your mind they're apparently all interchangeable, so worrying about one more than another seems pointless or hypocritical to you. ??? :-/

At least in Switzerland, the only entities legally capable of tracking and logging location information on any cell phone, irrespective of OS, is the government (via carriers). If you live in an oppressive/authoritarian state, that might be terrible, but from your earlier posts I take it you don't find this problematic in the U.S.. As I live in Switzerland, I don't either, in part because accessing that information requires at least some court involvement.

The same is true of my credit card transactions. Card issuers can't combine that data with other information, hand it out to other companies, or use it for anything else but credit card related processing. The view one company gleans from this data is quite limited, and it's specific to the task I'm paying them to do. Nothing more.

Companies like Google and Facebook can cast a much wider data-net, across very different types of services, which they consolidate into a single profile. For these sorts of companies, there is no limit to the breadth or depth of information required to do their job. More is always better. It baffles my mind that you see no difference between this and the previously mentioned examples.

I doubt it, but maybe U.S. carriers, financial institutions, government agencies etc have few to no legal restrictions on what information they can share? For example, I recently read the U.S. congress has allowed U.S. ISPs to sniff any data transferred between their customers and the internet services they use (consent is implicit), and sell that to whomever they want, without data anonymiztion. The U.S. citizenry either (like you said) just bent over or did nothing. If that's true, then I guess you might have a point that it makes no difference to you folks, but that's in no way comparable to the environment I live in. Maybe you're right that we're judging this from the viewpoints of slightly different cultures, which has lead to very different opinions on how undignified it is to turn an entire populace into a product.

That's the only reason I can come up with why we still don't see eye-to-eye on this.

 

[tgp]

@a5cent I think there probably isn't a big difference in how our respective countries' businesses such as credit card companies handle user data. I think the biggest difference is probably that I don't care and you do. :wink:

What I don't understand about how you and others feel (and act) is that if I cared, I wouldn't use a credit card, drive on a toll road, or go places under camera. That is what I find baffling.

I don't feel that someone picking and choosing what they allow and what they don't makes a significant difference in the end result. I'm sure that all of us would be astounded if we actually knew what was going on. But still, I wouldn't care.

I believe that these companies are self-governed. I think some of our differences are a bit culture based. Business in the US is based on free market, much more so than Europe and most of the rest of the world. If nefarious things start going on, customers will drop them. Europe relies on government regulation.

 

[a5cent]

@a5cent I think there probably isn't a big difference in how our respective countries' businesses such as credit card companies handle user data.

Well, ISPs and carriers are very different (objectively better here).

I don't know anything about the banking industry in the U.S., but based on the little information I do have (i.e. the recent fraud perpetrated by Wells Fargo, the recently revised laws to inhibit class action law suits against banks, etc), it doesn't sound very similar to me. It sounds like even more bending over, but ultimately, none of that is related to privacy policies, and I don't know enough about the U.S. banking system to have an opinion on it.

I don't want to get into the whole Fox News propaganda BS, whose views on Europe are about as nuanced and sophisticated as a worms views on interstellar space travel ;-) There certainly are differences, and you'd be right if you're comparing the U.S. to some specific regions, but if you can't get any more specific than "Europe" you're certainly wrong.

What I don't understand about how you and others feel (and act) is that if I cared, I wouldn't use a credit card, drive on a toll road, or go places under camera. That is what I find baffling.

Well, I thought I did a good job of explaining the difference between driving a toll road and using an online service. I have no idea why that isn't getting through. If [edit] privacy policies and business practices [/edit] actually are the same, I'd expect you to agree. Ah well, doesn't look like we'll get anywhere here... probably best to move on.

Either way, it was nice chatting with you again ;-)

 

[tgp]

Well, I thought I did a good job of explaining the difference between driving a toll road and using an online service. I have no idea why that isn't getting through.

You did a fine job explaining it. I just don't agree with you! :smile:

Either way, it was nice chatting with you again ;-)

Indeed! Think of what we would have missed here if we agreed!

 

[a5cent]

You did a fine job explaining it. I just don't agree with you! :smile:

Dammnit tgp, now you're making me want to know why not ?!!?!?!?

But no, STOP. ;-)

Indeed! Think of what we would have missed here if we agreed!

Very true, nothing more boring than a group of people who agree on everything ;-)