Two-Thirds of Consumers Don't Expect Google To Track Them the Way It Does (niemanlab.org) 185
A significant majority of consumers do not expect Google to track their activities across their lives, their locations, on other sites, and on other platforms. Jason Kint, writing for Nieman Lab: Our findings show that many of Google's data practices deviate from consumer expectations. The results of the study are consistent with our Facebook study: People don't want surveillance advertising. A majority of consumers indicated they don't expect to be tracked across Google's services, let alone be tracked across the web in order to make ads more targeted. Nearly two out of three consumers don't expect Google to track them across non-Google apps, offline activities from data brokers, or via their location history.
There was only one question where a small majority of respondents felt that Google was acting according to their expectations. That was about Google merging data from search queries with other data it collects on its own services. They also don't expect Google to connect the data back to the user's personal account, but only by a small majority. Google began doing both of these in 2016 after previously promising it wouldn't.
There was only one question where a small majority of respondents felt that Google was acting according to their expectations. That was about Google merging data from search queries with other data it collects on its own services. They also don't expect Google to connect the data back to the user's personal account, but only by a small majority. Google began doing both of these in 2016 after previously promising it wouldn't.
Re: (Score:3)
Imagine thinking that a company motto meant jack shit in terms of actual corporate behavior. Congratulations, you fell for corporate PR mumbo jumbo.
Same consumers purchased Google Home (Score:1)
Still important what they think (Score:3)
.
If they "don't understand the EULA or business model" --- that fact extremely important to protecting the irRight to Privacy. If they did understand the EULAs, or think that Google does track them, it would literally take away such rights.
TL/DR: NOT reading EULAs is important for preserving your rights.
Expect vs. Care (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sure few people expect what Google actually does, as it would require technical understanding to realize what is possible and what is probable...
But here's the truly important thing - how many people truly CARE what Google or Facebook is doing?
People say they don't want to be tracked across Google, but then they keep on using it. People say they don't want Facebook tracking, but they keep on using it as well. They are saying "I would like everything this does today but disable the tracking". That's nice and all but by continuing to use those services even when they know what is going on, they are indicating they really don't care that much at all and are willing to make the tradeoff of privacy for service.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
"Expect" matters more legally than "care" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
And those of us that see it and try to circumvent it are seen as the outliers, the weirdos, the nut jobs.
I don't see you as weirdos or nutjobs, but you're definitely outliers.
Re: (Score:2)
For most people outliers ARE weirdos or nutjobs.
Re: (Score:2)
If they cared, they'd stop using the services.
That would be fair, if true. You're using the company's resources, you should pay them one way or another - either directly, via some subscription, or through ads.
The huge problem is that companies like Google and Facebook don't abide by this implicit contract. They have developed so many sneaky ways of tracking you that they don't need you to sign off with them at all. Google grabs your credit card transactions from brick and mortar stores; Facebook plunders friends' contacts and builds shadow profiles for
Re: (Score:2)
People care, just not enough to stop using the free services that Google provides.
Most adults have realized that you don't get something for nothing and almost everything is you trading a bit of yourself, your time or your money or your soul, in exchange for something you want.
Re: (Score:2)
That's nice and all but how? Even if you don't use FB, google, et al, they are still tracking you. They track you by your friends, Your mobile signal through your carrier. Your wifi signal anytime you touch a 'compromised' access point. Almost any website. So how is not using their services going to help? I use all the blockers, vpn's and filters to clear out what I can find. I operate under no illusion that I am being tracked, but how am i supposed to participate in modern society? Unless you go of
Re: (Score:2)
It's much like elections. MOST PEOPLE do care. They just don't perceive any realistic option to avoid the tyranny.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, if your friends are all on Whatsapp, good luck using Viber to contact them. Same holds for FB and all that other stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
It is UNLIKE elections. Someone other than you turns against your privacy by sharing their contact list with your details. Then that same person takes pictures of you, and the things you do, writing names and descriptions with the pics. They talk or text about you.
