Google Maps Pics

[Rosie]

People who are that concerned with privacy should probably not be taking photographs using their cell phones.

Digital point & shoot cameras are small, lightweight, inexpensive, and are not connected to the internet. As far as we know ...

 

[2017ish]

People who are that concerned with privacy should probably not be taking photographs using their cell phones.

Digital point & shoot cameras are small, lightweight, inexpensive, and are not connected to the internet. As far as we know ...

Many/most of them now come Wi-Fi equipped .....

 

[Rosie]

Many/most of them now come Wi-Fi equipped .....

Heh, I was waiting for that, I'm so old skool. But still, many are not.

 

[gauss]

When I setup my new Android phone, I answered NO/decline to any of the optional services that it wanted me to turn on.

I would turn things on later individually as I needed them (ie gps etc.).

If you accept the defaults on setup you are likely opening yourself up to plenty of unexpected surprises.

-gauss

p.s. I don't get my phones in a store or anything like that but, rather, order them on the Internet unactivated and then manually activate them - YMMV

 

[Animorph]

I think it is more likely that OP was looking at a private depiction of photos and location history using Google Maps as a base. I forget how to access that, but I was able to bring up a Google map of everywhere we had been for the past 2 years or so. It's pretty cool, but it is not (normally) public. It's not something anyone using Google Maps would be able to see.

 

[Texas Proud]

? You are assuming the users don't know this. I suspect many do, and many who don't know don't care.

That hardly makes them 'patsies'.



I use Google products, their browser, google groups, gmail, maps, search, android phones. I'm quite happy with most of them. I don't feel swindled, and I don't think I'm a sucker - I'm one of the most skeptical people I know.

-ERD50

I would bet that the majority of people using Google and Google products do not know what Google is collecting on them.... Do you know all that they are collecting on you


Also, it is almost impossible to not have Google collect something on you... their ads are on so many sites and I suspect they have cookies that track people even if they are not using a Google product... I also suspect that any of the free blockers etc. do not block everything, so it is a false sense of security with these...

Google to me is the closest to the company/entity that are in so many sci-fi shows etc. that keep track of everybody on the planet... I wish for a law that says they cannot keep all that date forever.... say for a max of 6 months.... but unless the masses out there puts up a stink to their representatives nothing will happen....

 

[bUU]

And even then, Google has so much money that they can direct toward influencing whatever elections that could put representatives in power that would support such laws.

 

[sengsational]

Many/most (point and shoot cameras) come Wi-Fi equipped .....

Just a privacy note on the non-phone cameras...

I bought a Canon point and shoot with wifi so that it would be easy to move my pictures to the PC without hooking-up the USB cable or to move a picture or two to my phone in order to share while I'm away from the PC.

I have an outbound firewall on my PC which I must specifically allow programs running in my machine to access the Internet.

The Canon software on the PC refuses to work unless I allow it through the firewall. This steams me! I thought I paid (with money) for a feature to move my pictures to my PC wirelessly, but apparently I'm being charged per-use, in the form of my personal data. I don't actually know what data is being sent (not every picture, for sure, because I would notice it took a long time), but even meta data about the pictures is (should be) private. I'm tempted to break-out WireShark and see what they're stealing. I'm sure if I looked at the privacy agreement it says they can have my first born (let 'em try...she'd kick their *ss). Don't even get me started on the supposed "disclosures". Consumer Reports this month even reported on a fake company that people actually clicked to agree to give-up their first-born

This kind of turned into a rant. Sorry about that. I'm less concerned about business models that have no visible means of support (i.e. Google) because you know they're going to take every scrap they can get. But if I pay real money for something, it would be nice to have the chance to pay a little more to opt-out of their snooping.

 

[braumeister]

The Canon software on the PC refuses to work unless I allow it through the firewall.

You wouldn't want something that could connect anyway. That would mean the firewall wasn't effective, right?

 

[Midpack]

I use Google products, their browser, google groups, gmail, maps, search, android phones. I'm quite happy with most of them. I don't feel swindled, and I don't think I'm a sucker - I'm one of the most skeptical people I know.

That's fine. Some of us don't.

