Nah, the technology part is facilitating the collection of data for use by the advertising side.
This is what I think too. I seriously doubt that Google sells anyone's personal data. No doubt they collect a boat load of it but, they don't sell it, they use it for their own business model. Advertisers probably don't even want to buy the data. It is cheaper for them to just pay Google for targeted advertising than to manage the data themselves. The data has a very short expiration date and only Google is able to keep it current enough for it to be useful. It would also be foolish for Google sell any data because that is what keeps them relevant to the advertisers. Why would they sell off their most important business asset?
If Google was actually selling your data, there would be some proof. There is no way to keep something like that a secret for nearly two decades, especially on the Internet. People point to some scenario like "I searched for information about a topic and then later I was shown an ad about that exact topic or product. Isn't that proof enough?" No, that is just Google at work, not Google selling your personal information to an advertiser.
Apple iPhone has offered hardware encryption since iPhone 3GS; protecting the hardware encryption keys with your passcode. According to Tim Cook less than 50% of iPhone users were using a passcode prior to iPhone 5S. Following iPhone 5S 80% of users were using a passcode and TouchID to secure their iPhone.
It's not my argument. It's Schmidt's. I'm just saying that's his angle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro
Please identify the lie.
Ok, see below:
Quote:
Originally Posted by matthewmaurice
Google makes, literally ALL, its money from pimping its users out to advertisers.
"literally ALL" is the lie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBook Pro
Ninety percent (90%) of total revenues for Google Inc. are derived from advertising.
90% is not equal to "literally ALL" for all values of 90%.
90% is not equal to "literally ALL" for all values of 90%.
If 2+2=5 for sufficiently large values of 2 (which it does), advertising being ~90% of Google’s revenue is sufficiently large that the destruction thereof would ruin the company.
I disagree with Schmidt. I don't use any real information with Google or Apple or anything on the web. How much more secure can that be. The security level is all the same for me. Doesn't matter how secure the companies are trying to make. Some day, some how, hackers, insiders or from outside, will break into the system and steal all the info. Do strong encryption with anything you put in the cloud which you don't want others to see/use.
I disagree with Schmidt. I don't use any real information with Google or Apple or anything on the web. How much more secure can that be. The security level is all the same for me. Doesn't matter how secure the companies are trying to make. Some day, some how, hackers, insiders or from outside, will break into the system and steal all the info. Do strong encryption with anything you put in the cloud which you don't want others to see/use.
You forget one thing: business model!
Google "use" your information from cloud, email, search...for marketing (How is that called "more secured"?) while Apple sell their products to you. To Google, you're the product. To Apple, you are the customer.
Google’s revenue is sufficiently large that the destruction thereof would ruin the company.
Absolutely. No argument there at all.
My point is that there is actually a bit more depth there than just advertising. Google employs a very large number of top-tier software engineers (many of whom likely had an offer from Apple to consider as well). Off the top of my head, I can't think of any company that would have a higher number of badass devs. That's a pretty significant trait for an advertising company -- but they are still an advertising company.
In the same sense though, the big four TV networks are also just advertising companies. They employ a large number of actors to get the eyeballs that sell the ads. Network TV is free -- which again makes us the product.
Apple is a retail company. Most of their employees are retail workers. Apple makes most of their money from selling products at retail or to retailers -- but they have tremendously talented design and engineering groups that truly make the best products in their segment. I do believe Apple products are the best -- they just don't fit my individual requirements as well, which causes me to drop a notch or two in quality and design to achieve a better experience.
"Between May 2007 and May 2010, as part of it's Street View project, Google Inc. (Google or Company) collected data from Wi-Fi networks throughout the United States and around the world. The purpose of Google's Wi-Fi data collection initiative was to capture information about Wi-Fi networks that the company could use to establish users' locations and provide location-based services. But Google also collected "payload" data - the content of internet communications - that was not needed for it's location database project. The payload data included e-mail and text messages, passwords, Internet usage history, and other highly sensitive personal information."
"When the European data protection authorities investigated Google's Wi-Fi data collection efforts in 2010, the Company initially the denied collecting payload data. On May 14, 2010, however, Google publicly acknowledged that it had been, "collecting samples of payload data from open (i.e., non-password-protected) WiFI networks" but stated that it likely collected only fragmented data. Google traced the collection of payload data to code that was "mistakenly" included in its Wi-Fi data collection software. On October 22, 2010 Google acknowledged for the first time that "in some instances entire e-mails and passwords were captured, as well as passwords." And finally, as described below, the Company provided evidence to the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) showing that the data collection resulted from a deliberate software-design decision by one of the Google employees working on the Street View project."
