or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google asks journalists to tone down story of "massive" Google Play security flaw
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Google asks journalists to tone down story of "massive" Google Play security flaw - Page 2

post #41 of 256
That is very creepy. I am an Apple fan but still use many Google products; Gmail, Chrome, maps, search etc. I have never been overly concerned about them infringing too much on my privacy but now I am creeped out. I am very very seriously considering discontinuing all Google use. The only product of theirs that I truly love is Chrome, so that will be hard.
Here is some advice Google, don't be evil.
post #42 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Person View Post

Here is some advice Google, don't be evil.

Hmm... they're way past that.

post #43 of 256

From the writer commenting on her censored story.

 

Quote:

For the people asking how the story was amended: Despite the fact that Google refused to comment on the record, I was asked to change the headline (both the homepage headline and SEO headline inside the story), as well as the standfirst and lead (first paragraph). Google's issue was with the use of the word "flaw". Apparently a system that is designed to share users information with developers without their knowledge or permission and without explicitly saying so in any terms of service is not considered to be a flaw. I have no problem amending stories if they are factually incorrect but the fact is neither developers nor customers were aware of this information sharing and Mr Nolan is not the only developer to express concern over having this information at his disposal. There's little reason app developers should have this information. If Google was going to share this information they should have been clear about this from the start. Hope this clears things up.

post #44 of 256

I'm really surprised by this article and the comments here.  I think the issue here is that Google Play store works differently than the Apple store.  When you buy an app in the Play store, it actually says "Pay to:" the app developer.  It uses Google Checkout/Wallet, which has a privacy policy that explicitly says it will share this information with the merchant.

 

Has no one here used Amazon Marketplace?  Where's the article and outrage about Amazon doing exactly the same thing there?  I think Google's explanation here is entirely satisfactory to me: I'm not buying from Google, I'm buying from the app developer, so of course the developer knows who I am.  Just because their store works differently doesn't mean there's a "massive oversight".  I get that some people are surprised by this, because lots of people are just used to the way Apple's store works, but that doesn't mean Google's approach is a flaw, "criminal" as other commenters have suggested, or is something that even needs to be fixed.

 

I wonder how many people are upset about Google sharing this information, but wouldn't think twice about installing a *free* app that requested access to enumerate accounts on the phone, allowing it to send that data back to the app developer without the user even knowing about it.

post #45 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidn1 View Post

I'm really surprised by this article and the comments here.  I think the issue here is that Google Play store works differently than the Apple store.  When you buy an app in the Play store, it actually says "Pay to:" the app developer.  It uses Google Checkout/Wallet, which has a privacy policy that explicitly says it will share this information with the merchant.

 

Has no one here used Amazon Marketplace?  Where's the article and outrage about Amazon doing exactly the same thing there?  I think Google's explanation here is entirely satisfactory to me: I'm not buying from Google, I'm buying from the app developer, so of course the developer knows who I am.  Just because their store works differently doesn't mean there's a "massive oversight".  I get that some people are surprised by this, because lots of people are just used to the way Apple's store works, but that doesn't mean Google's approach is a flaw, "criminal" as other commenters have suggested, or is something that even needs to be fixed.

 

I wonder how many people are upset about Google sharing this information, but wouldn't think twice about installing a *free* app that requested access to enumerate accounts on the phone, allowing it to send that data back to the app developer without the user even knowing about it.

It's OK. No harm in bending over.

post #46 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by IQatEdo View Post

Upon the release of the iPod, the hardware was revolutionary, sporting for example a HD. iTunes was often portrayed as having been constructed in support of this revolutionary hardware and was touted as not being, or needing to be, all that profitable in its own right. Now, the ecosystem that is iTunes and the associated store is increasingly viewed as setting Apple products apart in the face of stiff hardware competition and that perhaps, hardware is increasingly supporting iTunes (and that which it spawned, iTunes and App stores), which would be a complete role reversal. This assertion might be quite incorrect but if true would be ironic.

What has this got to do with the dispensing of personal data freely to developers by google and high handed actions of google to demand a change in the way the story is written.

post #47 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

"Apple is evil, therefore, anything evil done by Google while competing with Apple is automatically good." That's the logic behind Google apologetics.

