Google's Free, Unlimited Google Photos Service Now Available on iOS and Web

[kevinof]

Er no. Have you ever heard of iAd? It's Apples advertising platform and yes they do sell data to advertisers and corporations.

http://advertising.apple.com/ie/

Take off the blinkers. All these companies - Google, Apple, MS and anyone else is there to make money off their customers, any way they can.

Of course, way safer.

Apples interests are more aligned with those of its customers, because they don't get payed by advertisers or corporations. When the guy who buys the computer is the same guy who uses the computer, it's going to be a good to use computer which will protect user data just fine.

Image​

 

[Oletros]

Er no. Have you ever heard of iAd? It's Apples advertising platform and yes they do sell data to advertisers and corporations.

http://advertising.apple.com/ie/

Take off the blinkers. All these companies - Google, Apple, MS and anyone else is there to make money off their customers, any way they can.

No, Apple doesn't sell any data

 

[Aragornii]

Which is what I said originally. And this is why I prefer Google's photos. It ... just ... works.

Actually you didn't say that originally, you just said you kept your photos in folders, you didn't say you were keeping them in operating system folders as opposed to using the app. the Apple Photos App does everything you say you want it to do, and it does it very well. You just need to use the program the way it was designed to work.

 

[Sill]

I thought I'd chime in here.

For everyone that dislikes/fears/loathes Google, Facebook et al, for data mining reasons-these people are the least of your worries.

My wife works for Experian, who by their very nature, know EVERYTHING about you.

They know what credit & debit cards you have/had, what addresses you've been at, phone contracts, mortgages, loans, I can't stress quite how much these companies know about you.

Literally, every time you spend money, get finance, register anything financially, they clock it and using various products that they sell, use it to sell their products.

I think you mean "every time you use a debit/credit card". I don't use those. I do have a Paypal account that I use very rarely, so I'd be interested in knowing if Experian or any other credit smearing operation has info on that.

As far as registering things, that easy enough to get around with first level data scraping agencies like the big 3 - simply put it in a trust and make yourself the beneficiary of the trust. The credit agencies don't look deeper than that.

 

[C DM]

No, Apple doesn't sell any data

Nor does Google.

 

[Oletros]

Nor does Google.

Yap

 

[Keirasplace]

Nor does Google.

Of course not, they sell you ;-). In advertising, you are the product; seems simple enough.

To better serve this purpose they collect mounds of info on you, what you do, when you it, where you do it. Then, you get "helpful" increasingly contextual commercial touts (in whatever form is possible/convenient ) and the toutee (Not a word but it should be ;-)) pays whatever company is the intermediary (FB, Twitter, Goolgle) for this privilege. That's how they make their money (i.e. : monetize) and provide you with that "free" service.

Many people either don't understand this, or don't care (a bit like not caring about your health until it is too late . If they do understand it and get involved in all this willingly, I've got nothing against it. You can't force people to refuse to give their info away, can you.

Though privacy laws need to be modernize so what happens to this info once they got it is better regulated.

----------

Er no. Have you ever heard of iAd? It's Apples advertising platform and yes they do sell data to advertisers and corporations.

http://advertising.apple.com/ie/

Take off the blinkers. All these companies - Google, Apple, MS and anyone else is there to make money off their customers, any way they can.

Google has to collect a lot more info, in a broader way, because THEY HAVE NO OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME; same thing with Facebook. They're not all the same. Apple does this in a much narrower way and advertisers get a less client info from this; doing a false equivalency doesn't make it so. That's why IAd has been a relative dud for Apple.

 

[kevinof]

Nope. Google doesn't collect a lot more info, it just collects better, more accurate info. I purchase ads on both Adwords and iAds and basically both operate in exactly the same way, only Google is more effective as more people use it's search engine.

"Apple does it in a much narrower way" - You seem to imply that gathering this information for advertisers (like me) is ok if you just do it a little, but not if you gather a lot. Strange argument.

Google has to collect a lot more info, in a broader way, because THEY HAVE NO OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME; same thing with Facebook. They're not all the same. Apple does this in a much narrower way and advertisers get a less client info from this; doing a false equivalency doesn't make it so. That's why IAd has been a relative dud for Apple.

 

[C DM]

Of course not, they sell you ;-). In advertising, you are the product; seems simple enough.

