Google Nexus 7 is selling well, but would you trust it?

[Neo]

Initial reports say that the Nexus 7 tablet is selling well on the back of good reviews, but given Google's overt propensity to mine your data and sell it to the highest bidder, as well as the recent revelations of covert activity such as the Google Street projecting collecting more than just photographs of your neighborhood, and the close ties between Google and Big Gov, are the buyers of the Nexus 7 thoughtlessly handing over all rights to their internet privacy?

[harrybarracuda]

If they've already got a Gmail account, and use Google, who honestly gives a shit?

[Neo]

Great commentary Harry...

[harrybarracuda]

Sorry, but if you don't get my point then you have no place asking such a dumb question.

[Cthulhu]

Initial reports say that the Nexus 7 tablet is selling well on the back of good reviews, but given Google's overt propensity to mine your data and sell it to the highest bidder, as well as the recent revelations of covert activity such as the Google Street projecting collecting more than just photographs of your neighborhood, and the close ties between Google and Big Gov, are the buyers of the Nexus 7 thoughtlessly handing over all rights to their internet privacy?

Yes.

I find privacy advocates, who boast about the "superiority" of Google and Android, to be, at best, amusing illustrations of hypocrisy, contradiction, and cluelessness.

Your choices really are between Apple, which goes to bat for customer privacy, and Google which blatantly ignores and abuses customer privacy. Don't even start including Facebook.

[harrybarracuda]

How do you explain this then?

While Apple says it prohibits and rejects any app that collects or transmits users’ personal data without their permission, that has not stopped some of the most popular applications for the iPhone, iPad and iPod — like Yelp, Gowalla, Hipster and Foodspotting — from taking users’ contacts and transmitting it without their knowledge.
Google, which makes the Android operating system software, forces developers to ask users for permission to access any personal data up front.
The app makers collect the data to help quickly expand the network of people using their program. The practice of taking address book information without permission first came to light last week, when a developer noticed that Path, a mobile social network, was uploading entire address books to its servers without users’ knowledge. The company has since said it will stop the practice and destroy the data it has collected.
But Path is hardly the only mobile application that collects address books. Last February, Lookout, a mobile security company, found that 11 percent of free applications in Apple’s iTunes Store had the ability to access users’ contacts. And on Tuesday, VentureBeat, a technology blog, reported that dozens of applications for Apple devices were taking users’ address books without permission.

Or this?

Here are some examples of the types of personal information Apple may collect and how we may use it.
What personal information we collect

• When you create an Apple ID, register your products, apply for commercial credit, purchase a product, download a software update, register for a class at an Apple Retail Store, or participate in an online survey, we may collect a variety of information, including your name, mailing address, phone number, email address, contact preferences, and credit card information.
• When you share your content with family and friends using Apple products, send gift certificates and products, or invite others to join you on Apple forums, Apple may collect the information you provide about those people such as name, mailing address, email address, and phone number.
• In the U.S., we may ask for your Social Security number (SSN) but only in limited circumstances such as when setting up a wireless account and activating your iPhone or when determining whether to extend commercial credit.

How we use your personal information

• The personal information we collect allows us to keep you posted on Apple’s latest product announcements, software updates, and upcoming events. It also helps us to improve our services, content, and advertising. If you don’t want to be on our mailing list, you can opt out anytime by updating your preferences.
• We also use personal information to help us develop, deliver, and improve our products, services, content, and advertising.
• From time to time, we may use your personal information to send important notices, such as communications about purchases and changes to our terms, conditions, and policies. Because this information is important to your interaction with Apple, you may not opt out of receiving these communications.
• We may also use personal information for internal purposes such as auditing, data analysis, and research to improve Apple’s products, services, and customer communications.
• If you enter into a sweepstake, contest, or similar promotion we may use the information you provide to administer those programs.

[Cthulhu]

I see you've found absolutely nothing to make your point.

- the old "contacts data" issue, which Apple has closed within days of it surfacing, including changing how contacts data is accessed and now having contacts alert users whenever it gets accessed, and extending this to OS X as well. Location data has always alerted users when and who accesses it, and in both instances users can disable access, universally or by application. I note you omitted a date for your source, or, for that matter, a source at all.

- an excerpt from Apple's EULA that does noticeably *NOT* include the use of user private data to be passed on to third parties "partners" or "affiliates", because (as I said) they do not sell or use your data to be given to others.

There's plenty of examples where Apple goes out of their way to protect customer and user privacy & data.

