Apple's Cook speaks out against public, private data harvesting policies

1246

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 108
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,340member
    dabe wrote: »
    Are you still saying that Google does not sell information about person or persons?
    No, you're still saying they do, with no backup for it as best I can see. If you're trying to now change it to the entirely different "monetize" I'd agree with you. "Selling" indicates it leaves your control which is the FUD you were originally trying to pass off as fact. Yeah it sounds much worse than what actually happens just as those using the meme intend.

    Which of the big techs does not make an effort to monetize their users. The answer would be: None AFAIK. With that said some companies do actually sell personal information and for no reason other than making it a revenue stream. It's their business. Google would not be one of those would they, based on what you know?
  • Reply 62 of 108
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    No, you're still saying they do, with no backup for it as best I can see.



    Let me put it this way: Google monetizes information about persons all the time. It means that they use information about person or persons to create a product or service that they then sell. And they do that all the time. Do you agree with this? Or do you need proof?

  • Reply 63 of 108
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,340member
    dabe wrote: »
    Let me put it this way: Google monetizes information about persons all the time. It means that they use information about person or persons to create a product or service that they then sell. And they do that all the time. Do you agree with this? Or do you need proof?
    Well heck I already acknowledged that. Now how about the question I posed to you in that same post:

    "With that said some companies do actually sell personal information and for no reason other than making it a revenue stream. It's their business. Google would not be one of those would they, based on what you know?"
  • Reply 64 of 108
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    Well heck I already acknowledged that. Now how about the question I posed to you in that same post:



    "With that said some companies do actually sell personal information and for no reason other than making it a revenue stream. It's their business. Google would not be one of those would they, based on what you know?"



    Yes, if selling is restricted to this limited scope and personal information is defined as Google has specified at its privacy page, Google would not be one of those companies.

     

    Okay, so now that you've expressed agreement with my revised statement (i.e., Google monetizes information about persons all the time. It means that they use information about person or persons to create a product or service that they then sell. And they do that all the time.), we can admit that it's the word "sells" that you objected to in the first place when it was used instead of "monetizes." Correct?

  • Reply 65 of 108
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    "Selling" indicates it leaves your control which is the FUD you were originally trying to pass off as fact. Yeah it sounds much worse than what actually happens just as those using the meme intend.

     

    Wow! How interesting! I can honestly tell you that I never thought of that at all, i.e., the idea of "selling indicating that it leaves your control," much less trying to do what you suggested. You have quite an imagination. But I suspect it's based on something you've experienced in the past and it seems reasonable. Even so, it wasn't something that even occurred to me.

  • Reply 66 of 108
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,340member
    dabe wrote: »

    Yes, if selling is restricted to this limited scope and personal information is defined as Google has specified at its privacy page, Google would not be one of those companies.

    Okay, so now that you've expressed agreement with my revised statement (i.e., Google monetizes information about persons all the time. It means that they use information about person or persons to create a product or service that they then sell. And they do that all the time.), we can admit that it's the word "sells" that you objected to in the first place when it was used instead of "monetizes." Correct?
    Absolutely. Doesn't sell and monetize mean two different things? O f course they do. The only reason to use "sell" instead of the more accurate "monetize" is for fear-mongering, sometimes called FUD. It's just an attempt to make some folks folks think something evil is going on when in reality it's something fairly mundane.

    "Sell personal information" is something perhaps a dozen or more companies using trackers on this site do.

    "Monetize personal information" is what Google, Microsoft, Apple and probably Facebook do but I'd have to take a closer look at Facebook to be more certain.

    You knew the difference.
  • Reply 67 of 108
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,340member
    dabe wrote: »
    Wow! How interesting! I can honestly tell you that I never thought of that at all, i.e., the idea of "selling indicating that it leaves your control," much less trying to do what you suggested. You have quite an imagination. But I suspect it's based on something you've experienced in the past and it seems reasonable. Even so, it wasn't something that even occurred to me.
    Imagination? Once I've sold something it is no longer mine I would assume. When you buy something I would think you expect the same.