To better serve this purpose they collect mounds of info on you, what you do, when you it, where you do it. Then, you get "helpful" increasingly contextual commercial touts (in whatever form is possible/convenient ) and the toutee (Not a word but it should be ;-)) pays whatever company is the intermediary (FB, Twitter, Goolgle) for this privilege. That's how they make their money (i.e. : monetize) and provide you with that "free" service.

Many people either don't understand this, or don't care (a bit like not caring about your health until it is too late . If they do understand it and get involved in all this willingly, I've got nothing against it. You can't force people to refuse to give their info away, can you.

Though privacy laws need to be modernize so what happens to this info once they got it is better regulated.

----------



Google has to collect a lot more info, in a broader way, because THEY HAVE NO OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME; same thing with Facebook. They're not all the same. Apple does this in a much narrower way and advertisers get a less client info from this; doing a false equivalency doesn't make it so. That's why IAd has been a relative dud for Apple.

They all collect info. And they all have been doing it for ages. The world keeps on spinning.

 

[Keirasplace]

They all collect info. And they all have been doing it for ages. The world keeps on spinning.

Right... So, no different now then in 1995 or 2000 (they're getting exactly the same info...); you know that's not true and in the future, it will be even less so.

So in your earth has always gone around the sun world, no updates to privacy laws and data collection laws are needed?

Also we have again, the false equivalency Google = Apple; Apple doesn't collect and use data in the same way as FB or Google. Apple use user data mostly internally to support their own services. They obviously have much of it because of that. Because Apple limits how much of this info is used to serve ads, and the limits in where those ads are served, they're not that popular with advertisers; Iad has mostly been a dud.

Even in the case of Apple pay, they mostly get out of the way from the relationship of the end user and their bank.

Anyway,

As I said, better information about who/when/what/where/why data is collected, who/when/what/where/why it is used, is needed. And I don't mean reading a 100 page EULA written by professional obfuscators to find out.

Yes, this means REGULATION.

IF you want to go against that, use something else than the sun has always turned around the sun, as your argument's basis.

 

[Keirasplace]

Nope. Google doesn't collect a lot more info, it just collects better, more accurate info. I purchase ads on both Adwords and iAds and basically both operate in exactly the same way, only Google is more effective as more people use it's search engine.

"Apple does it in a much narrower way" - You seem to imply that gathering this information for advertisers (like me) is ok if you just do it a little, but not if you gather a lot. Strange argument.

Apple has a lot more info on users than it is using to serve ads, maybe even more than Google. They have a massive amount of info on the people using their phones to provide them countless services obviously. That's the very reason Iad are less popular they don't use all the info Apple has to serve the ads.

When your able to serve hyper-personalized ads, you the advertiser do get a lot of user data that way. Especially if its cross references with other user info you can track the user with (or that you have from other sources). Because obviously, Google is not the only one doing it.

Google is just one part of big privacy/data give away that's happening right now. The sum game of all this is a total breach in privacy.

 

[kevinof]

Rubbish. 90% of search data comes from search. Not emails or photos or anything else. It's what people search for that is gathered and used for advertising. Google has lots of this because it's got a great search engine, Apple has very little because it doesn't have a search engine.

Secondly there is no user tracking and to suggest there is shows a complete lack of understanding as to how this advertising market works. I've figured out that you've never bought ads from Google or Apple and that's why you don't seem to understand what data is and is not available from these sources.

Apple has a lot more info on users than it is using to serve ads, maybe even more than Google. They have a massive amount of info on the people using their phones to provide them countless services obviously. That's the very reason Iad are less popular they don't use all the info Apple has to serve the ads.

When your able to serve hyper-personalized ads, you the advertiser do get a lot of user data that way. Especially if its cross references with other user info you can track the user with (or that you have from other sources). Because obviously, Google is not the only one doing it.

Google is just one part of big privacy/data give away that's happening right now. The sum game of all this is a total breach in privacy.

 

[Azzin]

I think you mean "every time you use a debit/credit card". I don't use those. I do have a Paypal account that I use very rarely, so I'd be interested in knowing if Experian or any other credit smearing operation has info on that.

As far as registering things, that easy enough to get around with first level data scraping agencies like the big 3 - simply put it in a trust and make yourself the beneficiary of the trust. The credit agencies don't look deeper than that.

No, I mean what cards you have/had.

Who do you think gives your credit rating to the card issuers?

 

[Sill]

No, I mean what cards you have/had.