- iBook deals with publishers, forbidding them to collect customer data for direct marketing, something that nearly derailed the deals until all publishers fell in line.
- location tracking via cell towers & wifi, whereas Apple completely anonymizes user data, and newly randomly encrypts it every 30 minutes (Google pairs the information with the UDID of your device, and subsequently with unique user information, and then claims this makes it unable to be matched with a user.. Uh huh)
- Facebook deal, which didn't happen initially because FB wanted access that Apple didn't give it.

You really need to learn to do better research.

The major differences between Apple and Google:

- to Apple, you are their CUSTOMER.
- to Google, you are their PRODUCT.

What do you prefer to be?

[harrybarracuda]

Maybe I'm missing something, but that "We collect" spiel is straight off Apple's website.

It also helps us to improve our services, content, and advertising.

Doesn't sound familiar?

[Cthulhu]

Maybe I'm missing something, but that "We collect" spiel is straight off Apple's website.

It also helps us to improve our services, content, and advertising.

Doesn't sound familiar?

You're building a strawman, and desperately so, at that.

The proof is in the pudding, neither myself or anyone I know has ever received any third party spam, mail or messages, from submitting an email address via an Apple registration. The only mail received are notifications from Apple or marketing messages from Apple - both of which can be turned off, and remain turned off, with a simple opt-out link.

Conversely, when Google started requiring providing a mobile number for "authentication" via text messages, it didn't even take 2 weeks for that number to receive unsolicited sales calls and text messages (something which, I might add, is illegal in the USA). Nope, not a coincidence, because I provided Google with a "burn" number from a pre-paid phone bought just for that purpose.

The same holds true for Facebook, I might add.

The proverbial pudding, here, is that Apple has not abuse the trust they have been handed, by misusing the information they collect.

... and you just spraying FUD all over the place.

[harrybarracuda]

Abuse *what* trust, exactly? Google are quite open about collecting data and using it to provide targeted advertising. Where is the misuse? Have you ever read a license agreement?

The fact that they are more sophisticated at it than Apple is quite irrelevant.

I can't comment on the Mobile phone issue, I never use it because I'm sure buried in there somewhere is a clause that says they are allowed to use it for advertising, and I don't want spam SMS's (although anyone from the US is welcome to call me with a sales call, I'll keep the line open).

But you don't have to sign up for it.

And I'm not sure what you mean about Spam, GMail is about the best at removing UCE from your inbox, to the point that I would almost have gone with Google Mail Filtering as an anti-spam measure if it wasn't so expensive.

So if Google are sending me spam because of data they've collected from my email, they are doing a great job of chucking it in the junk mail folder!

Meanwhile Apple are collecting all of this data, including that on people with which you share things, and you are telling me that you trust them completely and they don't have any ulterior use for it than - remind me again - a few targeted spams from which you can opt out?

Call me Mr. Suspicious....

[Cthulhu]

Either you are deliberately playing dumb, or you really are that stupid - I am sincerely hoping you are just playing the part for the sake of a wind-up.

Google's being fine $22.5 million for deliverate evasion of Safari privacy settings (settings that Apple maintains as defaults in order to default their browser to higher privacy settings, and which Google had to devise a deliberate way of working around, avoiding, and deliberately violating privacy settings, in order to get to user browsing history and configurations).

Google to pay $22.5 million fine for Safari privacy evasion - Jul. 11, 2012

That's the big news right now - but previously we have had the noted Street View privacy violations, the previously noted Android tracking issue, a recent privacy violation in France (Google to pay $22.5 million fine for Safari privacy evasion - Jul. 11, 2012), etc... it paints a disturbing trend.

Yes, their right to use said private data which they collect is spelled out in their EULA; Apple's EULA, which you so nicely copied, is specifically devoid of any such 'right' to redistribute the information to any "partners".

Oh right, the old "Oh, just because Apple has never abused your trust, don't tell me they aren't planning anything with it - wink, wink" argument. At this rate, I have heard this argument, in one shape or form, for over 20 years, regarding all kinds of services and products of Apple's - "Oh, right, well "OS X Server" might include unlimited users for a flat fee now, but just wait, in a few years they will raise the price and set per user licenses, like a real company would" -- when in fact Apple has dropped the prices of 'server' since then, from $1500, to $1000, to $500, to the current price of $50 - and still includes unlimited users.)

[Neo]

Abuse *what* trust, exactly? Google are quite open about collecting data and using it to provide targeted advertising. Where is the misuse?