I think it's googles lack of Respect for copyright (eg. Android java APIs, the google book search, adwords tm usage YouTube copyright willfull infringment) and intellectual property rights will soon become so large problems in parallell that google will be prosecuted way harder than it has today.

Im willing to bet the oracle vs. Google lawsuit will have long rippleeffects on Google once its over.

I think Google has exeeded microsofts corporate evilness way long ago. It will become historys biggest corporate it industry lawbreaker. Dont be evil is a joke. Google has demonstrated time and time again that it does not honor the cornerstones of our civilisation (laws and aggreements).

Its unbelievable how many people and organisations (eg. foss organisations, eff) support such copyright missconduct that Google has been makeing. The Google apologists come out of the woodwork trying to defend eg. googles API copying!!! People seem to turn a blind eye to googles missconduct of the law. Its because people dont care about others rights and personal gains outweigh others rights. Clearly they dont understand what they are speaking for
Edited by habi - 2/17/13 at 4:45am
post #48 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I'm not understanding where the irony is. I see nothing about iTunes that has happened the opposite way to what is expected.

That's why I asked if it wasn't supposed to be profitable and it turned out to be.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #49 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidn1 View Post

I'm really surprised by this article and the comments here.  I think the issue here is that Google Play store works differently than the Apple store.  When you buy an app in the Play store, it actually says "Pay to:" the app developer.  It uses Google Checkout/Wallet, which has a privacy policy that explicitly says it will share this information with the merchant.

Has no one here used Amazon Marketplace?  Where's the article and outrage about Amazon doing exactly the same thing there?  I think Google's explanation here is entirely satisfactory to me: I'm not buying from Google, I'm buying from the app developer, so of course the developer knows who I am.  Just because their store works differently doesn't mean there's a "massive oversight".  I get that some people are surprised by this, because lots of people are just used to the way Apple's store works, but that doesn't mean Google's approach is a flaw, "criminal" as other commenters have suggested, or is something that even needs to be fixed.

I wonder how many people are upset about Google sharing this information, but wouldn't think twice about installing a *free* app that requested access to enumerate accounts on the phone, allowing it to send that data back to the app developer without the user even knowing about it.
x

Read what the author wrote:
"Apparently a system that is designed to share users information with developers without their knowledge or permission and without explicitly saying so in any terms of service is not considered to be a flaw."

You don't give your permission and there's nothing in the terms of service allowing it. Add that to the issue that this article is about - Google throws its weight around to get the media to tell stories the way Google wants them to (or suppress the story entirely if it's unfavorable to Google).

Google consistently acts as if they are the masters of the universe and no one has any right to privacy or intellectual property if Google wants it.

The most amazing thing about this is that no matter how evil Google gets, there are plenty of Google shills out there defending them.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #50 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post

That's why I asked if it wasn't supposed to be profitable and it turned out to be.

I believe that the original statement about iTunes was that it wasn't supposed to be a profit center. Apple's 30% would mostly be spent on promotion and providing the service. IIRC, that's pretty much the way it has worked out - it's not very profitable by Apple standards (although it would probably be a huge success by Amazon standards).
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #51 of 256

I may regret posting this thread as no doubt there's a noose already tied simply waiting for a neck to put in it, but here goes anyway.

 

According to the comments following this same story at some other sites, this is not a Google Play app issue per-se but instead comes from Google Wallet. It only has to do with payments are for apps, books and the like. Free apps aren't included or affected, nor contact info shared when no payment is required.

 

Google Wallet is a payment processor, along the same lines as Pay-pal. And like Pay-pal the actual transaction is between buyer and seller and not buyer and Google. Google treats the developer, publisher, etc as the seller rather than themselves. That's of course quite different than Apple where they are both the seller and the payment processor. Apple "owns" the transaction from beginning to end and never passes along the purchasers contact information to an app developer/provider, except in the case of Newsstand purchases.

 

The (weak) Google notice that payment details may be shared with the product seller as needed to facilitate the transaction completion is included in the TOS when a Google Wallet account is opened. 

 

Developers comments indicate that when you pay for your purchase using Google Wallet they receive your basic contact details: Buyers name, email address and "region", for instance New Zealand. (I'm certain there's a developer or two here who can confirm) There is no sharing of specific addresses, payment method, CC numbers or that sort so no financial info is exposed.

