Nope, no ads on Google Glass. Devs are banned from monetizing any user data too.
Section 2: Advertisements
No Ads. You may not serve or include any advertisements in your API Client.
Data Usage. You may not use user data from your API Client for advertising purposes. You may not sell or transmit any user data received from your API Client(s) to a third-party ad network or service, data broker, or other advertising or marketing provider. For the avoidance of doubt, user data from the API Client(s) may not be used for Third-Party Ad Serving ("3PAS").
I just cancelled my account. Took a hit, as I had paid ahead of time, but I don't care. I had already felt uncomfortable about my footage sitting in the cloud somewhere, but no WAY do I want google having access to that.
I'll find a new setup and maybe even store footage locally. Either way, Dropcam is toast for me now.
I'll probably just toss it, but maybe I'll take it apart for parts first.
I just cancelled my account. Took a hit, as I had paid ahead of time, but I don't care. I had already felt uncomfortable about my footage sitting in the cloud somewhere, but no WAY do I want google having access to that.
I'll find a new setup and maybe even store footage locally. Either way, Dropcam is toast for me now.
I'll probably just toss it, but maybe I'll take it apart for parts first.
A little premature since the sale hasn't yet finalized so even Nest doesn't own them, much less Google.
Nope, no ads on Google Glass. Devs are banned from monetizing any user data too.
Section 2: Advertisements
No Ads. You may not serve or include any advertisements in your API Client.
Data Usage. You may not use user data from your API Client for advertising purposes. You may not sell or transmit any user data received from your API Client(s) to a third-party ad network or service, data broker, or other advertising or marketing provider. For the avoidance of doubt, user data from the API Client(s) may not be used for Third-Party Ad Serving ("3PAS").
This is a policy for 3rd party apps. Where does it say Google itself may not serve Ads?
IIRC Google reinterated just a couple weeks ago that both Google Glass and Nest would be ad-free. If you have doubts about the accuracy you should look into it for yourself.
If the military and law enforcement adopt this technology the sales numbers will explode. Sports teams, virtual tours, operating rooms - the applications are almost endless. Good luck to you!
Projections? So what are netbook projections prior to the iPad. Didn't Creepy Eric project that Google TV will be on the majority of TVs sold by now?
IIRC Google reinterated just a couple weeks ago that both Google Glass and Nest would be ad-free. If you have doubts about the accuracy you should look into it for yourself.
I totally trust Google. I trusted they would not bypass the "Do not track" settings in Safari.
No Google does not sell user data to whoever will pay.
2. Gmail: prying and spying. This October, a federal judge refused to dismiss a potential class-action lawsuit brought by Gmail users who objected to its practice of analyzing the content of all the messages on its network and selling byproducts to advertisers. Those suing Google said it violated federal wiretap laws.
I did my part and posted links, how about you do the same for your claims.
What claims? He said projections are meaningless because they are made by people who can’t even see their nose in their periphery, much less technology only a few years down the line.
Netbook projections were completely destroyed by the iPad. And now you’re claiming that projections for the sale of Google Glass–one of the most invasive pieces of technology ever made–are proof that it will do well.
Netbook projections were completely destroyed by the iPad. And now you’re claiming that projections for the sale of Google Glass–one of the most invasive pieces of technology ever made–are proof that it will do well.
Whoa - settle down Seabiscuit! All I wrote was "some projections are looking good" - and they are. Never said this was proof of anything. I also said in another post that "we'll have to wait and see" - so relax! I guess in your world there has never been a projection that came even close to being correct. Two examples does not mean that all projections are crap.
Now, you just claimed that Google Glass is "the most invasive pieces of technology ever made." Any proof for that? Mine was speculative, yours is definitive.
And all he wrote was a historic proof that projections are meaningless. Come on.
One of.
Not much more invasive than a smartphone. And since the general consensus on these forums is that Apple changed the smartphone industry and made it popular and accessible, then I guess that means Apple is one of the largest contributors to the invasion of privacy.
As we all know, smartphones constantly track your eyes and have a camera on the world around them.
And since the general consensus on these forums is that Apple changed the smartphone industry and made it popular and accessible, then I guess that means Apple is one of the largest contributors to the invasion of privacy.
Not much more invasive than a smartphone. And since the general consensus on these forums is that Apple changed the smartphone industry and made it popular and accessible, then I guess that means Apple is one of the largest contributors to the invasion of privacy.
Comments
Nope, no ads on Google Glass. Devs are banned from monetizing any user data too.
Section 2: Advertisements
No Ads. You may not serve or include any advertisements in your API Client.