Google Street View privacy scandal broadens - Los Angeles Times

Google Engineer Knew About Street View WiFi Data Scoop: FCC Report

UK Regulator Re-Opens Google Street View Investigation - Softpedia

FTC Said to Fine Google $10 Million Over Safari Ad Cookies - Softpedia

Google to pay $22.5 million fine for Safari privacy evasion - Jul. 11, 2012

Have you ever read a license agreement?

Google privacy policy is subject of backlash - The Washington Post

Google privacy policy: The missing opt-out isn’t the only problem. - Slate Magazine

Google's March 1, 2012 privacy change enables the company to share data across a wide variety of services.[39] This includes embedded services in millions of third party websites using Adsense and Analytics. The policy was widely criticized as creating a environment that discourages Internet innovation by making Internet users more fearful online.[40]

After privacy concerns were raised, Google's CEO, Eric Schmidt, declared: "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. If you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines—including Google—do retain this information for some time and it's important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act and it is possible that all that information could be made available to the authorities."[41]

Privacy International has raised concerns regarding the dangers and privacy implications of having a centrally-located, widely popular data warehouse of millions of Internet users' searches, and how under controversial existing U.S. law, Google can be forced to hand over all such information to the U.S. government.[42]


In its 2007 Consultation Report, Privacy International ranked Google as
"Hostile to Privacy", its lowest rating on their report, making Google the only company in the list to receive that ranking.[42][43]

Criticism of Google - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yup. nothing to see here. Keep moving along.

[Cthulhu]

Bingo, Eric Schmidt (who is best described as "creepy") showing total drain for privacy issues is enough to give concern.

[harrybarracuda]

Either you are deliberately playing dumb, or you really are that stupid - I am sincerely hoping you are just playing the part for the sake of a wind-up.

Google's being fine $22.5 million for deliverate evasion of Safari privacy settings (settings that Apple maintains as defaults in order to default their browser to higher privacy settings, and which Google had to devise a deliberate way of working around, avoiding, and deliberately violating privacy settings, in order to get to user browsing history and configurations).

Google to pay $22.5 million fine for Safari privacy evasion - Jul. 11, 2012

That's a rather overly complicated and emotional description. From what I see, if an Apple user pressed the +1 Button, Google conned the iphone into installing a tracking cookie.

Whoop de fucking do. So a user who is already (I assume knowingly) having his data collected by Google's Search engine uses another Google service, revealing yet more data, and Google install a cookie.

Simple answer: Don't use Google and don't hit the +1 button.

They can earn the money to pay the fine in about four hours, and they won't even have to admit wrong doing.

That's the big news right now - but previously we have had the noted Street View privacy violations, the previously noted Android tracking issue, a recent privacy violation in France (Google to pay $22.5 million fine for Safari privacy evasion - Jul. 11, 2012), etc... it paints a disturbing trend.

The StreetView thing was a hoot. They collected 200Gb of data from insecure wireless routers while using them to improve Google Location Services. I think that was a bit naughty. But you think someone actually sat down and went through it all? $25,000 fine. Again, wow.

Yes, their right to use said private data which they collect is spelled out in their EULA; Apple's EULA, which you so nicely copied, is specifically devoid of any such 'right' to redistribute the information to any "partners".

You've lost me there:

You may be asked to provide your personal information anytime you are in contact with Apple or an Apple affiliated company. Apple and its affiliates may share this personal information with each other and use it consistent with this Privacy Policy. They may also combine it with other information to provide and improve our products, services, content, and advertising.

You don't need to explain, it's in English.

Oh right, the old "Oh, just because Apple has never abused your trust, don't tell me they aren't planning anything with it - wink, wink" argument. At this rate, I have heard this argument, in one shape or form, for over 20 years, regarding all kinds of services and products of Apple's - "Oh, right, well "OS X Server" might include unlimited users for a flat fee now, but just wait, in a few years they will raise the price and set per user licenses, like a real company would" -- when in fact Apple has dropped the prices of 'server' since then, from $1500, to $1000, to $500, to the current price of $50 - and still includes unlimited users.)

Probably because they can't shift the fucking thing.




So, it's taken 11 posts to basically sum up what I said in post #2:

If you already use Google or Gmail, why the fuck would you worry about a Nexus tablet collecting your data?!

[Cthulhu]

^ the naïveté is staggering

[harrybarracuda]

What you call naivete is actually disinterest, and is better than what I call paranoia.

