Nest Labs, makers of the Nest Learning Thermostat and Protect smoke and carbon monoxide detector, announced on Tuesday that it will be opening its smart home platform to third-party developers and partners, which includes parent company Google.
Well, my point is that you can't call it being caught off guard when Google in 2011 already knew that the integration of mobile devices and home automation was going to be an important area. Which they clearly did else they wouldn't have experimented with Android@Home. I'm not talking about Google knowing exactly what Apple was planning on doing.
And that was the point of my statement. Not that Apple would desire to offer such a platform, but that it is going to ship.
At this moment in time there is nothing to fear I would say. Google develops for Nest but you have the choice to use it or not, just like any other product from 3rd party developers. So you can choose who to share with by using the 3rd party products you want and ignoring those you don't want.
Now if there would be a fixed Nest/Google integration then that would be breaking a promise and thus a problem.
Now if there would be a fixed Nest/Google integration then that would be breaking a promise and thus a problem.
While I realize that's not the case- and those with Nest products that fear Google integration don't need to worry yet- can you understand the hesitation for new adoption due to the fact policies could change in the future?
Ive said previously- those in their early twentys and younger won't care at all about their privacy, so even if it does change, it will be a good resource for Google. And honestly- if I were Google, I'd sit on it for a couple years, then integrate. Yes, you'd lose some, but you would gain invaluable information and in the long-run I would think it would outweigh the small loss.
You are either unaware or ignoring that Pinchai never said any such thing of course. The story that he did was the result of a mistaken trnslation from a Spanish paper covering a Google event a few months ago with no other bloggers or reporters at the presentation corroborating the supposed quotes. The corrected story with his actual comments appeared the next day but wasn't nearly as click-worthy and never reported by AI AFAIK. DED as expected likes to repeat the erroneous quote as it fits his storyline.
When there's Android security scare stories out there with at least some semblence of evidence behind them why use a imaginary one to make a point?
How convenient! LOL! The corrected quote provided by Google. LOLOLOLOL!!!!! It would be different if this was originally posted on a anti-Google site. Well those don't exist because any for profit site relies on them for income so they dare not speak against them. This was a quote from a google fan site that just deleted the offensive statements the made google look bad and told the truth.
While I realize that's not the case- and those with Nest products that fear Google integration don't need to worry yet- can you understand the hesitation for new adoption due to the fact policies could change in the future?
Ive said previously- those in their early twentys and younger won't care at all about their privacy, so even if it does change, it will be a good resource for Google. And honestly- if I were Google, I'd sit on it for a couple years, then integrate. Yes, you'd lose some, but you would gain invaluable information and in the long-run I would think it would outweigh the small loss.
Time will tell.
Yep. There's a balance between convenience and security in the digital world. Google front loads so much convenience into the Chrome/Android experience that users get hooked on the convenience. Then when Google asks for more access, the users are addicted to the convenience, and grant it. I'm not in my twenties, I'm already like "f**k it," this s**t is too useful to limit because of an unsubstantiated threat. Show me harm, and I'll consider the threat. Until then, it's just a bunch of people running around telling me the sky is falling... for the last 5 years.
"One reason it's taken us this long to build is we realized we had to be incredibly transparent with our user about data privacy."
No. When you're incredible, I don't believe you and I don't trust you. If you want trust, you need to be credible. I realize you thought you were speaking informally and being hyperbolic, however, you impugn your customers who desire data privacy when you say they have incredible expectations. No, sir, it's you who lack credibility.
How convenient! LOL! The corrected quote provided by Google. LOLOLOLOL!!!!! It would be different if this was originally posted on a anti-Google site. Well those don't exist because any for profit site relies on them for income so they dare not speak against them. This was a quote from a google fan site that just deleted the offensive statements the made google look bad and told the truth.