Who do you think gives your credit rating to the card issuers?

I know who does that, I wasn't questioning that. All I'm saying is thats why I avoid that stuff. I don't have any credit cards. I don't use debit cards either. So, no transactional analysis exists for me, unless Paypal happens to share that info. I rarely use it though.

 

[Azzin]

I know who does that, I wasn't questioning that. All I'm saying is thats why I avoid that stuff. I don't have any credit cards. I don't use debit cards either. So, no transactional analysis exists for me, unless Paypal happens to share that info. I rarely use it though.

If you think it's only credit & debit card info they hold on you, you are sorely mistaken and uninformed.

What about the Internet connection you're using to post here?

What about the phone contract you have?

Any loans?

Mortgage?

Rent?

Salary?

Bank account(s)?

Cable/Satellite TV?

I seriously think you literally have no idea about what data they have on you.

 

[Sill]

If you think it's only credit & debit card info they hold on you, you are sorely mistaken and uninformed.

What about the Internet connection you're using to post here?

What about the phone contract you have?

Any loans?

Mortgage?

Rent?

Salary?

Bank account(s)?

Cable/Satellite TV?

I seriously think you literally have no idea about what data they have on you.

I seriously think you literally have no idea how seriously I take this stuff, and how far I go to limit my exposure. Most of things on that list don't apply to me. Why is it so important to you to try and find some kind of "AHA moment" here?

 

[kdarling]

Also we have again, the false equivalency Google = Apple; Apple doesn't collect and use data in the same way as FB or Google. Apple use user data mostly internally to support their own services.

And Google uses data to support personalized features like Google Now, and coming contextual abilities... something which, btw, Apple is also reportedly looking into.

Heck, one of the Holy Grails of computing in movies is the ability for machines to be smart enough to know what we're talking about. To do this, requires knowledge about us and what we're looking at.

Remember, we're talking about machines doing this automatically. It's like the way that Siri interprets our requests.

Apple has a lot more info on users than it is using to serve ads, maybe even more than Google. They have a massive amount of info on the people using their phones to provide them countless services obviously. That's the very reason Iad are less popular they don't use all the info Apple has to serve the ads.

Apple uses a LOT of info they have on us to serve up targeted ads. See my post #95 above.

iAds are less popular because 1) prices... Apple was at first asking for a million dollar commitment in fees. Talk about using us as the product to make money! And 2) they don't reveal info on their demographics, which makes it harder to determine if the ad money is really worth it.

When your able to serve hyper-personalized ads, you the advertiser do get a lot of user data that way. Especially if its cross references with other user info you can track the user with (or that you have from other sources). Because obviously, Google is not the only one doing it.

Speaking of cross-referencing... from a recent Ad Age article:

Apple Opens Up iTunes Radio Inventory to Automated Buying Through iAd
Advertisers Can Target Apple Listeners With Phone, Email Identifiers

"Starting on Thursday, Apple is extending its mobile advertising network to iTunes Radio, its web streaming service that competes with Pandora, through programmatic ad buying. Previously, advertisers had to buy through Apple's lean iAd sales staff. The new (iAds) feature also comes with updated targeting capabilities, using customer phone numbers and email addresses that can be cross-referenced anonymously against marketers' data."

Google is just one part of big privacy/data give away that's happening right now. The sum game of all this is a total breach in privacy.

Neither Apple nor Google are the real concern. At all. Not only do they only serve indirectly, they both have plenty of reason to safeguard the personal they have gathered, not the least because secrecy is what makes it so valuable.

Seeing debates about Google or Apple is like watching normal people in The Matrix worrying about their lifestyles, while being oblivious to the fact that they're really just batteries in a big machine.

The real companies to be worried about, are the hundreds that do NOT have reason to keep our really personal information secret, but instead make money by DIRECTLY selling such info.

 

[subsonix]

And Google uses data to support personalized features like Google Now, and coming contextual abilities...

And better ad targeting.

Heck, one of the Holy Grails of computing in movies is the ability for machines to be smart enough to know what we're talking about. To do this, requires knowledge about us and what we're looking at.

Remember, we're talking about machines doing this automatically. It's like the way that Siri interprets our requests.

It's quite different if you explicitly search, or ask a question on a service you know exist on the Internet, and that service having access to all your data as a default.

