Hacker News Reader

Comment by MengYuanLong | Hacker News Reader

I never realized you could access your search data history. It was really fascinating to see the different visualizations including my search concentration by hour and days of the week.

That said, even as a non-statistician, it wasn't hard to imagine the amount of information Google could infer by focusing on an individual. I had a data set exceeding 50k searches with the resulting click-throughs on my account. (Plus, they can of course leverage their massive db to help eliminate anomalies like Whitney Houston)

In addition to the basics like big item purchase history, hobbies, and problems (e.g. sickness); I wouldn't be surprised if Google could predict my relationship status and sexual preferences.

Custom search results are great, but I'm extremely happy to have been given the option to delete that profile. If anything, it is the single largest factor pushing back to Firefox and possibly DuckDuckGo.

View on HN

Google makes money from your ignorance. They could put a "Disable all Tracking" button in the black bar at the top of all Google properties, but their business model relies on the majority of people not knowing they're being tracked, or not caring enough to go looking into how to disable it.

"Ignorance"? I don't understand this righteous indignation people have towards online companies who would dare to try make money off the awesome free services they provide. Some of us are completely aware of what Google does. Seeing some personalized ads in exchange for access to all the world's information seems like a fair trade-off to me.

Yes, "Ignorance". He was "ignorant" of the possibility. When you call somebody ignorant, for being ignorant of something, this is not an insult, it is a statement of fact. I don't know where you got "righteous indignation" from. There is nothing righteous about my saying he is ignorant, and there was no anger or annoyance, so I don't know where you got "indignation" from.

"Some of us are completely aware of what Google does"

And most are not. And that was my point. At no point did I state that 100% of people are unaware of what Google does, so I don't know why you felt the need to add that tidbit.

"Seeing some personalized ads in exchange for access to all the world's information seems like a fair trade-off to me."

Not really relevant to anything I said. (EDIT:) However, if "seeing some personalized ads," is the only cost you can imagine, then I'm afraid that Google is benefiting from your ignorance too. Here are two more costs:

1.) If your account is compromised, your search history is compromised and could be used against you

2.) If you get in legal trouble, your search history could be used against you

"If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged"

Some people (like me) just don't mind. Tracking is not inherently bad, and they use that data to provide some value for users. If you had to inform everyone and provide opt-ins for every single feature that someone out there might not like, nothing would ever be done on the Internet.

Also, running analysis on this kind of data must be pure awesomeness, from scientist's point of view ;).

You'll note that I made no statement regarding the goodness or the badness of tracking. I merely stated that Googles business model relies on the majority of people not being aware of the tracking, or not caring enough to disable it.

Remember that "if you're not paying for it, you're the product".

http://lifehacker.com/5697167/if-youre-not-paying-for-it-you...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com