There's probably at least as many anti-Google bloggers (some particularly loud ones on Microsoft's payroll) as there are anti-Apple. They're not hard to find at all. As for the (mistranslated) comments about Android and security I would have thought the fact no other journalist or blogger out of the most-assured dozens attending the Mobile World Congress events reported hearing the same Pinchai quote would be a big red-flag. Not to you perhaps, but other reputable sites like Mashable and TechCrunch were quick to correct the story since even the original source didn't stand the supposed quote. BTW, I thought the first story was in Spanish. It was instead French. http://www.frandroid.com/actualites-generales/198006_pour-sundar-pichai-le-galaxy-s6-sera-android
There's probably at least as many anti-Google bloggers (some on Microsoft's payroll) as there are anti-Apple. They're not hard to find at all. As for the (mistranslated) comments about Android and security I would have thought the fact no other journalist or blogger attending the event reported the same Pinchai quote would be a red-flag. Not to you perhaps, but other reputable sites like Mashable and TechCrunch were happy to correct the story since even the original quote source didn't stand the supposed quote. BTW, I thought the first story was in Spanish. It was instead French. http://www.frandroid.com/actualites-generales/198006_pour-sundar-pichai-le-galaxy-s6-sera-android
Techcrunch! Lol. They are Apple haters. No nothing of mashable, but I doubt a Android fan site would add text that hurts Google. They change their page to suit Google using their transcript instead of their own. The difference is Googles excludes the two sentences in question. None of these sites have any journalistic integrity when it comes to Google. They won't bite the hand thatq
feeds them.
Intentionally? I agree with you. Mistakenly? Of course it happens. From reports that's just what happened with the French fansite. They made an error.
I don't think it was a mistake. Google moved immediately to clarify what he meant, then released a corrected transcript. The offending sentence was surgically removed. To me that says, he said it. It wasn't a mis-translation because the whole sentence disappeared. It was a rewriting of the answer after the fact.
I know you don't. That not another single reporter at the event apparently heard that statement shouldn't get in the way of you holding fast to your beliefs. Give no quarter!
Intentionally? I agree with you. Mistakenly? Of course it happens. From reports that's just what happened with the French fansite. They made an error.
Keep in mind these reporters rarely report on the crazy stuff Google employees say. Including Schmidt's comments on privacy. They are very selective in what they print about them. That's why most Google fans have no idea how many times this company has been found guilty of violating consumer privacy laws intentionally. When you have a company who controls monetization of the internet by controlling search, what site that depends on search to remain relevant and makes their revenue from Google ads is going to risk being demoted in search rankings by accident of course, or some glitch mistakenly keeping ads from working on your site.
Intentionally? I agree with you. Mistakenly? Of course it happens. From reports that's just what happened with the French fansite. They made an error.
Keep in mind these reporters rarely report on the crazy stuff Google employees say. Including Schmidt's comments on privacy. They are very selective in what they print about them. That's why most Google fans have no idea how many times this company has been found guilty of violating consumer privacy laws intentionally. When you have a company who controls monetization of the internet by controlling search, what site that depends on search to remain relevant and makes their revenue from Google ads is going to risk being demoted in search rankings by accident of course, or some glitch mistakenly keeping ads from working on your site.
In the words of your "tinfoil hat strong in this one is"
When you have a company who controls monetization of the internet by controlling search, what site that depends on search to remain relevant and makes their revenue from Google ads is going to risk being demoted in search rankings by accident of course, or some glitch mistakenly keeping ads from working on your site.
Google has done that? With so many valid concerns about Google's business you really feel FUD is the answer? When you make silly statements like that it makes it hard to take you seriously. There's no shortage of news reports on both real and creatively imagined Google privacy missteps. You don't seem to have any trouble finding them nor do others here. Just Google it again, they aren't hidden as you already knew.
"Cisco also says that “Android users, at 71%, have the highest encounter rates with all forms of web-delivered malware,” which Cisco says can include “phishing, likejacking, or other social engineering ruses, or forcible redirects to websites other than expected.” iPhone users, in contrast, accounted for just 14% of all web-delivered malware encounters."
So hey, Sundar, your platform is NOT SECURE.
You going to do anything about it? No? All you care about is delivering ads?