    EDIT: here's something that came up this morning. I mentioned to a funeral home owner I do business with that shortly after I was diagnosed with cancer last year I received a couple of oddly-timed emails and and a letter or two mailed to my home from companies trying to sell me on pre-paying for funeral services or a burial plot. I suggested it was simply fortuitous timing on their part. He said no it wasn't.

    He said he buys marketing lists from data companies based on health information they've acquired by some means.Said it's pretty cheap too. He even related a recent story where both he and a competing funeral home had both contacted the same soon-to-die man with his company getting the man's business.

    He says most of the data comes from the health providers themselves, or at least indirectly so, but that's his story. I don't really know but intend to look into it some more.
  • Reply 68 of 108
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





     "Selling" indicates it leaves your control which is the FUD you were originally trying to pass off as fact. Yeah it sounds much worse than what actually happens just as those using the meme intend.

     

    Yes, somehow I overlooked this part of your post the first time around. Now I understand why you were so wound up about this! 

     

    So, do you think that when Google says "we do not sell your personal information," they are mainly trying to indicate that this particular subset of information does not leave their control? Or are they also indicating that they do not monetize this particular subset of information?

     

    (Meanwhile, I'm not sure I agree with you that "selling" always means that something leaves your control. But I see your concern if that's the meaning that others have adopted.)

  • Reply 69 of 108
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    Imagination?

    Yes. "Selling" indicates it leaves your control which is the FUD you were originally trying to pass off as fact. Yes, the latter part, in italics, is purely imagination!

  • Reply 70 of 108
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,340member
    dabe wrote: »
    Yes. "Selling" indicates it leaves your control which is the FUD you were originally trying to pass off as fact. Yes, the latter part, in italics, is purely imagination!
    My apologies then. I would have thought you understood the difference between the two but as you've mentioned you did not then my bad.
  • Reply 71 of 108
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





     Once I've sold something it is no longer mine I would assume. When you buy something I would think you expect the same.

    When you provide a service, the equation is a bit different. I receive the fruits of the service after or upon buying, but the service provider still controls the service and how it's delivered. So it's not as simple as you make it seem.

  • Reply 72 of 108
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,340member
    dabe wrote: »
    When you provide a service, the equation is a bit different. I receive the fruits of the service after or upon buying, but the service provider still controls the service and how it's delivered. So it's not as simple as you make it seem.
    Oh, geez. At some point do you want to argue about the definition of "is" too?



    [VIDEO]
  • Reply 73 of 108
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    From former Apple employee Manton Reece:

    http://www.manton.org/2015/06/google-photos.html

    [QUOTE]Tim Cook spoke recently about privacy and cloud services:

    [quote]“You might like these so-called free services, but we don’t think they’re worth having your email or your search history or now even your family photos data-mined and sold off for God knows what advertising purpose.”[/quote]

    I’m going to give you a very cynical translation, which I don’t often do: We are in denial about how much better Google Photos is than what we’re doing at Apple. It is so advanced in terms of search that we won’t be able to match it anytime soon. In fact, we don’t even have anyone working on similar technology at all.[/QUOTE]

    Unfortunately I think he's right. Hopefully Apple proves all of us cynics wrong on Monday.
  • Reply 74 of 108
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,340member
    rogifan wrote: »
    From former Apple employee Manton Reece:

    http://www.manton.org/2015/06/google-photos.html
    Unfortunately I think he's right. Hopefully Apple proves all of us cynics wrong on Monday.
    http://www.theverge.com/2015/6/4/8729943/laughing-and-crying-my-way-through-the-new-google-photos

    Touching.
  • Reply 75 of 108
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    Oh, geez. At some point do you want to argue about the definition of "is" too?

     

    As long as it's not too late to argue that the devil is in the details rather than the devil was in the details. :)

     

    P.S. Was not able to view the the Flash insert, but I'm sure it was interesting.

