• Okay back in the Don’t Be Evil days, the business model expressed that no human should ever see private data except its owner. Google’s business clients could ask Google questions about data analyses involving cross sections of thousands of users, but couldn’t ask about individuals. Also you could tell Google to send ads to car owners (though normal Google advertising channels) and they would, and report how many users saw your ads.

    Then two things became a problem.

    One was internal affairs. Not just Google techs stalking their exes but people stealing databases of names and selling them to information collection orgs. So if you were a debt collector, it was good to have a friend in Google.

    Also the PATRIOT act, FBI, DHS, NSA and eventually all of US law enforcement. Judges let them look at the raw Google data, which Google actually resisted with a high-powered legal team, but eventually the judges let law enforcement have at, which is how we have reverse warrants fulfilled by Google today.

    In the aughts, Google was supposed to figure out a technological solution, so that the police could tap at the computer or look at the (salted) data all they want and without end user keys which no-one could access, they’d be SOL.

    But they did too little too late, and nowadays, enough info on one person could narrow then down to a single human being, which John Oliver demonstrated a couple of years ago by building info kits on everyone in the US Senate, including acts of fraud and illicit affairs.

    It was a good idea, and still may be if it’s started locked down like Crystal Palace, but Google can’t do it anymore.

  • Political Custard@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I was listening to a Linux podcast and one of the people on it said that their partner didn’t mind adverts and didn’t mind their data being mined because it meant that the adverts were more appropriate. I was absolutely stunned, I didn’t think anyone, for one moment, would actually think like this. I had to have a sit down after hearing that. 😅

    If I were to ever see an advert on my computer or phone, I would immediately flip out and have to go searching to find out how it got there (though admittedly this never actually happens).

    • bananamuffinsurprise@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Spot on. There’s no amount of money in the world that would make them not spy on your and use your data for ads and God knows what else.

      The only sane alternative is FOSS.

    • lemmyreader@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Good point, except that this, paying for services and still not getting any privacy, is a reality. But maybe your remark was ironic :)

      • taladar@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Paying for services and still not getting any privacy is largely a result of the equally naive attitude that a paid product is superior to a free one.

        In reality neither free nor paid is an indicator of quality and a lot of the time enforced regulations are the only thing that can really prevent a company or organization from putting its own self-interest over that of the customer whenever possible (even though some companies and organizations might do so even without being forced to).

    • Rolando@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      You say that ironically, but in the early days of Google its motto was “Do No Evil” and it promoted non-intrusive advertising. There was this sense that Google was a company of engineers and that you could trust them.

      (disclaimer: I didn’t trust them.)

      • cm0002@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Google was a company of engineers that you could trust, however, like Boeing (which was another “Company of Engineers”) they were slowly replaced by business execs who probably haven’t written a line of code in their life (Save for maybe some VBA for some businessy excel spreadsheet)

        • BreakDecks@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          This is why I love FOSS products. You get the advantage of using well engineered code, without the risk of that code falling into the hands of exploitive capitalists.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            7 months ago

            Permissively-licensed stuff (e.g. MIT, BSD) still has that risk. What you really want is copyleft (e.g. GPL) specifically, not just FOSS.

            • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              7 months ago

              You can change the license at any point. You just can’t make people change the license of past copies

                • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  gpl does not prevent the owner from changing the licence later. (Unless it is also making use of someone else’s gpl components.)

                  For example, Qt has a free version which is under the GPL; and a paid version which is not. So if you were making software with Qt, if you were using the free version, you’d be compelled to also release your product under GPL. But you could then later switch to a paid subscription and rerelease under some other licience if you wanted to.

    • BreakDecks@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      When Gmail first came out 20 years ago (as of yesterday), we all thought that. It was a new world and nobody was thinking about the long term ramifications. Before that point, there wasn’t even such a thing as a Google account, Google was just a search engine that didn’t operate all that differently than Duck Duck Go does today.

      I don’t even think that Google had a plan at that point in the game. Monetization was the obvious goal, but nobody really thought about what that would look like.

      Since then, Google users’ privacy has experienced death by a thousand cuts. If the terms you have to agree with today were known then, Gmail never would have succeeded.

      With every new product and feature added to a Google account holder’s toolbox over the past two decades, creeping normalization came with them, and here we are today…

      • fluckx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Exactly. Same as is happening with privacy right now. Chip away bit by bit. Do it all at once and people will complain. But do it bit by bit and they won’t know until it’s too late.

        Similarly to the story of the frog in the boiling water. Drop it in hot water and it’ll jump out. Heat the water slowly and it’ll boil to death.

        But hey. At least we’ve got nothing to hide right? /S

        • Syn_Attck@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          Protonmail is today (or was a few years ago) what everyone thought Gmail was when it came out. I can still remember how excited I was to get an email accepting me into the Gmail beta. A crazy amount of space, no one knew how they did it.

        • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          As a side note, here’s what Wikipedia says about the frog experiment:

          “While some 19th-century experiments suggested that the underlying premise is true if the heating is sufficiently gradual,[2][3] according to modern biologists the premise is false: changing location is a natural thermoregulation strategy for frogs and other ectotherms, and is necessary for survival in the wild. A frog that is gradually heated will jump out. Furthermore, a frog placed into already boiling water will die immediately, not jump out.[4][5]”

          Your point still stands, but you might want to consider switching to another metaphor next time.

          Source: Boiling frog

            • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              Neither did I until one day I stumbled upon a video that explained the misguided experiments that were behind the saying. Just today I started reading about it on Wikipedia and found that juicy summary.

              There’s a pretty good reason why we have ethical restrictions and peer review with modern science.

