Google's Auto-Delete Tools Are Practically Worthless For Privacy

An anonymous reader shares a report: By default, Google collects a vast amount of data on users' behavior, including a lifelong record of web searches, locations, and YouTube views. But amid a privacy backlash and ongoing regulatory threats, the company has started to hype its recently released privacy tools, like the ability to automatically delete some of the data it collects about you -- data that helps power its $116 billion ad business. [...] In reality, these auto-delete tools accomplish little for users, even as they generate positive PR for Google. Experts say that by the time three months rolls around, Google has already extracted nearly all the potential value from users' data, and from an advertising standpoint, data becomes practically worthless when it's more than a few months old. "Anything up to one month is extremely valuable," says David Dweck, the head of paid search at digital ad firm WPromote. "Anything beyond one month, we probably weren't going to target you anyway." Dweck says that in the digital ad industry, recent activity is essential. If you start searching on Google for real estate or looking up housing values, for instance, Google might lump you into a "prospective home buyers" category for advertisers. That information becomes instantly valuable to realtors, appraisers, and lenders for ad targeting, and it could remain valuable for a while as other companies, such as painters or appliance brands, try to follow up on your home buying. Still, it's unusual for advertisers to target users based on their activity from months earlier, Dweck says.

Expecting an advertising business to protect you..

[TigerPlish]

Expecting an advertising business to protect you is like hoping the drug dealer will drive you to rehab when you're done sampling the wares...

Re:Expecting an advertising business to protect yo

[OneHundredAndTen]

I always wonder if advertising really works? I mean, whether the millions upon millions that companies spend on advertising are money well spent, or money down the drain? Sometimes I get the feeling that advertising money is spent because it is 'obvious' that it must be spent, because that has always been the case, and because, since everybody is doing so, we'd better do it as well, just in case.

Re:

[DarkRookie2]

It does. I bought a dryer bar once cause I saw it on TV. That was nice.

Re: Expecting an advertising business to protect y

[Z00L00K]

And what is a dryer bar? A place where alcoholics hang out to become sober?

Re:

[DarkRookie2]

https://www.amazon.com/Bounce-... [amazon.com]

Re:Expecting an advertising business to protect yo

[ShanghaiBill]

I always wonder if advertising really works?

Of course it does. American companies spend over $200B annually on advertising and marketing. They employ thousands of statisticians to analyse the results. For many companies, such as luxury brands and cosmetics, marketing is, by far, their biggest expense. They wouldn't be doing that if it didn't work.

The Internet makes it easier than ever to try different campaigns, and to analyse the results. I remember running A-B tests using card decks back in the early 1990s. It would take months and cost kilobucks to get results. Today, you can do that with Google Ads in an hour.

Also, many studies have show that people who think they aren't affected by advertising are actually influenced by advertising about as much as everyone else. Walk around your house. Look in your pantry. How many of those products are brand names?

That makes a lot of sense

[Krishnoid]

I mean, how much correlated buying activity lasts longer than a trimester [forbes.com], really?

Re:

[nitehawk214]

This has been me for a decade. My mom's last official address before she went into hospice was my house. Stupid move, as I still get flooded with insurance scams, AARP cards, hearing aids ads, and of course fake debt collectors looking for money that doesn't exist. (The real debt collectors hit me up for some major money because of this too. Those ones file actual lawsuits. Fuck our stupid healthcare system.)

If your parents are going in to long term care, get them a P.O. box that you can access with your po

Re:

[The_mad_linguist]

The only source for this story is a marketing guy bragging about how good his marketing research is, so I'd consider it dubious at best.

In other news today

[DarkRookie2]

Rocks are hard. Water is wet. The sky is blue. Bears shit in the woods. And the Earth is round.

Re:

[DarkRookie2]

Which is the miss?
2 and 3 could be argued as such (What is wet anyways? Sky gets its blue color from light scattering in the upper atmosphere off of small particles.)