You find this out, or just realize what others are doing to you on your own if lucky, and you decide whether it is worth your time and effort to keep other things to yourself instead of spreading to your devices. Most think the effort is too much,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
For the average person, you have to beat them over the head with the fact that they're being tracked, watched, listened to, and monitored all day every day, before it really starts getting through to them what's being done to them.
Meanwhile companies like Google and Facebook may be required by law to disclose what i
They know sometimes (Score:2)
They do not know, so how can they care?
Mostly they do not know, but from time to time stores like this come along in the mainstream that explain things to people, then lots do know - but it doesn't seem to change usage much.
Hell, I do know and it doesn't affect my use much at all, except that I shy away from Google a little more than I would if they were not as sketchy in behavior. But I still have my email through them, and use them for search a lot because I need a search engine that returns good results
Re: (Score:1)
You have to endure Google/Facebook tracking without using Google/Facebook at all. I have several webpages I need to use for work who embed Google services (maps) out of convenience.
And they buy your cellphone location data.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure few people expect what Google actually does, as it would require technical understanding to realize what is possible and what is probable...
how many people truly CARE what Google or Facebook is doing?
Interesting you appear to be conceding the fact people don't understand what these services are doing.
Then you proceed to make the "nobody cares" argument.
When the actual argument devolves into: How many people truly CARE about something they don't understand and don't know is happening?
It isn't clear what value if any exists in the resulting answer.
What choice do consumers have? (Score:2)
It's not like Google was running around in 2005, telling everyone that they planned on tracking everyone and everything, even if you didn't use their products. But now they are a monopoly, and have been some time. And a note for would-be pedants: monopoly doesn't mean you have 100% marketshare. It means you have enough market dominance to harm consumers even if they don't use your products.
So you want to quit Google, and block all their known domains in your hosts file. Okay, cool - but the next biggest
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Two thirds of consumers are stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Where do you think Google makes its money?
From Uncle Sam and other oppressive governments?
Re: (Score:1)
No.
Two thirds DO NOT expect Google to be doing what it is doing. That is simple lack of awareness. Or lack of being well informed. Not paranoid enough. Etc. But not necessarily stupid.
That means that one third DOES expect Google to be doing what it is doing. Since this is Google users, and they are aware of what Google is doing to them -- that makes THEM the stupid ones.
So in summary:
2/3 -- NOT stupid, but perhaps not well informed or not paranoid en
Re: (Score:2)
Lack of awareness of what? Of how Google makes money? Is that a complicated idea?
Re: (Score:1)
But 1/3 do expect Google to do that. So if they are users, then the 1/3 is stupid. But the 2/3 are something, but not necessarily stupid -- although stupid could be included in the list.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because something is a conscious doesn't exclude it from being stupid. See "Jackass The Movie".
>There are easily that many people who upon buying a "40w lightbulb" and actually
> getting a 40w lightbulb will bitch and complain that what they ordered can't be eaten.
I would kindly inform them that they are wrong. Almost anything is edible. At least one time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Two thirds of consumers are stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you're crazy and I can answer your question.
Google makes its money from anonymously connecting you with advertisers. They create a very detailed profile on you based on their tracking data. Then they sell advertisements, expecting the buyer to provide blanket information for the kind of person that they're targeting. Google probably then adds some of its own AI on top of the advertisers' expectations to create more ad clicks. Then you go to a random webpage which asks Google which ad to show you. The advertiser pays Google who gives a smaller amount to the website operator.
Note how Google never has to release any of your information to make money here. I don't think I remember a single article about Google even accidentally leaking private information.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think I remember a single article about Google even accidentally leaking private information.
This actually supports your argument, but there is an incident in which information was "leaking" out of Google. Google started using SSL for internal communications because they found that the NSA had internal wiretaps a few years back.
This actually makes your overall argument stronger, even it takes exception to a single detail because the response Google had reinforces your argument.
Re: (Score:1)
What is Neutrophils? What is the closest star to the Sun? What do the SR in SR-flip flop mean and which operation has priority (in logic programming, not electronics)?
