If you are going to put your files on Google's or any third-party service, I would recommend you use encryptions software to encrypt any files you store on their drives. One, it protect it from them snooping for data they can use to target you.
I know Gatorguy will defend Google actions, but does everyone understand that Google used all the photos people stored on their servers to do their R&D on photo recognition algorithms. Google is now selling this technology to the governments and police. Not only are you the product they sell to their customers, you also provide the necessary data for do their R&D programs. There is no evidence that Apple is doing the same thing, Apple is not using customer information stored on their service to help develop the next product. This is why Apple charges for their service since nothing comes free.
Encrypted you data then your data can not be use against your or to help other companies make money off you and not share the profits with you.
Also, if this is not enough, you are adding to the carbon footprint, due to all the power use to keep your data on a server up and running 27/7. My backup drive is off line except when it is needed.
You call it defending Google, while others might call it not tolerating FUD farming no matter the topic.
Casual readers have too much trouble already sorting out the crap spread like fertilizer to grow an agenda from actual fact. So you could have actually looked at what security measures are included rather than making a bunch of stuff up 'cause you think you heard about it someplace on the internet. https://gsuite.google.com/faq/security/
BTW. of course Google trained their object recognition algorithm using anonymised photos. How do you suppose Apple trained theirs, magic wand?
If you have a paid account, does Google still assume they have the right to scan/read/peruse your information?
They have said several times they won't do that...any more.
THEY might not do it, but they still allow third party access which is often bundled into app permissions.
...on both Google Android and iOS, and only with your request and permission to do so. That's how those nice mail organizers are able to access your private Apple-supplied email accounts for example. Apple let them because you "requested" it. It's also how various App Store personal organizers can help keep your daily/monthly schedules up-to-date: Apple allows them access to your calendar as long as you've "agreed" to it. Of course it would be REALLY nice if developers were more clear in what you you "asked" them to do with your accounts and data.
If you are going to put your files on Google's or any third-party service, I would recommend you use encryptions software to encrypt any files you store on their drives. One, it protect it from them snooping for data they can use to target you. Second if someone else happens to gain access they most likely are not going to waste their time trying to hack your files, since there are lots of other people data they can get to without the extra work.
I still use dropbox, for sharing files with people but I use PGP or Stuffit Delux to encrypt the data and then I provide the person with the public PGP key to de-encrypt it.
I know Gatorguy will defend Google actions, but does everyone understand that Google used all the photos people stored on their servers to do their R&D on photo recognition algorithms. Google is now selling this technology to the governments and police. Not only are you the product they sell to their customers, you also provide the necessary data for do their R&D programs. There is no evidence that Apple is doing the same thing, Apple is not using customer information stored on their service to help develop the next product. This is why Apple charges for their service since nothing comes free.
Encrypted you data then your data can not be use against your or to help other companies make money off you and not share the profits with you.
Also, if this is not enough, you are adding to the carbon footprint, due to all the power use to keep your data on a server up and running 27/7. My backup drive is off line except when it is needed.
Dont forget about that dreadful captcha, where a human is used to teach algs to recognize images.
If you are going to put your files on Google's or any third-party service, I would recommend you use encryptions software to encrypt any files you store on their drives. One, it protect it from them snooping for data they can use to target you. Second if someone else happens to gain access they most likely are not going to waste their time trying to hack your files, since there are lots of other people data they can get to without the extra work.
I still use dropbox, for sharing files with people but I use PGP or Stuffit Delux to encrypt the data and then I provide the person with the public PGP key to de-encrypt it.
I know Gatorguy will defend Google actions, but does everyone understand that Google used all the photos people stored on their servers to do their R&D on photo recognition algorithms. Google is now selling this technology to the governments and police. Not only are you the product they sell to their customers, you also provide the necessary data for do their R&D programs. There is no evidence that Apple is doing the same thing, Apple is not using customer information stored on their service to help develop the next product. This is why Apple charges for their service since nothing comes free.