Pinchai is either unaware of or ignoring that 99% of all mobile malware targets Android.
If he were aware of or if he were not ignoring that particular catastrophe, he'd drop everything to try and fix it.
He's obviously not. Maybe he's striving for 100%.
And no, that 99% number isn't just a semantic shade of meaning lost in translation.
Here are a few security scare stories (not imaginary) out there to make my point:
Kaspersky: 99% of all mobile threats target Android devices
betanews: 99 percent of mobile financial malware writers prefer Android
"Cisco also says that “Android users, at 71%, have the highest encounter rates with all forms of web-delivered malware,” which Cisco says can include “phishing, likejacking, or other social engineering ruses, or forcible redirects to websites other than expected.” iPhone users, in contrast, accounted for just 14% of all web-delivered malware encounters."
So hey, Sundar, your platform is NOT SECURE.
You going to do anything about it? No? All you care about is delivering ads?
Yeah. Thought so.
How would Google prevent malware writers from targeting Android? Targeting and hitting are not one and the same. You knew that.
BTW, did you actually read your BGR link or just grab what you thought was a juicy quote?
"The good news is that mobile malware is still a very small portion of overall malware in the world. The bad news is that if it does grow in prevalence then it’s much more likely to hurt Android devices. Cisco’s annual security report claims that 99% of all mobile malware targeted Android devices last year, although the firm also notes that such malware only made up around 1.2% of all web malware encounters in all of 2013."
71% of 1.2% is hardly bad news considering most targets of those misleading social ruses or phishing attacks are in BRIC or 3rd world countries where Android is by far the predominant mobile OS. iOS has no better protection against phishing attacks than Android to the best of my knowledge. If they do clue me in.
How would Google prevent malware writers from targeting Android? Targeting and hitting are not one and the same. You knew that.
BTW, did you actually read your BGR link or just grab what you thought was a juicy quote?
"The good news is that mobile malware is still a very small portion of overall malware in the world. The bad news is that if it does grow in prevalence then it’s much more likely to hurt Android devices. Cisco’s annual security report claims that 99% of all mobile malware targeted Android devices last year, although the firm also notes that such malware only made up around 1.2% of all web malware encounters in all of 2013."
71% of 1.2% is hardly bad news considering most targets of those misleading social ruses or phishing attacks are in BRIC or 3rd world countries where Android is by far the predominant mobile OS. iOS has no better protection against phishing attacks than Android to the best of my knowledge. If they do clue me in.
How would Google prevent malware writers from targeting Android? Targeting and hitting are not one and the same. You knew that.
Oh, I dunno. Maybe by actually implementing better security? Ya think?
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
BTW, did you actually read your BGR link. 71% of 1.2% is hardly bad news considering most targets of those social ruses or phishing attacks are in BRIC or 3rd world countries where Android is by far the predominant mobile OS. iOS has no better protection against phishing attacks than Android. to the best of my knowledge.
Oh. A little sophistry. Sure, phishing is phishing.
But what do you call it when malware is available directly from Google Play?
Built into otherwise innocent-looking apps?
I call it a disaster. Google hopes people won't notice.
And no, it's not just a third-world problem here.
---
Report: Malware-infected Android apps spike in the Google Play store
Comments
Nest Labs, makers of the Nest Learning Thermostat and Protect smoke and carbon monoxide detector, announced on Tuesday that it will be opening its smart home platform to third-party developers and partners, which includes parent company Google.
Trust: So hard to earn. So easy to lose.
Well, my point is that you can't call it being caught off guard when Google in 2011 already knew that the integration of mobile devices and home automation was going to be an important area. Which they clearly did else they wouldn't have experimented with Android@Home. I'm not talking about Google knowing exactly what Apple was planning on doing.
And that was the point of my statement. Not that Apple would desire to offer such a platform, but that it is going to ship.
Trust: So hard to earn. So easy to lose.