Most users are not aware of all that Google gathers on them, and that collecting data is by default more than ever, and more every year. You have to opt out or your (considerable) data is being used, and opting out can be hard to figure out, by design. And I doubt anyone is aware of all the data, or all the ways Google uses the info, so it's almost impossible to fully opt out and keep all your info private.

Again, for those who are OK with it, that's their choice.

$74.5 billion annual revenue is a lot for an enterprise that doesn't charge it's users for it's products and services. What their customers pay for must be very valuable...

On to the earnings.

• 2015 revenues of $74.5 billion, up 12.9 percent year-over-year
• Q4 revenues of $21.3 billion, up 18 percent year-over-year
• Q4 net income $4.9 billion, up from $4.6 billion in 2014
• Earnings Per Share (EPS) of $7.06, up from $6.79 in 2014
• Capital expenditures for the quarter were $2.1 billion
• Google's effective tax rate was 5%, down from 18% in 2014

http://www.androidcentral.com/google-releases-q4-and-full-2015-earnings

 

[ERD50]

emph mine...

I would bet that the majority of people using Google and Google products do not know what Google is collecting on them.... Do you know all that they are collecting on you ....

That's fine. Some of us don't.

Most users are not aware of all that Google gathers on them...

No, I don't think most or even many users know all that Google collects. Just that in general that Google collects info (that why they might see ads related to recent activity), like I said "I suspect many do, and many who don't know don't care.".

It's good we have choices, and I really can't see the harm to me in what Google does. I have strong doubts that Google grabbed the OPs picture without the OP (or someone with access to the camera) providing permission. I think we'd find tons of complaints on the internet, and I didn't see any. It just doesn't fit - look at some Street Map pics yourself and see if they appear to be grabbed w/o permission.

-ERD50

 

[cathy63]

$74.5 billion annual revenue is a lot for an enterprise that doesn't charge it's users for it's products and services.

Lots of people pay for Google Apps for Work (including many U.S. Government agencies and universities); Google Fi; Chromecast, Chromebook and Nexus devices; Google Search Appliances; etc. Many manufacturers also pay for bundling Android or Chrome OS on their phones and tablets the cost of which gets passed along to end users.

So yes, $74.5B is a lot of revenue, and while some of it comes from selling big data, it's misleading to claim that they don't charge users for products and services.

 

[Midpack]

Lots of people pay for Google Apps for Work (including many U.S. Government agencies and universities); Google Fi; Chromecast, Chromebook and Nexus devices; Google Search Appliances; etc. Many manufacturers also pay for bundling Android or Chrome OS on their phones and tablets the cost of which gets passed along to end users.

So yes, $74.5B is a lot of revenue, and while some of it comes from selling big data, it's misleading to claim that they don't charge users for products and services.

OK, only 90%+ comes of their 2015 revenue came from advertising. Better?

This statistic displays Google's revenue worldwide from 2002 to 2015. In 2015, Google's revenue amounted to 74.54 billion US dollars. Google's revenue is largely made up by advertising revenue, which amounted to 67.39 billion US dollars in 2015. As of May 2015, Google ranks first among worldwide internet companies, with a market capitalization of 373 billion U.S. dollars.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/266206/googles-annual-global-revenue/

 

[bUU]

Again, for those who are OK with it, that's their choice.

Everyone has a choice, beginning with the choice to enter the Google consumption environment in the first place. Don't buy an Android device, and don't establish an account some other way, and most of the problem goes away. As soon as you choose to engage in a company's consumption environment, you've made a choice, even if you choose to remain unaware of the ramifications of the choice you made.

$74.5 billion annual revenue is a lot for an enterprise that doesn't charge it's users for it's products and services. $4.9 billion

To be fair, revenue isn't a good measure of total value. You also posted Net Income ($4.9 billion per quarter). That's a fair measure of value.

OK, only 90%+ comes of their 2015 revenue came from advertising.

Which means less than 10% come from licensing and other revenue sources such as selling data.

 

[Texas Proud]

Everyone has a choice, beginning with the choice to enter the Google consumption environment in the first place. Don't buy an Android device, and don't establish an account some other way, and most of the problem goes away. As soon as you choose to engage in a company's consumption environment, you've made a choice, even if you choose to remain unaware of the ramifications of the choice you made.