Encrypted you data then your data can not be use against your or to help other companies make money off you and not share the profits with you.
Also, if this is not enough, you are adding to the carbon footprint, due to all the power use to keep your data on a server up and running 27/7. My backup drive is off line except when it is needed.
Dont forget about that dreadful captcha, where a human is used to teach algs to recognize images.
Thankfully CAPTCHA has been retired. Now we have reCAPTCHA.
If you have a paid account, does Google still assume they have the right to scan/read/peruse your information?
No more than Apple does if that's what you're asking. All cloud providers need to be able to access your content to be able to sort, search and otherwise service your account as well as offer value-added features
If you have a paid account, does Google still assume they have the right to scan/read/peruse your information?
No more than Apple does if that's what you're asking. All cloud providers need to be able to access your content to be able to sort, search and otherwise service your account as well as offer value-added features
The root question is who can initiate the search.
Only you in general, with the same exceptions for legal requirements as iCloud, Dropbox and others are subject to by law.
Funny timing on this given Google's breach of trust in the user location fiasco. Are memories today that ephemeral? Incidentally last night on one of the US late night comedy shows, I believe it was the Disney/ABC Jimmy Kimmel show, there was spot nearly a minute long, a parody not about Google, but the various ways that APPLE is tracking /stealing your privacy. Easy for AI readers to shrug off the stretch of facts into fictions, but the general public? Not too sure.
Not a "breach of trust" as much as IMHO intentionally obfuscating the proper settings, ALL the settings, needed to control location logging. That's not right.
Apple doesn't make it as clear as they should either, allowing less-knowledgeable users to assume turning off "Location Services" means it's off everywhere from that point forward. They also do the some of the same button confusion with Ad settings as does Google, requiring more than one toggle for controlling it and placing those in entirely different menus. If Apple or Google really wanted users to opt out of some of these services it should be one click done, and plainly worded so that users know exactly what that setting does. Something like "Limit Ad Tracking" or "Web and App Activity" is not clearly understood wording nor is it clear if on or off is the proper setting.
Those tracking and ad mechanisms are enabled by default, just the opposite of what it should be if user privacy is the goal. Opt in is the default rather than Opt-out and that's what we should all be demanding change. The EU actually has the right idea even if the implementation is both vague and rough around the edges.
If you are going to put your files on Google's or any third-party service, I would recommend you use encryptions software to encrypt any files you store on their drives. One, it protect it from them snooping for data they can use to target you. Second if someone else happens to gain access they most likely are not going to waste their time trying to hack your files, since there are lots of other people data they can get to without the extra work.
I still use dropbox, for sharing files with people but I use PGP or Stuffit Delux to encrypt the data and then I provide the person with the public PGP key to de-encrypt it.
I know Gatorguy will defend Google actions, but does everyone understand that Google used all the photos people stored on their servers to do their R&D on photo recognition algorithms. Google is now selling this technology to the governments and police. Not only are you the product they sell to their customers, you also provide the necessary data for do their R&D programs. There is no evidence that Apple is doing the same thing, Apple is not using customer information stored on their service to help develop the next product. This is why Apple charges for their service since nothing comes free.
Encrypted you data then your data can not be use against your or to help other companies make money off you and not share the profits with you.
Also, if this is not enough, you are adding to the carbon footprint, due to all the power use to keep your data on a server up and running 27/7. My backup drive is off line except when it is needed.
Dont forget about that dreadful captcha, where a human is used to teach algs to recognize images.
Yeah the guy who developed this, was the one who outed google at a TED talk stating he used all the photo stored on google servers to train the algorithm. He choose his word wisely, and did not specifically say it was user photos. Some of those photo were from web page archives and some of those archives were copyright photos and google mostly likely used it without the owner permission.
If you are going to put your files on Google's or any third-party service, I would recommend you use encryptions software to encrypt any files you store on their drives. One, it protect it from them snooping for data they can use to target you. Second if someone else happens to gain access they most likely are not going to waste their time trying to hack your files, since there are lots of other people data they can get to without the extra work.