  • ISOmorph@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    In other news, water is wet. Honestly though, people expecting “free” services from big corpos are naive. What do they expect the servers and admins/devs are payed with?

    • Greg Clarke@lemmy.ca
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Gmail was initially advertising funded while respecting privacy. It’s a false dichotomy to argue that a service can’t have a free privacy respecting offering. We’ve just become accustomed to accepting targeted advertising as the norm.

      • ISOmorph@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        It’s a false dichotomy to argue that a service can’t have a free privacy respecting offering.

        I don’t believe anyone is arguing that it’s technically impossible. But reality is pretty clear that it’s implausible. Targeted ads reel in too much money.

        I think the real fallacy is getting used to services being free at all. You need to pay a monthly fee for basically every utility, but as soon as it’s in the digital world people expect that to change. What makes a search engine or mail provider so much different than your ISP or cable provider? You want competent services that respect your privacy? Pay for alternatives like Kagi and Proton.

  • pleasejustdie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Gmail wasn’t even the first, Hotmail, Yahoo mail, there were tons of free email offerings, even sites that would host your whole website for free like geocities. Gmail came into the market when 3rd party email being free was already well established. They just followed an Apple style of development, taking something that already exists and made a better version of it. Also back then their motto was still “Don’t Be Evil” and they mostly still kept to it, so they used that goodwill and the better user experience to grow it at a massive rate. And for the most part, its still the best experience for email for many cases.

  • archchan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I don’t mind paying for email if it’s actually private. One advantage I found to using Proton Mail instead of my self hosted email server (other than the obvious convenience, config, maintenance, blocked port 25, IP reputation so you don’t end up in spam, etc) is that the more people start to migrate off of Google and onto Proton, the more emails between Proton users will be E2E encrypted by default, so it’s one of those “the more users, the better” kinda things.

    Same with Tuta. Even though emails between a Proton and Tuta user aren’t E2E, it’s still a net benefit for everyone if more people switch to these private solutions.

    • RBG@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Which today though does not mean that if you pay for something like this that you are not also the product. Double-dipping for companies, so to say.

      • dustyData@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Hence caveat emptor. Research your company. I can say that the online services I pay for don’t gather my data and don’t sell it either. And they hold no leverage over me, the second they do any of those things I would drop them like a sack of potatoes.

  • TerkErJerbs@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    Within two years of Gmail going viral people were screaming from the tops of any soap box, tree and mountain You are the product!! but as these things always go, very few people paid attention.

      • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        And not just a little bit of convenience. At that time, Hotmail had like 14 MB of space whereas Gmail had 1 GB. Before, you were constantly out of space, whereas Gmail users could keep on going without ever deleting anything.

        Would you rather walk if you could have a personal uber driver with a Mercedes? Well, the driver is super creepy, but least the seats are soft. He will take you everywhere for free, but will also know everything about those rides and the conversations you had during them.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    It was never not creepy and wrong.

    NEVER. Just because it’s been two decades of people not thinking about it doesn’t change that.

    • monobot@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I remember, at that time, I was more worried about how admins in my local ISP spend their time than some far away company.

      • Syn_Attck@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I still remember being a young kid (11-12) and running a program to scan my local ISP in my small town (back then small ISPs could easily get government grants and become a monopoly) for insecure SMB servers or something. I suddenly got a flood of results like

        • /private/passwords.txt

        • /administrator/USD###-users.txt

        All kinds of tasty things. Very excite. Then the results started pouring in by the thousands…

        • YOU-ARE-VIOLATING-CFAA

        • FBI-DOORBELL

        • FIRSTNAME-LASTNAME.EXE

        • PWN3D-LMAONOOB

        Things like that. I immediately shut my computer down and that was probably the first time my dad saw me not eat for a day. Didn’t ask why I wasn’t sleeping much the week after that 😄

        Also I Googled for the filenames and found nothing. So if you’re the 50-70 year old who wrote that script and happen to see this, I’d love to get a message with the ISP name. They are in a number of small-medium size towns around my hometown now.

  • exanime@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    And to be fair, they were upfront about it…

    The problem now is that 1) Google products turned from innovative to barely functional (with every improvement coming in a soon to be killed new app) and 2) they went from your data to show you ads to profiling people’s fart strength

    Now that I think of it, thesgiy e free products also differ from inflation … You get to pay with even more of your privacy for an increasingly shittier product

    • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      With the rate of turnover at tech companies, some of their more fundamental legacy offerings are just black boxes at this point.

  • Eugenia@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    The problem is that if you run your own email server at home, you get blocked as a spammer these days. Today, to send emails you MUST use one of the big providers, or your email won’t get delivered half of the times. One has no alternative but to use these free services.

    • w2tpmf@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Not if you set it up properly.

      You can have your email hosted by Gmail or Outlook and still get flagged as spam if you don’t complete the exact same set up requirements. (SPF, DKIM, etc)

  • delirious_owl@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    in 2017, Google finally caved. That year, the company announced that regular Gmail users’ emails would no longer be scanned for ad personalization (paid enterprise Gmail accounts already had this treatment).

    Wut

  • Ultragigagigantic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    I don’t think paying will solve anything. Some genius will one day just think “but what if we just charged more. But what if we made our service worse so they pay more to restore it. But what if we just merge with even shittier people so they can do all this shitty stuff.”

    It’s never enough, it will never be enough. It’s self hosted and open source or barbarism.

    • Manmoth@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Self-hosting was always the intent. Open source ended up being a bonus. People 30 years ago wouldn’t understand why something like facebook would even need to exist. The internet is designed so literally everyone can have their own website.