Re:

[fustakrakich]

"round" means circular, like a pizza, with extra pepperoni please...

Re:

[DarkRookie2]

Earth is a oblate spheroid

3+ month data

[Alain Williams]

might not be of great commercial value; but that does not mean that the individual regards it as not worth deleting. Eg would you want: your employer knowing that you were job hunting; your partner know that you visited a dating site; your vicar/pastor/rabbi/imam/... know that you visited another religion's web site ? We all need privacy, we should not have to fight the likes of Google to keep private.

Yep, the headline doesn't match the summary

[raymorris]

Indeed, it may not be particularly useful for ADVERTISERS, but there is definitely a privacy impact of whether or not there is a database saying Senator Sneekie Paants (D, California) spent $10,000 at a strip club three years ago.

In fact, it's a reasonable compromise. *If* you accept the idea that we consumers should be allowed to choose not tomoay cash for services but instead pay via accepting targeted ads, privacy is helped by keeping only very short-term information - even just the last five minutes, while still allowing them to trade valuable ad targeting info for services.

* Obviously one can debate if free ad-supported services are good or bad, and separately one can debate whether they should be legal. (Some bad ideas, like smoking weed all day, are legal in some places). The vast majority of people choose to use such services, so apparently they are in favor of having them available.

Re:

[darkmeridian]

Google also allows user to "pause" the tracking of information. I can choose to pause location history tracking or my web history, etc. So if you believe Google, you can actually not get tracked when using their services if you are okay with the compromises (no Google Maps).

Wrong logic

[gurps_npc]

There are too distinct things - the value of the information to Google and the value of your privacy to you.

The information may become worthless to Google after 3 months but the value of your privacy NEVER is reduced.

For example, the value of not telling people that you once spent several hours googling is worth $100 of dollars, even 10 years later.

I think it is a good idea for google to auto-delete things they no longer care about that you might still care about.

Stupid. Outright stupid.

[bickerdyke]

And short sighted. No one needs ads for a washing machine after he just bought one. But leran my habits from long term data and sell me what I want before I even get the idea myself.

Re:

[110010001000]

That would require actual thought and innovation, rather than show_ad_from_category(recent_search())

Re: Stupid. Outright stupid.

[Z00L00K]

If the ads comes when the warranty is up for the old one you may have a bigger chance to catch a customer.

So Google collecting and helping with your

[oldgraybeard]

keystokes and tracking everything for that session is not good for privacy. I Am Shocked!

Just my 2 cents ;)

privacy is about privacy not about advertising

[vux984]

This line is absurd

"Experts say that by the time three months rolls around, Google has already extracted nearly all the potential value from users' data, and from an advertising standpoint"

Yes, from an 'advertising standpoint' data over 3 months old might be much lower value. But the police on the other hand might be interested in everything going back years. So might your insurance company. Customs and Border agents at any given border. Or your future ex's divorce lawyers.

Not to mention Social Justice Warrior types just love to dredge up stuff from years ago and then eject you from accepted society with what they find; maybe you belonged to the wrong forum 5 years ago or looked at the wrong porn, or liked Kevin Spacey or Mario Batali... or something... etc etc etc.

Having everything older than 3 months get deleted is a HUGE improvement over it not.

Re:

[CaptAubrey]

Awesome comment and observation.

Re:

[dgatwood]

Yes, from an 'advertising standpoint' data over 3 months old might be much lower value.

I don't even think that's true. Advertising is basically bimodal. For existing products, the right time to start showing ads is when you start showing interest in that product or similar products, and the right time to stop showing those ads is when you actually buy that product or a similar product. That last part fails to happen right now, resulting in most of these ads based on short-term data being completely usele

Re:

[Mononymous]

Social Justice Warrior types just love to dredge up stuff from years ago and then eject you from accepted society with what they find; maybe you belonged to the wrong forum 5 years ago or looked at the wrong porn, or liked Kevin Spacey or Mario Batali... or something... etc etc etc.