 

Now with all that out of the way I think Google should go into more detail in the Google Wallet Terms of Service to be crystal-clear that they are only serving as the payment processor. Put in bold type if need be that contact details WILL be provided to the seller of the product or service, not just a vague statement about what might be shared. Going further, easy to understand TOS agreements should be the law IMO. Obscurely-written multi-page user agreements aren't for the consumers benefit, but only intended to cover the service provider's butt as broadly as the law will allow. Please tell me in the first paragraph or two the most important things I should know if I agree to your Terms of Service. Don't bury those things 10 paragraphs deep.

 

I also believe there should be some sort of notice in the GooglePlay TOS referencing payments made using Google Wallet and how contact information may be shared. I read thru it and can't find one myself. The fact that the buyers contact info is provided to the seller may be completely reasonable, perhaps even expected. Just don't make it look like you're trying to hide that it's done. That only makes it look nefarious and makes us wonder if there's something else hiding in there that we should know.

 

EDIT: For those interested, I think this is the Google Wallet TOS that the complaining Australian developer would have been provided when he asked to take part. It explains Google Wallet in detail.

https://wallet.google.com/customer/tos/viewdocument.html?family=0.buyertos&gl=AU#SafeHtmlFilter_TermsofService

 

EDIT 2: This is kinda interesting too. Google's fee schedule for developer's using Google Wallet.

https://checkout.google.com/seller/fees.html


Edited by Gatorguy - 2/17/13 at 5:33am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #52 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by IQatEdo View Post

Oh - and iTunes as it turns out, how ironic lol.

iTunes is a free download. It allows importing mp3, mpeg, CDs and other media. It also can access the for pay iTunes Music Store for additional purchases.

But to be clear, iTunes is free.
post #53 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by stelligent View Post


That is not true. Please don't make stuff up.

Then why are there over 1000 hello world apps in the Google Play Store? About 4000 if you go to other languages.

Are you saying Google audited these apps?
post #54 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


I'm not understanding where the irony is. I see nothing about iTunes that has happened the opposite way to what is expected.

i agree... the iTunes store was intended to run at a non-profit level... (they did not expect to make a profit)...   

but, due to its extreme popularity, it started to generate a profit(the store)... irony no, "that's lucky/nice" yes...

 

 

BTW...

is the "Peter Principal" ironic?... (perhaps... I person rises  to their own level of incompetence...  )

 

but the itune store was never incompetent... or the program for that matter... ("does not do much"  is different than a program being "incompetent"... one might even say that Steve Jobs did NOT suffer Incompetency well...   "that is  sh!t" ...

post #55 of 256

Google weren't very clever.  By objecting to the idea this was 'flaw', and theerfore unintentional, they appear to be admitting it was intentional, which means in Europe, they run the risk of getting into deep doo-doo for breaching data protection laws.

 

 

Quote:
In a nutshell, the regulations would mandate that the collection of use of personal data would be restricted to the amount of information minimally necessary to provide a service, with fully transparent disclosure to users as to how long their data will be kept, how it will be used, and who has access to it. Users should be able to give “informed consent” to the use of their personal data,

 

Ooops!

 

Schmidt's statement about privacy and street view is classic:

 

 

Quote:
Google CEO Eric Schmidt said on CNN last week people who were concerned about Google Street View taking pictures of their homes and businesses could protect their privacy: they could “just move.”
post #56 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


x

Read what the author wrote:
"Apparently a system that is designed to share users information with developers without their knowledge or permission and without explicitly saying so in any terms of service is not considered to be a flaw."

You don't give your permission and there's nothing in the terms of service allowing it. 

Yes there is. Read the Google Wallet Terms of Service agreement for yourself. It's as open-ended and non-specific as possible just like every other TOS I've read, but the disclosure is there.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #57 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I may regret posting this thread as no doubt there's a noose already tied simply waiting for a neck to put in it, but here goes anyway.

According to the comments following this same story at some other sites, this is not a Google Play app issue per-se but instead comes from Google Wallet. It only has to do with payments are for apps, books and the like. Free apps aren't included or affected, nor contact info shared when no payment is required.

And here come the red herring arguments from the chief Google shill.