At this moment in time there is nothing to fear I would say. Google develops for Nest but you have the choice to use it or not, just like any other product from 3rd party developers. So you can choose who to share with by using the 3rd party products you want and ignoring those you don't want.
Now if there would be a fixed Nest/Google integration then that would be breaking a promise and thus a problem.
Now if there would be a fixed Nest/Google integration then that would be breaking a promise and thus a problem.
While I realize that's not the case- and those with Nest products that fear Google integration don't need to worry yet- can you understand the hesitation for new adoption due to the fact policies could change in the future?
Ive said previously- those in their early twentys and younger won't care at all about their privacy, so even if it does change, it will be a good resource for Google. And honestly- if I were Google, I'd sit on it for a couple years, then integrate. Yes, you'd lose some, but you would gain invaluable information and in the long-run I would think it would outweigh the small loss.
Time will tell.
You are either unaware or ignoring that Pinchai never said any such thing of course. The story that he did was the result of a mistaken trnslation from a Spanish paper covering a Google event a few months ago with no other bloggers or reporters at the presentation corroborating the supposed quotes. The corrected story with his actual comments appeared the next day but wasn't nearly as click-worthy and never reported by AI AFAIK. DED as expected likes to repeat the erroneous quote as it fits his storyline.
When there's Android security scare stories out there with at least some semblence of evidence behind them why use a imaginary one to make a point?
How convenient! LOL! The corrected quote provided by Google. LOLOLOLOL!!!!! It would be different if this was originally posted on a anti-Google site. Well those don't exist because any for profit site relies on them for income so they dare not speak against them. This was a quote from a google fan site that just deleted the offensive statements the made google look bad and told the truth.
While I realize that's not the case- and those with Nest products that fear Google integration don't need to worry yet- can you understand the hesitation for new adoption due to the fact policies could change in the future?
Ive said previously- those in their early twentys and younger won't care at all about their privacy, so even if it does change, it will be a good resource for Google. And honestly- if I were Google, I'd sit on it for a couple years, then integrate. Yes, you'd lose some, but you would gain invaluable information and in the long-run I would think it would outweigh the small loss.
Time will tell.
Yep. There's a balance between convenience and security in the digital world. Google front loads so much convenience into the Chrome/Android experience that users get hooked on the convenience. Then when Google asks for more access, the users are addicted to the convenience, and grant it. I'm not in my twenties, I'm already like "f**k it," this s**t is too useful to limit because of an unsubstantiated threat. Show me harm, and I'll consider the threat. Until then, it's just a bunch of people running around telling me the sky is falling... for the last 5 years.
No. When you're incredible, I don't believe you and I don't trust you. If you want trust, you need to be credible. I realize you thought you were speaking informally and being hyperbolic, however, you impugn your customers who desire data privacy when you say they have incredible expectations. No, sir, it's you who lack credibility.
There's probably at least as many anti-Google bloggers (some particularly loud ones on Microsoft's payroll) as there are anti-Apple. They're not hard to find at all. As for the (mistranslated) comments about Android and security I would have thought the fact no other journalist or blogger out of the most-assured dozens attending the Mobile World Congress events reported hearing the same Pinchai quote would be a big red-flag. Not to you perhaps, but other reputable sites like Mashable and TechCrunch were quick to correct the story since even the original source didn't stand the supposed quote. BTW, I thought the first story was in Spanish. It was instead French.
http://www.frandroid.com/actualites-generales/198006_pour-sundar-pichai-le-galaxy-s6-sera-android
feeds them.
Intentionally? I agree with you. Mistakenly? Of course it happens. From reports that's just what happened with the French fansite. They made an error.
I know you don't. That not another single reporter at the event apparently heard that statement shouldn't get in the way of you holding fast to your beliefs. Give no quarter!
Google has done that? With so many valid concerns about Google's business you really feel FUD is the answer? When you make silly statements like that it makes it hard to take you seriously. There's no shortage of news reports on both real and creatively imagined Google privacy missteps. You don't seem to have any trouble finding them nor do others here. Just Google it again, they aren't hidden as you already knew.
