Google enables advertisers a look into your browsing history…

  • @Ricaz@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    710 months ago

    I don’t necessarily disagree, but your analogy of inviting someone into your home is flawed. You did agree to them collecting some anonymous data just by using it, and the browser history usage is opt-in.

    Their products are not free, they just don’t cost money. If you don’t agree with that policy, don’t use their products. I would also add that this is their business model for most of their products (which are undeniably extremely popular, because they’re good).

    Maps, Search, Chrome, YouTube, etc are all really good products that you pay for by letting them use some of your data, but not the more sensitive parts, in my opinion.

    I disagree that their “raw database” should be public. That seems like a terrible idea. I would much rather share my clicks and geolocation than pay for the service (I don’t, but I would prefer that model).

    I do however agree that data needs to be regulated, and that users solely own all their own data.

    • TheEntity
      link
      fedilink
      710 months ago

      No amount of regulation would help if the users themselves don’t value their data. As far as they are concerned, these products are free. They might be wrong, but that’s irrelevant here, the relevant part is that to them their data is worthless so they don’t care. We need more education on this, not regulation. Or rather we need both.

      • @Ricaz@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        310 months ago

        Yes, and people are free to choose and think what they want. Everyone knows there can be shady things in ToS, they just don’t care, and that’s honestly fine.

        A more serious issue, in my opinion, is sensitive personal data like government identification, medical and banking records, and of course date of birth, address, etc. that can be used to identify you and in worse cases, steal your identity.

        Such data is not being handled well enough, for the vast majority of cases. I’m lucky to live in a country/region that does it well (better than most), with laws protecting individuals.

        But honestly idgaf if ad trackers can see on my digital footprint that I just bought a bicycle. I also enjoy services like Google Maps very much, because it works scarily well, and I can choose when I want to be tracked or not.

    • @Taleya@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      410 months ago

      Problem is, Chrome abused a notion that was set up by mozilla - the idea of software without strings, open source, freely available to all. That was the environment that Chrome first set foot in, and they absolutely took advantage of that preconception, same as fb.

      People forget that before google started getting cunty ‘if you don’t pay for the product you are the product’ really wasn’t a thing on the 'net.

      They conceived of and created predatory practises most users literally had no framework to conceive of - the onus is on them for that shit.

        • TWeaK
          link
          fedilink
          English
          110 months ago

          It actually really, really isn’t. Just try blocking Google services using an ad blocker and see how many websites don’t work. How Google track who you bank with, where you have social media accounts and basically everything they can with Captcha. If you don’t connect to google.com, gstatic.com and maybe fonts.google.com then so much stuff online simply does not work.