Hacker News Reader

Comment by Destroyer661 | Hacker News Reader

I have a hard time understanding the whole deal everyone is making of Google finally combining the whole ecosystem they have into one nice package. I don't think the author knows that Google already knows what you use in Google docs, they already mine your email to show ads to you, they already do everything he talks about, they're just now going to let you have access to it through search instead of having to go to mail/reader/youtube/etc individually. This seems like much ado about nothing. Google isn't trying to wall people up in it's ecosystem, they're simply trying to unify all of the services they offer into one point of contact, which, as a user of many of these services, I applaud.

View on HN

they already mine your email to show ads to you, they already do everything he talks about, they're just now going to let you have access to it through search instead of having to go to mail/reader/youtube/etc individually

Uhm ok tell me if you like this scenario:

* I'm fed up of my employeer so I'm sending tons of jobs applications from my personal gmail account

* I dont write these mails while at work, but sometimes I login on google services for doin some work-related stuff (let's say use keyword search tools)

* I forgot to logout

* I start searching stuff on the net with my chief for our vmware project and instantly google suggests me as a perfect match my application letter sent to vmware HR

* Thank you google I'm almost fired :)

of course in this case I should've logged out from google, but I'd prefer to possibly opt-out this kind of stuff...

What you are scared of is some hypothetical situation that there so-far is no evidence it could or would happen in the future? When you do web searches, your personal emails start popping up within the results? That actually happens, or is going to happen? When?

Relevant ads outed a gay teen on Facebook: http://unicornbooty.com/blog/2012/01/11/gay-teen-inadvertent...

Maybe not widespread, but definitely not entirely hypothetical.

I'm not sure what this has to do with my question. What you linked to has nothing to do with either Google or email.

>What you are scared of is some hypothetical situation that there so-far is no evidence it could happen

Ecio78 outlined a scenario in which relevance targeting "outed" him in a way he didn't want. I'm analogizing Facebook relevance ads with Gmail and search ads.

I didn't think Ecio78 was saying that emails are going to pop up explictly, only that Google would present information that is relevant to him in a situation where he didn't want that relevant information.

> of course in this case I should've logged out from google

Yes, exactly, what is to stop anyone from just going through your sent mail if they were already willing to go through your web history?

I believe he was saying he would not have accessed his email on his work computer at all, he would then log into Google for other reasons and not open his mail. But Google would then go ahead and show him something related to his email account that he did not want.

Leaving his computer logged into his Google account and his employer sitting down to go through the account, such as sent mail, is a different matter.

The solution to all this is to never use personal logins for anything on a computer you do not control 100%.

Yes exactly, thanks talmand for the clarification, i was thinking about the case in which the user is not logged in the mail but google fetches data for your search from all your personal data just because you're logged on.

Apparently when Apple has a unified ecosystem, the purpose is to "perfectly tailor its devices to its users" but if Google does it, it's "maniacal" and "tyrannical"?

The state of tech blogging is so, so poor.

Correct me if I'm wrong (I might have outdated knowledge since I don't really use Apple products a whole lot), but you can use a Mac or iPod/iPad without having your personal data stored with Apple.

Apple and Google are in two different businesses. When Apple has a unified ecosystem, they limit what you can install/do right out of the box (they sell hardware that's tightly integrated with their own software). When Google has a unified ecosystem, they collect more information about you through different services.

Apple makes money from selling stuff. Google makes money from ads. Who has a greater incentive to collect more of your personal information and use it to make money?

> Apple and Google are in two different businesses. When Apple has a unified ecosystem, they limit what you can install/do right out of the box (they sell hardware that's tightly integrated with their own software). When Google has a unified ecosystem, they collect more information about you through different services.

Spot on. For example Google knows my exact porn-searches the moment I make them, either through their search-engine logs or directly through Chrome. Now imagine if it were to surface that Apple somehow logs and sends back to some server in Cupertino all porn-related searches made by MacBook-owners... (I chose "porn" as an example because it's a sensitive topic, I could as well have chosen "drugs", "depression", "cancer cure", "tax evasion" and so on).

Yes, I'd agree with you that tight integration for Apple and Google provide different kinds of "systemic risk".

For Google, the risk is they control too much of your information.

For Apple, when Apple owns the entire software and hardware stack, the market price of hardware skyrockets (the opposite of the effect Microsoft had by commoditizing hardware), and by its monopoly on App Stores for iPads/iPhones, it is able to gouge content creators for ~30% of the price of books/apps.

IMO, tight integration of BOTH of these companies is bad for society, but I found the author's singling out of Google to be unwarranted.

Is the state of tech blogging so, so poor or do you just not agree with the conclusions? For instance:

"It must force Chrome and Google+ down the throats of users who are simply looking for a brilliant search engine."

Google just recently started showing Chrome 'faster internet' ads to Firefox users (before it was only displayed to IE users). This blog is a bit over the top especially with claims like "[Google] search engine that’s no better than Bing", but fundamentally I think it's right on the money.

I actually agree with the overall thesis -- Google is integrating its services in emulation of Facebook and Apple in order to become more profitable.

The "poor" parts are 1) the over-the-top sensationalist language and 2) the implication that it's okay or even beneficial for Apple and FB to integrate but that Google has "sold its soul to the capitalist devil" in doing the same.

Regarding the Chrome ads, this would be a complete non-issue in any other industry. Suppose I go to Amazon to buy a computer-related book and am there shown an ad for Amazon Web Services. Are AWS now being shoved down my throat?

If I was running a business which used Google Docs and Gmail as the center piece of corporate workflow, I would be very concerned about the ability of competitors to gather industrial intelligence simply by purchasing advertising.

And that's even without giving Google the leverage to change the Terms of Service by which I access my existing business records unilaterally, at will, and without recourse.

YMMV

On the other hand, if I was a buisness concerned about the ability of competitors to gather industrial intelligence, I wouldn't use 2nd party cloud services.

Please correct me if I'm mistaken but companies using Google services such as GMail and Docs use them through Google Apps which isn't subject to advertising like the public versions of these services.

You're missing the point--when the switchover occurs the ads accompanying regular google search will pull upon a profile which includes your GMail/Google Docs accounts as well.

Data from Google's enterprise products are not included in your ad profile. I can't imagine they will change that, or they will see a mass exodus from their platform. Just because something shows up in your (March 1st) search results doesn't mean it was used in generating the ad next to it.

>"I can't imagine they will change that, or they will see a mass exodus from their platform."

I have observed people tend to accept vendor lock in. Particularly when the migration costs are high.

Likewise, the cost of lost enterprise accounts would have to offset the revenue gained from mining the data...assuming of course that Google isn't already mining enterprise data.

From TFA: "if you want to continue using Gmail, Docs, and so on. You must allow Google to share your data between its services"

Maybe it is actually sensationalist nonsense, but that is what the whole article is kinda about.

I agree. In fact, I'm surprised that Google services don't already work this way.

I agree too. I think it was naive of anybody to think that this wouldn't eventually happen. For years people have said that Google's goal was to control the information - all of it. I suppose that never bothered me because I know that I control what information I give Google, and I don't feel that Google has tried to subvert that control yet.

I'm a little disappointed that Google is returning Goog+ results above other social networks when the + results clearly are not as relevant, but hopefully they'll iron that out over time.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com