Who cares if it's Google Wallet or the Google App Store? The author stated:
"Apparently a system that is designed to share users information with developers without their knowledge or permission and without explicitly saying so in any terms of service is not considered to be a flaw."

it's wrong - no matter which of the Google information harvesting groups did it.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #58 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Add that to the issue that this article is about - Google throws its weight around to get the media to tell stories the way Google wants them to (or suppress the story entirely if it's unfavorable to Google).

I cant find any specific reference to a story that Google tried to suppress, successfully or not, even searching with Bing. I can nearly guarantee that if it happened Microsoft would let everyone know.lol.gif

 

I can see that AI tries to imply it happens, which doesn't mean it really ever has does it? Makes a good story tho, and works as flamebait.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #59 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Yes there is. Read the Google Wallet Terms of Service agreement for yourself. It's as open-ended and non-specific as possible just like every other TOS I've read, but the disclosure is there.

Well, we have your word against the journalist. And the journalist specifically stated that she would be willing to correct her statement if anyone showed it to in error, but that hasn't happened. So Google apparently hasn't been able to show her to be in error.

Besides, if you were correct, why would Google try to pressure the media to withdraw the stories? Why wouldn't they simply show the items in the ToS that you claim exist?
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #60 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


And here come the red herring arguments from the chief Google shill.

Who cares if it's Google Wallet or the Google App Store? The author stated:
"Apparently a system that is designed to share users information with developers without their knowledge or permission and without explicitly saying so in any terms of service is not considered to be a flaw."

it's wrong - no matter which of the Google information harvesting groups did it.

Users of the service did agree to the sharing of contact information in the typical vague TOS way. No matter how many times you say just the opposite it still won't make it true. Read the agreement for yourself.

 

By the way you left out the phrase "as usual" when replying to me. Just thought I'd remind you so it doesn't become habit.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #61 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I cant find any specific reference to a story that Google tried to suppress, successfully or not, even searching with Bing. I can nearly guarantee that if it happened Microsoft would let everyone know.lol.gif


I can see that AI tries to imply it happens, which doesn't mean it really ever has does it? Makes a good story tho, and works as flamebait.

So you're OK with Google pressuring the media to rewrite their stories in a way that's more favorable to Google - as long as they don't completely squelch the story?

Figures.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #62 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Users of the service did agree to the sharing of contact information in the typical vague TOS way. No matter how many times you say just the opposite it still won't make it true. Read the agreement for yourself.

Not according to the journalist who write this article. And apparently, Google has not shown her any sections of the ToS that say what you are pretending that they say.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #63 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Not according to the journalist who write this article. And apparently, Google has not shown her any sections of the ToS that say what you are pretending that they say.

Ah, just like the State Farm commercial!

 

Man: Where'd you hear that?

 

Woman: On the internet. They can't put anything on the internet that isn't true.

 

Man: ..and where did you read that?

 

Woman: On the Internet

 

I realize that you may not wish to read the Google disclosure because you couldn't then continue to make believe what you say isn't there really isn't there. For others the policy is here, and the disclosure listed under "Information We Share".

http://wallet.google.com/files/privacy.html

 

As for you JR, feel free to continue with FUD in the face of facts sir. No reason to change now.


Edited by Gatorguy - 2/17/13 at 6:49am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #64 of 256

The addendum to the article is still, as of this writing, factually incorrect regarding Apple.  They're trying to make it sound like Apple is acting on your behalf as a developer, and thus being the seller themselves when they say Apple files your tax returns for you.  Apple does no such thing.  An an app developer, you are the seller and Apple is just an intermediary.  There are no 1099 forms from Apple or any other tax handling.  You are responsible for all taxes yourself.  The ONLY difference is that Apple doesn't share the user's contact information while Google does.

post #65 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Ah, just like the State Farm commercial!

Man: Where'd you hear that?

Woman: On the internet. They can't put anything on the internet that isn't true.

Man: ..and where did you read that?

Woman: On the Internet

The internet is where I heard that Google is not evil. As you point out, that doesn't make it true.

Still waiting for you to explain why Google didn't simply provide the terms of service rather than pressuring people to recant their stories.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #66 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattBookAir View Post

...More to the point, this isn't news. As noted above, people must know they're giving up privacy when they go the google route. They're effectively selling their privacy to pay for the products and services google provides. Live with it....