And just how are they supposed to be gettting access to any of this stuff? Google sells advertising, not user data.

Actually, the real reason these tools are useless is you have to register a Google account first. Why would anyone ever log in to a search engine?
I don't allow any of Google's cookies, and I've thought about blocking all of their JavaScript.

Re:

[vux984]

"And just how are they supposed to be gettting access to any of this stuff? Google sells advertising, not user data."

Don't be naive. Whether by external breach, internal leaks, quiet cooperation with government, or even by legal subpoena. If it exists then there will be ways to get at it.

"Why would anyone ever log in to a search engine?"

Millions of people sign into other google properties all the time - for gmail, youtube, chat (hangouts), etc.
Millions of people sign into chrome itself.

The question is not '

Re: privacy is about privacy not about advertising

[Z00L00K]

Since I run adblockers then I don't know what ads they try to serve.

And this is really a surprise?

[QuietLagoon]

-- by the time three months rolls around, Google has already extracted nearly all the potential value from users' data, -- Do you really think that google is going to delete the data before it has finished its useful life to google? That would be like a gold miner shutting down an ore-rich runnel.

But I will always be the same

[WillAffleckUW]

When Google harvested my kid's interest in Super Smash Brothers, or Harry Potter, or Lego Star Wars, he is so very into all that at 26 ... oh, wait.

When I was so into Grunge in the 80s and Blues and Rockabilly in the 90s and Surf Pop in the 00s and EDM in the 10s those will always be true, right?

And just because I was into Seersucker jackets and zoot suits for a while, Neru outfits, and then gave up on it all and realized all you need is 2-3 styles of classic dress shirts and some black jeans, that doesn't

Guess they are finally starting to sweat a little

[CaptAubrey]

They have a "Privacy" booth setup in the middle of Union Station here in DC. I stopped to read the info in the booth. It's largely a misrepresentation as they make it seem as though you have total control of your data (hint: you don't). One of the Google'ites approached me to start a privacy conversation, I told them I left gmail for protonmail because of their business practices. The conversation ended pretty quickly after that.

Non sequitur

[vakuona]

I think the author needs to relearn making logical arguments.

The again, this is what counts as making logical arguments nowadays - just find one thing you don't like about something (in this case, Google making money using data) and make a claim about something tangentially related (privacy).

not perfect but...

[yodleboy]

Hey, google is going to use my information anyway. I'd like to know that it only goes back 3 months instead of 'lifelong'. Smaller privacy 'surface area' i guess.

Good luck changing anything

[AndyKron]

If Google actually did respect our privacy they would be out of business.

Immediacy is most important ah?

[evanh]

So what they're saying is the immediate activity is the most valuable info. Or, in other words, *what you're looking for or doing at that webpage*. So, they would be more than happy just to show you a relevant ad, which could be based on the page content, and don't really care much about the tracking.

How about dumping the tracking altogether then.

But how much does google really know?

[eminencja]

I recently downloaded all my data (takeout.google.com) and I was surprised how little info was there. I am sure google I not telling me all it knows.

Most of it (size-wise) were files I shared through google drive. I do not use Android phones and I sign in only in a separate gmail-only browser instance/profile. I (try to) never search when I am signed in. I have enabled all privacy settings Google exposes.

There are no recent locations, IP addresses, phone numbers, nothing. However, when I sign in from an unk

Take out "practically".

[Chas]

They ARE worthless for privacy. PERIOD.

And is anyone surprised that a data mining company (because that's all they really are) provides you with faux "privacy" tools?

Deleted?

[Mr_Silver]

In reality, these auto-delete tools accomplish little for users, even as they generate positive PR for Google

I always work on the principle that when you delete something, it places a True value in a cell with the name "isDeleted" and not much else.

Prior experience with Google Calendar [slashdot.org] suggests that I'm not wrong.