It's not my argument. It's Schmidt's. I'm just saying that's his angle.
Schmidt didn't make such a statement. Schmidt merely stated that Google is the leader in information security. You provided the embellishment which is patently false.
Schmidt didn't make such a statement. Schmidt merely stated that Google is the leader in information security. You provided the embellishment which is patently false.
Fair enough. I thought encryption just landed for iOS.
I am sick of stupid Google internet trolls with android phones fanboys. So you guys are getting noses punch????. I don't trust this(Google) shitty internet service. The first Internet Google in the year of 1984. So just shut up and quit complaining about the Internet.
Google Inc. CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME (In millions, except share amounts which are reflected in thousands and per share amounts) Six Months Ended June 30, 2014
$31,375 Total Revenues
$28,225 Total advertising revenues
$3,150 Other revenues
Ninety percent (90%) of total revenues for Google Inc. are derived from advertising. Thus, Google is an advertising company masquerading as a technology company.
A very important distinction is who is charged for the use of Google Apps for Business, Google My Maps Pro and Google Cloud Storage. These are not consumer services, these are enterprise services.
Thank you for that clarification. So we can assume that only a mere, trifling 90% of Google's human contacts are their 'product' then. All the rest are real customers
My point is that there is actually a bit more depth there than just advertising. Google employs a very large number of top-tier software engineers (many of whom likely had an offer from Apple to consider as well). Off the top of my head, I can't think of any company that would have a higher number of badass devs. That's a pretty significant trait for an advertising company -- but they are still an advertising company.
In the same sense though, the big four TV networks are also just advertising companies. They employ a large number of actors to get the eyeballs that sell the ads. Network TV is free -- which again makes us the product.
Apple is a retail company. Most of their employees are retail workers. Apple makes most of their money from selling products at retail or to retailers -- but they have tremendously talented design and engineering groups that truly make the best products in their segment. I do believe Apple products are the best -- they just don't fit my individual requirements as well, which causes me to drop a notch or two in quality and design to achieve a better experience.
Oh you have shattered my illusion ... here I was thinking American TV companies were here to entertain the masses ....
Wow the folks around here really hate google. Almost as much as they hate samsung. What about facebook. You guys should really really really hate facebook.
I wonder where appleinsider would be without google.
What I mean is, who pays the bills around here?
Looking at ghostery it sure seems like google pays the bills around here. Along with Adblade, Adknowledge, Almondnet, and god knows who else. Thanks ghostery!
If you aren't using ghostery and ad block plus you should be.
I don't hate Google. But I have no illusions that they are making billions by giving free stuff away. Everything they do in someway feeds their core business, either by creating more eyeballs to sell ads to or to make their ad delivery channel more attractive to those who actually do pay them money. Follow the money trail.
Comments
Nah, the technology part is facilitating the collection of data for use by the advertising side.
This is what I think too. I seriously doubt that Google sells anyone's personal data. No doubt they collect a boat load of it but, they don't sell it, they use it for their own business model. Advertisers probably don't even want to buy the data. It is cheaper for them to just pay Google for targeted advertising than to manage the data themselves. The data has a very short expiration date and only Google is able to keep it current enough for it to be useful. It would also be foolish for Google sell any data because that is what keeps them relevant to the advertisers. Why would they sell off their most important business asset?
If Google was actually selling your data, there would be some proof. There is no way to keep something like that a secret for nearly two decades, especially on the Internet. People point to some scenario like "I searched for information about a topic and then later I was shown an ad about that exact topic or product. Isn't that proof enough?" No, that is just Google at work, not Google selling your personal information to an advertiser.
Please explain.
Apple iPhone has offered hardware encryption since iPhone 3GS; protecting the hardware encryption keys with your passcode. According to Tim Cook less than 50% of iPhone users were using a passcode prior to iPhone 5S. Following iPhone 5S 80% of users were using a passcode and TouchID to secure their iPhone.
It's not my argument. It's Schmidt's. I'm just saying that's his angle.
Please identify the lie.
Ok, see below:
Google makes, literally ALL, its money from pimping its users out to advertisers.
"literally ALL" is the lie.
Ninety percent (90%) of total revenues for Google Inc. are derived from advertising.
90% is not equal to "literally ALL" for all values of 90%.
90% is not equal to "literally ALL" for all values of 90%.
Not for pedants, clearly.
However, I should indeed have typed "virtually" as opposed to "literally."
Not for pedants, clearly.