Data Usage. You may not use user data from your API Client for advertising purposes. You may not sell or transmit any user data received from your API Client(s) to a third-party ad network or service, data broker, or other advertising or marketing provider. For the avoidance of doubt, user data from the API Client(s) may not be used for Third-Party Ad Serving ("3PAS").
http://mashable.com/2013/04/16/google-glass-no-ads/
Does Google get to monetize on users Data? Do they then sell user data to whoever will pay?
I'll find a new setup and maybe even store footage locally. Either way, Dropcam is toast for me now.
I'll probably just toss it, but maybe I'll take it apart for parts first.
A little premature since the sale hasn't yet finalized so even Nest doesn't own them, much less Google.
As far as I know it's not different from any other Windows or Mac computer. The user has to open the service.
Nope, no ads on Google Glass. Devs are banned from monetizing any user data too.
Section 2: Advertisements
No Ads. You may not serve or include any advertisements in your API Client.
Data Usage. You may not use user data from your API Client for advertising purposes. You may not sell or transmit any user data received from your API Client(s) to a third-party ad network or service, data broker, or other advertising or marketing provider. For the avoidance of doubt, user data from the API Client(s) may not be used for Third-Party Ad Serving ("3PAS").
http://mashable.com/2013/04/16/google-glass-no-ads/
This is a policy for 3rd party apps. Where does it say Google itself may not serve Ads?
Nice job reading only what you wanted to read. Still waiting for the proof of your original claims, I guess.
IIRC Google reinterated just a couple weeks ago that both Google Glass and Nest would be ad-free. If you have doubts about the accuracy you should look into it for yourself.
Projections? So what are netbook projections prior to the iPad. Didn't Creepy Eric project that Google TV will be on the majority of TVs sold by now?
I totally trust Google. I trusted they would not bypass the "Do not track" settings in Safari.
No Google does not sell user data to whoever will pay.
2. Gmail: prying and spying. This October, a federal judge refused to dismiss a potential class-action lawsuit brought by Gmail users who objected to its practice of analyzing the content of all the messages on its network and selling byproducts to advertisers. Those suing Google said it violated federal wiretap laws.
the rest of the article is here.
http://www.salon.com/2014/02/05/4_ways_google_is_destroying_privacy_and_collecting_your_data_partner/
Projections? So what are netbook projections prior to the iPad. Didn't Creepy Eric project that Google TV will be on the majority of TVs sold by now?
I did my part and posted links, how about you do the same for your claims.
I did my part and posted links, how about you do the same for your claims.
What claims? He said projections are meaningless because they are made by people who can’t even see their nose in their periphery, much less technology only a few years down the line.
Netbook projections were completely destroyed by the iPad. And now you’re claiming that projections for the sale of Google Glass–one of the most invasive pieces of technology ever made–are proof that it will do well.
Netbook projections were completely destroyed by the iPad. And now you’re claiming that projections for the sale of Google Glass–one of the most invasive pieces of technology ever made–are proof that it will do well.
Whoa - settle down Seabiscuit! All I wrote was "some projections are looking good" - and they are. Never said this was proof of anything. I also said in another post that "we'll have to wait and see" - so relax! I guess in your world there has never been a projection that came even close to being correct. Two examples does not mean that all projections are crap.
Now, you just claimed that Google Glass is "the most invasive pieces of technology ever made." Any proof for that? Mine was speculative, yours is definitive.
All I wrote was "some projections are looking good" - and they are.
And all he wrote was a historic proof that projections are meaningless. Come on.
Now, you just claimed that Google Glass is "the most invasive pieces of technology ever made."
One of.
And all he wrote was a historic proof that projections are meaningless. Come on.
One of.
Not much more invasive than a smartphone. And since the general consensus on these forums is that Apple changed the smartphone industry and made it popular and accessible, then I guess that means Apple is one of the largest contributors to the invasion of privacy.
Not much more invasive than a smartphone.
As we all know, smartphones constantly track your eyes and have a camera on the world around them.
Only if you believe your false premise, that is.
Edited this post by mistake on my phone!
Not much more invasive than a smartphone. And since the general consensus on these forums is that Apple changed the smartphone industry and made it popular and accessible, then I guess that means Apple is one of the largest contributors to the invasion of privacy.
This statement makes absolutely no sense. How?
I'll post this link again.
http://www.salon.com/2014/02/05/4_ways_google_is_destroying_privacy_and_collecting_your_data_partner/
What original claim? That it is naive to assume Apple wouldn't mine data if they saw a net positive opportunity? That's not something I need to prove.