Don't call people stupid just because they do not know something.
Re: (Score:2)
That said, I think I have sadly resigned to having to stick with Apple. As much as it pains me to give App
The app store is an epic cash cow (Score:1)
Sure, that is not their only income - but it is a large enough part it should limit bad behaviour to a degree
Re: (Score:2)
Thinking about that was why I was happy when WhatsApp charged an Euro per year for the service because that was a clear business model and it meant they were less likely (you never know) to sell my data. Also why I don't trust Telegram: It's supposedly financed by one of its founders out of the goodness of their heart. Sure...
Opaque, Shadowy Practices (Score:2)
The problem is the opaqueness of what Google and other service providers, advertisers and tracking companies do. It's all secretive and so very well hidden from their users/customers/targets.
This surveillance, monitoring and logging needs to be made readily available to anyone whose interested in knowing, a couple of clicks and it's all laid out to see. Until that happens, you're damn right people aren't going to realise the extent. Why would they? How can they possibly know all the stuff scripts and cookie
Re: (Score:2)
30% (Score:2)
30% of the people that use computers, don't know how to use computers. And 98% of the people that use computers don't know how computers use them.
It keeps colecting my voice despite turning it off (Score:2)
I've turned this off twice now and a few weeks ago, it went right back to "sending voice data to google" in a notification.
And it seems like over time, the voice recognition is getting *worse* not better. I think it's getting too many words and it's making more and more goofy choices of which is the correct word to use.
Re: (Score:1)
I have a friend who went to that. But I have carpal tunnel. So it's painful even to swipe text.
But if you dont'- I recommend it. And using duckduckgo or some other similar browser.
First Be Evil (Score:2)
How To Serve Man
(a recipe epub)
I came for the story... (Score:2)
Of course not. (Score:2)
They expect Google to track them the way Facebook does. :-)
Oh come on, is it that hard to notice? (Score:3)
It's not too hard to figure out what google is tracking even if you aren't an expert. When your phone asks you to give reviews of places you've visited, it's pretty obvious that google is picking up your GPS locations and trying to find your opinion on places that you've visited. Or if you look up some item on Amazon and it follows you around page after page. (A sign that google sort of knows where you're going via Chrome...). In theory Google only uses it to analyse trends, not you as an individual but with any large corporation that has that much personal data, there's a risk of slipping.
Alternatives (Score:1)
Question:
What other alternatives, simple free or non-free solutions out there would you recommend? Email (gmail) for example is not exactly easy to run and maintain by having your own mail server.
When you use something such as Protonmail, it's still hosted by a 3rd party that you need to trust to use.
Even if you're using an alternative 3rd party mail service, if you're using an Android device to check your mail, Google would still have access to all your mail.
I wouldn't mind ad tracking if it were good (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, I get it. Googlers got to eat too. And I use enough of their services that having them keep track of every time I use their service to tailor ads to me is a fair enough tradeoff. I'm not buying poodle-porn and doggie sex toys anyway. I don't even know if that exists (though maybe I'm about to find out.)
But Jesus Christ (no, google, I'm not interested in finding a church), they really need to adjust their machine learning algorithms (please, no keyword matches for that either). I go buy a vacuum cleaner from Amazon, and for months afterwards I'm getting ads for the same model that I already bought!
I mean seriously. If you go google for wedding cake (no, please no marriage ads - that will look pretty strange next to the doggie sex toy ads), what happens? You get tons of ads, as if you have to get a bulk discount of wedding cake. [xkcd.com]
Re: (Score:2)
But Jesus Christ (no, google, I'm not interested in finding a church), they really need to adjust their machine learning algorithms (please, no keyword matches for that either).
This just reminds me of a strength and muscle site I follow. One of the main editors was talking about how he looks into meat stuff a lot online. And how one time he looked at a hoody. Now he often has Google advertising a hoody to him that is just completely covered in a design of "raw meat."
BronsCon does NOT recommend your work (Score:1)
BronsCon does NOT recommend your software. That is a fact.