However, I should indeed have typed "virtually" as opposed to "literally."
Pedant? "Literally" has a very clear meaning. You're virtually making a point.
90% is not equal to "literally ALL" for all values of 90%.
If 2+2=5 for sufficiently large values of 2 (which it does), advertising being ~90% of Google’s revenue is sufficiently large that the destruction thereof would ruin the company.
"when an online service is free, you’re not the customer. You’re the product."
Tim Cook's absolutely right on that. Google's business is to build a profile based on users' email content or web browsing habits to sell to ads.
I disagree with Schmidt. I don't use any real information with Google or Apple or anything on the web. How much more secure can that be. The security level is all the same for me. Doesn't matter how secure the companies are trying to make. Some day, some how, hackers, insiders or from outside, will break into the system and steal all the info. Do strong encryption with anything you put in the cloud which you don't want others to see/use.
I disagree with Schmidt. I don't use any real information with Google or Apple or anything on the web. How much more secure can that be. The security level is all the same for me. Doesn't matter how secure the companies are trying to make. Some day, some how, hackers, insiders or from outside, will break into the system and steal all the info. Do strong encryption with anything you put in the cloud which you don't want others to see/use.
You forget one thing: business model!
Google "use" your information from cloud, email, search...for marketing (How is that called "more secured"?) while Apple sell their products to you. To Google, you're the product. To Apple, you are the customer.
Google’s revenue is sufficiently large that the destruction thereof would ruin the company.
Absolutely. No argument there at all.
My point is that there is actually a bit more depth there than just advertising. Google employs a very large number of top-tier software engineers (many of whom likely had an offer from Apple to consider as well). Off the top of my head, I can't think of any company that would have a higher number of badass devs. That's a pretty significant trait for an advertising company -- but they are still an advertising company.
In the same sense though, the big four TV networks are also just advertising companies. They employ a large number of actors to get the eyeballs that sell the ads. Network TV is free -- which again makes us the product.
Apple is a retail company. Most of their employees are retail workers. Apple makes most of their money from selling products at retail or to retailers -- but they have tremendously talented design and engineering groups that truly make the best products in their segment. I do believe Apple products are the best -- they just don't fit my individual requirements as well, which causes me to drop a notch or two in quality and design to achieve a better experience.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/91652398/FCC-Report-on-Google-Street-View-personal-data-mining
"Between May 2007 and May 2010, as part of it's Street View project, Google Inc. (Google or Company) collected data from Wi-Fi networks throughout the United States and around the world. The purpose of Google's Wi-Fi data collection initiative was to capture information about Wi-Fi networks that the company could use to establish users' locations and provide location-based services. But Google also collected "payload" data - the content of internet communications - that was not needed for it's location database project. The payload data included e-mail and text messages, passwords, Internet usage history, and other highly sensitive personal information."
"When the European data protection authorities investigated Google's Wi-Fi data collection efforts in 2010, the Company initially the denied collecting payload data. On May 14, 2010, however, Google publicly acknowledged that it had been, "collecting samples of payload data from open (i.e., non-password-protected) WiFI networks" but stated that it likely collected only fragmented data. Google traced the collection of payload data to code that was "mistakenly" included in its Wi-Fi data collection software. On October 22, 2010 Google acknowledged for the first time that "in some instances entire e-mails and passwords were captured, as well as passwords." And finally, as described below, the Company provided evidence to the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) showing that the data collection resulted from a deliberate software-design decision by one of the Google employees working on the Street View project."
Never forget.
Schmidt didn't make such a statement. Schmidt merely stated that Google is the leader in information security. You provided the embellishment which is patently false.
Schmidt didn't make such a statement. Schmidt merely stated that Google is the leader in information security. You provided the embellishment which is patently false.
Fair enough. I thought encryption just landed for iOS.
Thank you for that clarification. So we can assume that only a mere, trifling 90% of Google's human contacts are their 'product' then. All the rest are real customers
Oh you have shattered my illusion ... here I was thinking American TV companies were here to entertain the masses ....
Oh you have shattered my illusion ... here I was thinking American TV companies were here to entertain the masses ....
No, we'd be up to two-a-week new episodes of Firefly, right?
The first Internet Google in the year of 1984. So just shut up and quit complaining about the Internet.
I wonder where appleinsider would be without google.
What I mean is, who pays the bills around here?
Looking at ghostery it sure seems like google pays the bills around here. Along with Adblade, Adknowledge, Almondnet, and god knows who else. Thanks ghostery!
If you aren't using ghostery and ad block plus you should be.