Wow, you're right. A Google search for "Schmidt on privacy" only returns 40Million+ results. :rolleyes:
You are either unaware or ignoring that Pinchai never said any such thing of course. ...
When there's Android security scare stories out there with at least some semblence of evidence behind them why use a imaginary one to make a point?
Pinchai is either unaware of or ignoring that 99% of all mobile malware targets Android.
If he were aware of or if he were not ignoring that particular catastrophe, he'd drop everything to try and fix it.
He's obviously not. Maybe he's striving for 100%.
And no, that 99% number isn't just a semantic shade of meaning lost in translation.
Here are a few security scare stories (not imaginary) out there to make my point:
Kaspersky: 99% of all mobile threats target Android devices
http://www.kaspersky.com/about/news/virus/2012/99_of_all_mobile_threats_target_Android_devices
(research by Kaspersky Labs)
betanews: 99 percent of mobile financial malware writers prefer Android
http://betanews.com/2013/12/12/99-percent-of-mobile-financial-malware-writers-prefer-android/
(research by NSS)
GigaOM: Study shows 99% of mobile malware in 2013 targeted Android devices
http://gigaom.com/2014/01/21/study-shows-99-of-mobile-malware-in-2013-targeted-android-devices/
(research by Cisco)(
BGR:
http://bgr.com/2014/01/21/android-mobile-malware-report/
Quote from the BGR article:
"Cisco also says that “Android users, at 71%, have the highest encounter rates with all forms of web-delivered malware,” which Cisco says can include “phishing, likejacking, or other social engineering ruses, or forcible redirects to websites other than expected.” iPhone users, in contrast, accounted for just 14% of all web-delivered malware encounters."
So hey, Sundar, your platform is NOT SECURE.
You going to do anything about it? No? All you care about is delivering ads?
Yeah. Thought so.
How would Google prevent malware writers from targeting Android? Targeting and hitting are not one and the same. You knew that.
BTW, did you actually read your BGR link or just grab what you thought was a juicy quote?
"The good news is that mobile malware is still a very small portion of overall malware in the world. The bad news is that if it does grow in prevalence then it’s much more likely to hurt Android devices. Cisco’s annual security report claims that 99% of all mobile malware targeted Android devices last year, although the firm also notes that such malware only made up around 1.2% of all web malware encounters in all of 2013."
71% of 1.2% is hardly bad news considering most targets of those misleading social ruses or phishing attacks are in BRIC or 3rd world countries where Android is by far the predominant mobile OS. iOS has no better protection against phishing attacks than Android to the best of my knowledge. If they do clue me in.
Parade canceled due to rain.
How would Google prevent malware writers from targeting Android? Targeting and hitting are not one and the same. You knew that.
Oh, I dunno. Maybe by actually implementing better security? Ya think?
BTW, did you actually read your BGR link. 71% of 1.2% is hardly bad news considering most targets of those social ruses or phishing attacks are in BRIC or 3rd world countries where Android is by far the predominant mobile OS. iOS has no better protection against phishing attacks than Android. to the best of my knowledge.
Oh. A little sophistry. Sure, phishing is phishing.
But what do you call it when malware is available directly from Google Play?
Built into otherwise innocent-looking apps?
I call it a disaster. Google hopes people won't notice.
And no, it's not just a third-world problem here.
---
Report: Malware-infected Android apps spike in the Google Play store
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2099421/report-malwareinfected-android-apps-spike-in-the-google-play-store.html
TL;DR: 11,000 malware apps in 2011. 42,000 in 2013. On Google Play. No phishing needed.
Killer quote: "In 2011 Google removed 60 percent of malicious apps, but in 2013 the company removed less than a quarter of them, the report said."
---
Android smartphones shipping from factory with malware
TL;DR: "The malware is disguised as the Google Play Store and is part of the pre-installed Android apps."
Killer quote: "More than 1.2 million new malware programs for Android appeared last year and this number is expected to rise sharply."
No phishing needed.
Just go to Google Play and help yourself.