 

[C DM]

I seriously think you literally have no idea how seriously I take this stuff, and how far I go to limit my exposure. Most of things on that list don't apply to me. Why is it so important to you to try and find some kind of "AHA moment" here?

In that case you are much more of an exception than even a minority really. For the vast majority the inconvenience of following that type of lifestyle isn't worth the hassle over someone knowing what brand of cheese the buy.

 

[subsonix]

In that case you are much more of an exception than even a minority really. For the vast majority the inconvenience of following that type of lifestyle isn't worth the hassle over someone knowing what brand of cheese the buy.

The vast majority are unaware of the tradeoffs, or potential for abuse.

 

[Sill]

The vast majority are unaware of the tradeoffs, or potential for abuse.

This.

Plus, many of them, once the reality of this is made evident to them, allow cognitive dissonance to set in and parrot the "I have nothing to hide" line.

To this I tell them, "Then of course you need to take down your curtains and blinds at home, and throw away your clothes."

----------

A
The real companies to be worried about, are the hundreds that do NOT have reason to keep our really personal information secret, but instead make money by DIRECTLY selling such info.

That another layer of the problem. Another one that I want to point out is the shadow profiles built by Facebook, Google, LinkedIn et al, of people who choose to opt out of those services yet are unavoidably caught up in them. Every time someone signs up for LinkedIn and casually allows that service to import their contact list, I end up getting an email from LinkedIn telling me that the mutual party has extended an invitation to me. Of course they didn't, but now my email address is known to LinkedIn as a cohort of their customer. The next person I know who gets sucked in to that, and the next, and so on, allows LinkedIn to build a shadow profile attributed to my email address.

Now extrapolate that to people who put your phone number, your home address, and other personal details next to your contact email address, and then allow Facebook or any of those companies to harvest it. Now a company you don't do business with has a lot of information on you that you didn't give them. I find this reprehensible, and a much more egregious threat to privacy then the thinly veiled things the Google does while they offer services people want. I'm not defending Google, btw, I still loathe them. I just think shadow profiles are a much more insidious tactic.

I rarely if ever say "there oughta be a law..." but in this case I think "the people" would be well served by government fulfilling one of its primary historical roles and protect the citizenry from this. A simply one page law stating that every company that compiles such data is required to delete it completely and utterly upon request from the target email address.

I would also like to see private companies such as Apple offer a way to block these blanket downloads of personal information. Perhaps there could be a way to offer a setting in Preferences that attaches a blocking code to my email or phone number, that keeps it from being harvested in this way.

 

[Azzin]

I seriously think you literally have no idea how seriously I take this stuff, and how far I go to limit my exposure. Most of things on that list don't apply to me. Why is it so important to you to try and find some kind of "AHA moment" here?

Well you have an Internet connection &/or a mobile phone and they know about that/those for starters. They also know how you paid/pay for them, because they are the people that hold the info on you that people like ISPs, banks etc approach to see how credit worthy you are.

I mean this genuinely here, but you have no idea how much info people like Experian hold on us.

Everything you do goes through them, to build a profile of you. This info is used by banks and financial organisations to see if they want to do business with you (Paypal included).

To use Paypal, you need to link it to a bank account or a credit card, so straight away they already know you've done that and hold that data in your profile.

I'm absolutely not looking for an AHA moment, I'm trying to make you aware, as I know more about it (knowing what my wife does) than most.

----------

Neither Apple nor Google are the real concern. At all. Not only do they only serve indirectly, they both have plenty of reason to safeguard the personal they have gathered, not the least because secrecy is what makes it so valuable.

Seeing debates about Google or Apple is like watching normal people in The Matrix worrying about their lifestyles, while being oblivious to the fact that they're really just batteries in a big machine.

The real companies to be worried about, are the hundreds that do NOT have reason to keep our really personal information secret, but instead make money by DIRECTLY selling such info.

^^ THIS.
Absolutely, 100% is the point I've been trying to make.

Apple & Google know limited amounts about what you do within their ecosphere, using their products, but companies like Experian know every move you make that involves a payment or an address.

 

[xmichaelp]

Very original icon and UI. Looks nothing like Photos.

 

[Oletros]

Very original icon and UI. Looks nothing like Photos.

And this show why it is good to read the threads before posting. That icon is prior to Apple Photos because is the icon on the Google+ Photos app and it evolved from the Picasa app icon

 

[AlliFlowers]

And boy has this thread gone off topic.