I still use dropbox, for sharing files with people but I use PGP or Stuffit Delux to encrypt the data and then I provide the person with the public PGP key to de-encrypt it.
I know Gatorguy will defend Google actions, but does everyone understand that Google used all the photos people stored on their servers to do their R&D on photo recognition algorithms. Google is now selling this technology to the governments and police. Not only are you the product they sell to their customers, you also provide the necessary data for do their R&D programs. There is no evidence that Apple is doing the same thing, Apple is not using customer information stored on their service to help develop the next product. This is why Apple charges for their service since nothing comes free.
Encrypted you data then your data can not be use against your or to help other companies make money off you and not share the profits with you.
Also, if this is not enough, you are adding to the carbon footprint, due to all the power use to keep your data on a server up and running 27/7. My backup drive is off line except when it is needed.
Dont forget about that dreadful captcha, where a human is used to teach algs to recognize images.
Yeah the guy who developed this, was the one who outed google at a TED talk stating he used all the photo stored on google servers to train the algorithm. He choose his word wisely, and did not specifically say it was user photos. Some of those photo were from web page archives and some of those archives were copyright photos and google mostly likely used it without the owner permission.
"I think they might have"... "Maybe".... "Perhaps they did".... "Can't prove they didn't..." You could even go so far as to claim "I heard they eat little children, raw with a side of peach marmalade"
You are certainly entitled to both "think" and "imagine".
If you are going to put your files on Google's or any third-party service, I would recommend you use encryptions software to encrypt any files you store on their drives. One, it protect it from them snooping for data they can use to target you.
I know Gatorguy will defend Google actions, but does everyone understand that Google used all the photos people stored on their servers to do their R&D on photo recognition algorithms. Google is now selling this technology to the governments and police. Not only are you the product they sell to their customers, you also provide the necessary data for do their R&D programs. There is no evidence that Apple is doing the same thing, Apple is not using customer information stored on their service to help develop the next product. This is why Apple charges for their service since nothing comes free.
Encrypted you data then your data can not be use against your or to help other companies make money off you and not share the profits with you.
Also, if this is not enough, you are adding to the carbon footprint, due to all the power use to keep your data on a server up and running 27/7. My backup drive is off line except when it is needed.
You call it defending Google, while others might call it not tolerating FUD farming no matter the topic.
Casual readers have too much trouble already sorting out the crap spread like fertilizer to grow an agenda from actual fact. So you could have actually looked at what security measures are included rather than making a bunch of stuff up 'cause you think you heard about it someplace on the internet. https://gsuite.google.com/faq/security/
BTW. of course Google trained their object recognition algorithm using anonymised photos. How do you suppose Apple trained theirs, magic wand?
As you always do, you missed my point, my point was if you going to use Google for data storage, you need to protect your data from Google's prying eye including their researcher. I do not care what Google puts out for public consumption which was rationalize by their lawyers, As I said before stop defining google actions since you have no inside information about what they are really doing. You think because Google claims in some sort of EULA that justifies you in say they are or are not doing something.
You may be right that Apple used user photo to develop photo recognition software that is used in photos on the iPhone and mac. But they are not sell this technology to third-parties other than Apple customers who are using the technology and paid for the technology. Or Apple may have license the technology from other sources. In Google case they said they use photo's stored on their servers to develop their technology which they profit from and do not share the profits with the people who provided them a the data.
If you are going to put your files on Google's or any third-party service, I would recommend you use encryptions software to encrypt any files you store on their drives. One, it protect it from them snooping for data they can use to target you. Second if someone else happens to gain access they most likely are not going to waste their time trying to hack your files, since there are lots of other people data they can get to without the extra work.
I still use dropbox, for sharing files with people but I use PGP or Stuffit Delux to encrypt the data and then I provide the person with the public PGP key to de-encrypt it.