  • Reply 76 of 108
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    Absolutely. Doesn't sell and monetize mean two different things? O f course they do. The only reason to use "sell" instead of the more accurate "monetize" is for fear-mongering, sometimes called FUD. It's just an attempt to make some folks folks think something evil is going on when in reality it's something fairly mundane.



    "Sell personal information" is something perhaps a dozen or more companies using trackers on this site do.



    "Monetize personal information" is what Google, Microsoft, Apple and probably Facebook do but I'd have to take a closer look at Facebook to be more certain.



    You knew the difference.



    If this is true and so obvious (i.e., that sell and monetize mean two different things), I wonder why Google would choose to say, "we do not sell your personal information," rather than simply saying we do not sell any information about you, not even your personal information. Just saying we do not sell your personal information leaves open the possibility that they might sell other information, doesn't it? And since they would know that such a statement could be used for fear-mongering as you call it, isn't it a bit perplexing as to why they would use the term "sell" at all?

  • Reply 77 of 108
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dabe View Post

     



    If this is true and so obvious (i.e., that sell and monetize mean two different things), I wonder why Google would choose to say, "we do not sell your personal information," rather than simply saying we do not sell any information about you, not even your personal information. Just saying we do not sell your personal information leaves open the possibility that they might sell other information, doesn't it? And since they would know that such a statement could be used for fear-mongering as you call it, isn't it a bit perplexing as to why they would use the term "sell" at all?




    EDIT: The reason I ask is because I really don't understand. What I've heard so far just doesn't seem to add up. Remember, I used the term "sell" myself without realizing that it was pretty loaded in this context.  Could it be that Google is not concerned with the implications of the term?

  • Reply 78 of 108
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,340member
    dabe wrote: »

    If this is true and so obvious (i.e., that sell and monetize mean two different things), I wonder why Google would choose to say, "we do not sell your personal information," rather than simply saying we do not sell any information about you, not even your personal information. Just saying we do not sell your personal information leaves open the possibility that they might sell other information, doesn't it? And since they would know that such a statement could be used for fear-mongering as you call it, isn't it a bit perplexing as to why they would use the term "sell" at all?
    Easy answer. They'e accused so often of doing it even by those that know better.

    Heck you see "Google sells your personal information" pretty much every day and it's repeated over and over to the point that too many people don't know it's actually FUD promoted by competitors and those that perhaps really didn't know any better. Apparently you were in that last camp.

    It has reached the point where Google had to specifically take the claim by the horns. Should'a done so sooner IMO.
  • Reply 79 of 108
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    Easy answer. They'e accused so often of doing it even by those that know better.



    Heck you see "Google sells your personal information" pretty much every day and it's repeated over and over to the point that too many people don't know it's actually FUD promoted by competitors and those that perhaps really didn't know any better. Apparently you were in that last camp.



    It has reached the point where Google had to specifically take the claim by the horns. Should'a done so sooner IMO.



    Good try. But it still doesn't add up. (No offense intended.) They should be changing the terms of the discussion by modifying the language at their own website as a first step, possibly using the word "monetize" instead of sell. At the very least, the statement could be "we do not sell information about you, not even your personal information." Unless, of course, it's not true (which is not my assertion), in which case they could make judicious use of "monetize." Anyway, that's just my humble opinion.

  • Reply 80 of 108
    dabedabe Posts: 99member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Dabe View Post

     



    Good try. But it still doesn't add up. (No offense intended.) They should be changing the terms of the discussion by modifying the language at their own website as a first step, possibly using the word "monetize" instead of sell. At the very least, the statement could be "we do not sell information about you, not even your personal information." Unless, of course, it's not true (which is not my assertion), in which case they could make judicious use of "monetize." Anyway, that's just my humble opinion.




    EDIT: On second thought, the answer could be that they (i.e., the folk at Google) just don't look at the word "sell" with exactly the same restrictions you've applied.

Sign In or Register to comment.