The information I'm most concerned about is in my bank's computer systems, now for THOSE I have a very high expectation of privacy.

Where I eat/shop/drink and what I think of them are no big secret. I like the Google ecosystem.

You're getting spied on even if you never touch a Google site. Get used to it.

[Cthulhu]

^ the naïveté is staggering....

[harrybarracuda]

If you haven't grasped the concept, yes it is.

Used your Visa card lately?

[Cthulhu]

I really have to believe that this is just part of your continued "anti-All-Things-Apple" windup, as the strawman you are building is otherwise a staggering display of obliviousness, or rather just a staggering display of naïveté.

Neo pretty much laid it out for you, and your only response was to point at a tree and scream "Look, squirrels!"

[baldrick]

Conversely, when Google started requiring providing a mobile number for "authentication" via text messages, it didn't even take 2 weeks for that number to receive unsolicited sales calls and text messages (something which, I might add, is illegal in the USA). Nope, not a coincidence, because I provided Google with a "burn" number from a pre-paid phone bought just for that purpose.

do you really think anyone believes you bought a sim card and put it in a phone just so you could use the number to associate it with your gmail login and then kept it on for the "less than 2 weeks" when you got your phone call

you are a fantasist desperately trying to be "cool"

[harrybarracuda]

I really have to believe that this is just part of your continued "anti-All-Things-Apple" windup, as the strawman you are building is otherwise a staggering display of obliviousness, or rather just a staggering display of naïveté.

Neo pretty much laid it out for you, and your only response was to point at a tree and scream "Look, squirrels!"

What are you blathering on about? This thread is about the Nexus 7 mining data, and yet straight away in Post #5 you drifted into a "Apple love me and I trust them" thread (sucker) and are now bleating because I have the temerity to say they're as big a bunch of money-grubbing cnuts as the rest. Get over it.

Going back to the OP, the issue of privacy doesn't appear to be putting people off (neither does the lack of 3G or an SD card slot). Price I suppose.

The Nexus 7 is selling like hotcakes at various US brick-and-mortar retail outlets just a few days into its general release, with some retailers already reporting that the 7in Android tablet built by Google and Asus is out of stock.


GameStop, Sam's Club, and Staples were listing the device as out of stock as of 13 July, while Office Depot appeared to still have a few Nexus 7 tablets on hand, according to a rundown of several Nexus 7 retailers compiled by Newsday.



GameStop had "already run through its first two allocations of the tablet," the site reported. A third shipment of Nexus 7 tablets should arrive in August, according to GameStop.


The Nexus 7 was unveiled by Google on 27 June at the search giant's Google I/O developer conference in San Francisco. Customers have been able to pre-order the tablets from Google and through a handful of its retail partners over the past two weeks and the devices began shipping to consumers Friday.



The Android 4.1 Jelly Bean-based tablet has sparked a considerable amount of interest, due in part to an attractive price tag, but also because of favourable ratings from a number of notable tech reviewers. Find one from us here. The Nexus 7 starts at £159 for the 8GB version—putting it in direct competition with Amazon's $199 (£127) Kindle Fire tablet—and a 16GB version is available for £199.

The Nexus 7 isn't seen as a direct rival to Apple's best-selling iPad, a larger device at nearly 10 inches that has a higher resolution display and starts at £399. But like the Kindle Fire before it, Google's tablet is potentially shaping up to be the among the first non-Apple tablets to succeed in a market where would-be iPad-killers like Hewlett-Packard's discontinued TouchPad, Motorola's Xoom, and Research In Motion's BlackBerry PlayBook have struggled mightily to simply get off the ground.


There's a caveat to the Nexus 7 success story, however. Just as Amazon is reportedly doing with its Kindle Fire (which still isn't available in the UK), Google appears to be selling the Nexus 7 at or near a loss to keep the price tag down, according to a recent IHS iSuppli teardown that estimated the cost of making a Nexus 7 tablet to be between $152 - $167 (£98 - £108).
The device is expected to land in the UK on 19 July.

Read more: US retailers selling out of Google's Nexus 7 | ITProPortal.com

[Cthulhu]

Price I suppose

Yes, it's the only drawing factor - the Kindle Fire has demonstrated that amply.

[harrybarracuda]

And I wouldn't be surprised if there was a little supply throttling going on, we all know how well that works.

[Cthulhu]

^ I'll just refer you back to the 9/11 thread, now, as it appears that one best fits you, at this point.

[harrybarracuda]

I have no idea what you're on today, but it must be some good shit.