 

But that's the point.  Most people DON'T know, and news sites are encouraged not to make a big deal of it.  My parents didn't know that Google's computers scanned all their private email on gmail in order to find vulnerabilities their advertisers could take advantage of.  They thought their private email was private.  Google talks about privacy all the time and implies that their systems are secure, then they switch to this sort of "broken by design" system, and when caught try to downplay the story.

post #67 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Still waiting for you to explain why Google didn't simply provide the terms of service rather than pressuring people to recant their stories.

It looks to me that Google may have contacted her to point out an inaccuracy, but claiming she was pressured would make it much more intriguing. I'm looking forward to hearing what she was threatened with if she didn't do what they were demanding. Did they threaten to publish embarrassing pictures of her? Secret bedroom videos? At least a letter from Google legal, right? There's gotta be more juicy details she can share.

 

Oooh... wait a minute. The writer doesn't say they were pressured to change the story. Never mind.


Edited by Gatorguy - 2/17/13 at 7:12am
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #68 of 256

Err... Why is the part of the article which criticises Apple crossed out in the original forum post?

 

Are we just censoring any criticism of Apple now?

 

Because if so, that's ... y'know ... pathetic.

post #69 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booga View Post

The addendum to the article is still, as of this writing, factually incorrect regarding Apple.  They're trying to make it sound like Apple is acting on your behalf as a developer, and thus being the seller themselves when they say Apple files your tax returns for you.  Apple does no such thing.  An an app developer, you are the seller and Apple is just an intermediary.  There are no 1099 forms from Apple or any other tax handling.  You are responsible for all taxes yourself.  The ONLY difference is that Apple doesn't share the user's contact information while Google does.

 

They are referring to sales tax. In Australia (where the article was written) there is a national 10% sales tax on everything. In that country, instead of Apple sending you the full price the customer pays (minus their 30%), they also take the sales tax off and send it to the government on your behalf (you provide Apple your Australian Business Number when you set up a paid developer account).

 

Yes, you still have to do a tax return yourself, but when you do, you find that all the sales tax you owe from the App Store has already been credited to your account. It's very convenient.

post #70 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

Google weren't very clever.  By objecting to the idea this was 'flaw', and theerfore unintentional, they appear to be admitting it was intentional, which means in Europe, they run the risk of getting into deep doo-doo for breaching data protection laws.

 

 

Quote:
In a nutshell, the regulations would mandate that the collection of use of personal data would be restricted to the amount of information minimally necessary to provide a service, with fully transparent disclosure to users as to how long their data will be kept, how it will be used, and who has access to it. Users should be able to give “informed consent” to the use of their personal data,

 

Ooops!

 

Schmidt's statement about privacy and street view is classic:

 

 

Quote:
Google CEO Eric Schmidt said on CNN last week people who were concerned about Google Street View taking pictures of their homes and businesses could protect their privacy: they could “just move.”


Well as for Eric Schmitt: its fairly typical. He seems intent on proving that he is the ultimate a*hole. Mission Accomplished.

 

Actually I suspect Google WILL get some problems in the EU. They are already in the crosshairs of the Commission and I would be surprised if these little tidbits of additional evidence of systematic privacy law violations will go unnoticed.   In one respect Google is not alone when it comes to violations of EU privacy law. ALL american service providers are tarred with the same brush. It seems impossible for an Ami to understand that privacy is a fundamental, constitutional right in the EU and in many EU countries civil rights are respected and expected to be respected, to an extent that is regrettably not the case in the US of A. 

post #71 of 256
Any time a "mistake" puts more power or money into one's pockets, expect that mistake to be made again and again.

One unintended consequence of putting the word "flaw" in invertd quotes (particular to British and Australian English it seems) is that for US readers, it can be interpreted snidely.
post #72 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Add that to the issue that this article is about - Google throws its weight around to get the media to tell stories the way Google wants them to (or suppress the story entirely if it's unfavorable to Google).
I cant find any specific reference to a story that Google tried to suppress, successfully or not, even searching with Bing. I can nearly guarantee that if it happened Microsoft would let everyone know.lol.gif


I can see that AI tries to imply it happens, which doesn't mean it really ever has does it? Makes a good story tho, and works as flamebait.

