What has Google copied?
That's the point on which you're going to focus? Really? See 4 posts above this one for a response to that question, and feel free simply to continue to ignore the rest of my quite lengthy post.
What has Google copied?
What has Google copied?
but I detest Google and think they are one of the most evil companies on the face of this planet.
That's almost lying with statistics. The mean average is thrown way off by a few top apps. The actual median average is more like 1 download per day, with 50% of all paid apps getting even less action.
Yap, that was very clear with all of your tin foil bashing
Yep, that's the way to discuss, attack the other person - it always seems to work in the minds of those who employ the tactic. It's also much easier than actually discussing or arguing any of the points made. Thanks for playing!
Yep, that's the way to discuss, attack the other person - it always seems to work in the minds of those who employ the tactic. It's also much easier than actually discussing or arguing any of the points made. Thanks for playing!
Well, when it comes to someone who says stuff like "Google is the most evil company on the face on the planet and copies everything", I doubt an earnest exchange of ideas will actually lead to anything.
I mean comeon. What's so evil about Google? "olol they stole an OS and track what movies I like". That's...evil to you? Really? You set the bar incredibly low on what constitutes a dastardly deed there, guy.
Me? I don't consider a corporation evil until they at least poison a small midwestern towns water supply. Google hardly qualifies.
Not that you've asked a question as to why I think evil applies here, but my personal philosophy is that privacy is something that is mine and mine alone, not something from which corporations can profit. When they draw the line inside my privacy they have effectively said that my person or part of it is public, and I've got a real problem with turning part of me public, and what I find most concerning about this is that some people don't think that's anything at all to worry about. But you didn't ask.
Considering your use of the word "evil", I assumed you were one of those people.
Yes, I can't wait until we are all fed Google ads 24x7 through our eyewear. Or better yet, implanted lenses. I dream of living in a Minority Report ad-saturated world.
It helps when your competition (Google) gives its stuff away for free.
Means each of the 775k apps has been downloaded (on average) 56k times!!
Obviously not true, as Temple Run has got at least 1140x more than this but still impressive!
----------
I don't think the smartphone will be replaced anytime soon, I just think that other things will be added to the everyday user.
Glasses is cool... but how do you take a call, or send a text? They could be used in addition to a phone (to display a route, display a text, display song playing or notifications) but I think that that's what it will be for the foreseeable future, just things being used in addition to others. To complement them!
What has to be argued when your main claim is that is an evil company?
By the way, you're totally wrong, Google does not sell your data and they don't track anything opn Android devices if you don't opt in.
You've been corrected on this falsehood before. I'd really stop doing it, because it's so easy to refute.
Even from Google's own lips:
"We will share personal information with companies, organizations or individuals outside of Google if we have a good-faith belief that access, use, preservation or disclosure of the information is reasonably necessary to:
meet any applicable law, regulation, legal process or enforceable governmental request.
enforce applicable Terms of Service, including investigation of potential violations.
detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or technical issues.
protect against harm to the rights, property or safety of Google, our users or the public as required or permitted by law.
We may share aggregated, non-personally identifiable information publicly and with our partners like publishers, advertisers or connected sites. For example, we may share information publicly to show trends about the general use of our services."
From here - http://www.google.com/intl/en/policies/privacy/
And no, they don't sell it. They give it away! Is that less evil?
You have not refuted anything, Gogole (or Apple( does not sell any information
If you're saying that Google gives away the information you're joking or you don't understand a simple TOS.
You've been corrected on this falsehood before. I'd really stop doing it, because it's so easy to refute.
Even from Google's own lips:
"We will share personal information with companies, organizations or individuals outside of Google if we have a good-faith belief that access, use, preservation or disclosure of the information is reasonably necessary to:
...
Is giving it away morally SUPERIOR than selling it in your mind??????
And besides, I didn't refute anything. Google did.
Please enlighten me. It shouldn't take too long. Unless you think a TOS doesn't mean what it says, in which case I question your judgement.
No, he is right. You are wrong.
It's excellent that you looked up (at least one) policy, but you have to know what it means and if it's something unusual. Neither policy is about selling or giving away personal info, except if you cause a disruption or if they need to cooperate with authorities.
Google's information disclosure to 3rd parties is not for the purpose of selling data to other ad services or to help 3rd parties target you directly for ad purposes. Their disclosure policy (like Apple's and everyone elses) is for the purpose of aiding law enforcement or processing said data outside of Google's area of expertise.
Google does not sell your data or its analytics data to 3rd parties, it sells ad placement based on the data it holds.
You've now been enlightened.
Google's own chosen words say otherwise.
And yet this supposed enlightenment is simply your words. Google's words do not agree with you.
Then you have to re read them, because they clearly state in which cases the ifnormation is shared and ads is not one of those cases
Sure they do, same as Apple's words, Microsoft's words, Facebook's words, Amazon's words. You just wish to interpret them differently. Anyone who understands a thing or 2 about business models and how advertising works know that selling the information is not a sustainable business model.
If I could simply buy Google's data, why would I use them for ad placement ? I'd buy the data once and leave Google hanging for future payments while I target ads directly to you. That's not in Google's or any other advertisers interest at all. They want you coming back again, and again and again for your ad campaigns.
Your blanket assertion was that Google does not sell personal data. I showed you two excerpts from Google's own TOS that show that they reserve the right to share your data (whether in aggregate or individual) at their discretion.
Your blanket assertion is, therefore, wrong.
No, my assertion is totally right, Google doesn not sell data and Google does not share data for ad purposes.
This is the internet equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and humming "I can't hear you. Nya nya nya!"