I know Gatorguy will defend Google actions, but does everyone understand that Google used all the photos people stored on their servers to do their R&D on photo recognition algorithms. Google is now selling this technology to the governments and police. Not only are you the product they sell to their customers, you also provide the necessary data for do their R&D programs. There is no evidence that Apple is doing the same thing, Apple is not using customer information stored on their service to help develop the next product. This is why Apple charges for their service since nothing comes free.
Encrypted you data then your data can not be use against your or to help other companies make money off you and not share the profits with you.
Also, if this is not enough, you are adding to the carbon footprint, due to all the power use to keep your data on a server up and running 27/7. My backup drive is off line except when it is needed.
Dont forget about that dreadful captcha, where a human is used to teach algs to recognize images.
Thankfully CAPTCHA has been retired. Now we have reCAPTCHA.
Thank God! reCAPTCHA is a completely different thing, tho. It uses humans to teach algs to recognize images, unlike that dreadful CAPTCHA /s It is not different, as it works in the exact same way, except now images are related to the needs of autonomous cars, while previously Google was teaching algs to read street addresses. Too bad a lot of lazy arse web developers like to use reCAPTCHA.
Comments
Casual readers have too much trouble already sorting out the crap spread like fertilizer to grow an agenda from actual fact. So you could have actually looked at what security measures are included rather than making a bunch of stuff up 'cause you think you heard about it someplace on the internet.
https://gsuite.google.com/faq/security/
BTW. of course Google trained their object recognition algorithm using anonymised photos. How do you suppose Apple trained theirs, magic wand?
Seriously tho while it sounds much the same it is quite different.
https://www.google.com/recaptcha/intro/v3beta.html
Apple doesn't make it as clear as they should either, allowing less-knowledgeable users to assume turning off "Location Services" means it's off everywhere from that point forward. They also do the some of the same button confusion with Ad settings as does Google, requiring more than one toggle for controlling it and placing those in entirely different menus. If Apple or Google really wanted users to opt out of some of these services it should be one click done, and plainly worded so that users know exactly what that setting does. Something like "Limit Ad Tracking" or "Web and App Activity" is not clearly understood wording nor is it clear if on or off is the proper setting.
Those tracking and ad mechanisms are enabled by default, just the opposite of what it should be if user privacy is the goal.
Opt in is the default rather than Opt-out and that's what we should all be demanding change. The EU actually has the right idea even if the implementation is both vague and rough around the edges.
Yeah the guy who developed this, was the one who outed google at a TED talk stating he used all the photo stored on google servers to train the algorithm. He choose his word wisely, and did not specifically say it was user photos. Some of those photo were from web page archives and some of those archives were copyright photos and google mostly likely used it without the owner permission.
You could even go so far as to claim "I heard they eat little children, raw with a side of peach marmalade"
You are certainly entitled to both "think" and "imagine".
As you always do, you missed my point, my point was if you going to use Google for data storage, you need to protect your data from Google's prying eye including their researcher. I do not care what Google puts out for public consumption which was rationalize by their lawyers, As I said before stop defining google actions since you have no inside information about what they are really doing. You think because Google claims in some sort of EULA that justifies you in say they are or are not doing something.
You may be right that Apple used user photo to develop photo recognition software that is used in photos on the iPhone and mac. But they are not sell this technology to third-parties other than Apple customers who are using the technology and paid for the technology. Or Apple may have license the technology from other sources. In Google case they said they use photo's stored on their servers to develop their technology which they profit from and do not share the profits with the people who provided them a the data.
Android Marketplace>Google Play
Google Wallet>AndroidPay>GPay
G1>Nexus>Pixel
Android Wear>WearOS
(Who knows what else I forgot)
When you fail, rename the failure!
It is not different, as it works in the exact same way, except now images are related to the needs of autonomous cars, while previously Google was teaching algs to read street addresses. Too bad a lot of lazy arse web developers like to use reCAPTCHA.