You have very low credibility around these parts, to begin with. Now you're fast headed for less-than-zero..... (Of course, you guys have little sense of shame or self-respect, so I am probably talking to a brick wall).
post #73 of 256

No reference to this story in news.google.com yet. Not even under 'Technology.' Not even when you 'Load more stories.'

 

Of course, the footnote on the page says "The selection and placement of stories on this page were determined automatically by a computer program." so it must be all above-board! lol.gif

post #74 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


You have very low credibility around these parts, to begin with. Now you're fast headed for less-than-zero..... (Of course, you guys have little sense of shame or self-respect, so I am probably talking to a brick wall).

I thought you were putting me on ignore months ago. 1confused.gif

 

Yeah, I'm well aware that "around these parts" you'd rather not consider me credible.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #75 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I cant find any specific reference to a story that Google tried to suppress, successfully or not, even searching with Bing. I can nearly guarantee that if it happened Microsoft would let everyone know.lol.gif

 

I can see that AI tries to imply it happens, which doesn't mean it really ever has does it? Makes a good story tho, and works as flamebait.

So you're claiming the author is a liar?

post #76 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I thought you were putting me on ignore months ago. 1confused.gif

I never put anyone -- even you -- on the 'ignore' list. 1smile.gif

 

A bit of cognitive dissonance keeps me alert and peppy.

post #77 of 256

My apology then. As for your cognitive dissonance don't be so uncomfortable with it. Not too late for you to modify your views. I've been there before as most every thinking person has.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #78 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by "Apple 
[" url="/t/156021/google-asks-journalists-to-tone-down-story-of-massive-google-play-security-flaw#post_2279086"]This is what you get when you choose Android. You get screwed, and deservedly so. What the hell did you expect? It's a shoddy free OS made by a company that collects information on people, including you.

On this very page, I see that Google Adsense, Google Analytics, Facebook Connect and more are being blocked by a plug in on my Safari.

How come I never see Apple getting blocked on any sites that I visit? Oh, that's right, Apple doesn't spy on people everywhere that they go and then steal their information left & right, and then turn around and hand it over to whoever, including "developers", who may belong to a huge criminal syndicate for all anybody knows.

The average ignoramus walking into a mobile phone store and walking out with a cheap or free Android phone may end up regretting their purchase a whole lot when they eventually find out that what they have to lose is worth a lot more than the few bucks that they think that they may have saved. Is the average Fandroid so ignorant and non caring about their privacy, that they just don't give a damn?

I would never recommend any Android device for anybody that I know. I'd go so far as to say that it's downright dangerous. I also would never hire anybody who owned an Android device, as they are potentially a walking security disaster, not to mention that they are most likely not the right person for the job, due to their poor taste and overall technical ignorance.
That because Apple doesn't make all its money off selling information on it customers like google does. Disagree with me, let me tell you the facts. Google track all the data that it collect from people using its search engine and sells it to advertisers. That and advertisement is where Google revenue come from. Google doesn't make money on Android, or everything else it does/makes it only make all their money off advertisement. Apple on the other hand does not. Apple's revenues come from it hardware ad software, and Apple makes record high revenues.
post #79 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven N. View Post


Then why are there over 1000 hello world apps in the Google Play Store? About 4000 if you go to other languages.

Are you saying Google audited these apps?


You are distorting my comment and using an ill-fitting counter-argument. But that's ok because I understand it is the normal practice here to deny existence of clouds while refusing to look at the sky.

 

To be precise, I didn't say Google had a rigorous approval process. I was commenting on "What's really scary is that Google has ZERO approval process when it comes to developers and their apps", which is patently untrue.

 

No company is perfect. In this area, Google could arguably do better. But that does not excuse anyone from making statements without knowing the facts, or outright lying.

post #80 of 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

My apology then. As for your cognitive dissonance don't be so uncomfortable with it. Not too late for you to modify your views. I've been there before as most every thinking person has.


What does a statement like this accomplish except to concede that he has you flummoxed?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Google asks journalists to tone down story of "massive" Google Play security flaw
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Google asks journalists to tone down story of "massive" Google Play security flaw