To be fair, revenue isn't a good measure of total value. You also posted Net Income ($4.9 billion per quarter). That's a fair measure of value.

Which means less than 10% come from licensing and other revenue sources such as selling data.

On your other post about laws... yes, Google would be spending big money to prevent the law I suggested.... but I doubt anything will ever come up as most people just 'do not care' like ERD50....


As to your last sentence on this post... not quite true... they are selling your data to get those advertising dollars... maybe not to the companies, but they are selling a willing customer based on their data and formulas.... and it must be working since you do not get $60 billion from companies if you are not adding value for them....

 

[Midpack]

OK, only 90%+ comes of their 2015 revenue came from advertising. Better?

Which means less than 10% come from licensing and other revenue sources such as selling data.

Where did I say "selling data?" You know better anyway. User data is what provides the targeted advertising $ value that traditional ad channels don't. That's monetizing user data.

And I said revenue to illustrate size, not value. Both are key indicators.

 

[Koolau]

You sound a little paranoid. Was there someone in the picture that you did not want to be seen with?
If not then who cares?

One Tag Line I considered was "Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean they aren't out to get you." But, even in the situation under discussion, I think my current Tag Line covers it just fine.

My cheap phone doesn't do much, but it will "track" me unless I turn off that "feature". I can think of NO reason that tracking me would be to my benefit. Can't think of too many reasons that it could hurt me, but see also my tag line.

In case you wondered, the tracking IS enabled (and can't be turned off) for 911 calls. YMMV

 

[sengsational]

You wouldn't want something that could connect anyway. That would mean the firewall wasn't effective, right?

I probably wasn't very clear. The pictures wouldn't move 4 feet (from the camera, through the air, to the desktop computer) unless I allowed the software that managed that 4 foot transfer to connect to the internet. The firewall was telling me "hey, this software wants to phone-home" and if I clicked "F.O." (aka disallow connection), then the pictures just wouldn't transfer. If I said "OK, allow snooper now", then the pictures would show-up on my PC.

 

[Exrook]

Google to me is the closest to the company/entity that are in so many sci-fi shows etc. that keep track of everybody on the planet...

No, that's Facebook <g>.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Early Retirement Forum mobile app

 

[bUU]

As to your last sentence on this post... not quite true... they are selling your data to get those advertising dollars...

They're not "selling" your data for that. They're using your data for that. The selling of the data, to the extent it goes on, would be part of non-advertising revenue.

 

[gauss]

Just a privacy note on the non-phone cameras...

I bought a Canon point and shoot with wifi so that it would be easy to move my pictures to the PC without hooking-up the USB cable or to move a picture or two to my phone in order to share while I'm away from the PC.

I have an outbound firewall on my PC which I must specifically allow programs running in my machine to access the Internet.

The Canon software on the PC refuses to work unless I allow it through the firewall. This steams me! I thought I paid (with money) for a feature to move my pictures to my PC wirelessly, but apparently I'm being charged per-use, in the form of my personal data. I don't actually know what data is being sent (not every picture, for sure, because I would notice it took a long time), but even meta data about the pictures is (should be) private. I'm tempted to break-out WireShark and see what they're stealing. I'm sure if I looked at the privacy agreement it says they can have my first born (let 'em try...she'd kick their *ss). Don't even get me started on the supposed "disclosures". Consumer Reports this month even reported on a fake company that people actually clicked to agree to give-up their first-born

This kind of turned into a rant. Sorry about that. I'm less concerned about business models that have no visible means of support (i.e. Google) because you know they're going to take every scrap they can get. But if I pay real money for something, it would be nice to have the chance to pay a little more to opt-out of their snooping.

Was an Internet connection listed as a requirement for the camera on the product packaging?

Did you have to accept licensing TOS when you installed the Cannon software that allows this?

If I were in this position I would try installing the software on a machine with no ethernet connection or wifi hardware. It would be interesting to see how the software reacts to this environment (perhaps it would allow the pictures to be transferred or give you and error as to why not).

-gauss

 

[Sunset]

Was an Internet connection listed as a requirement for the camera on the product packaging?

Did you have to accept licensing TOS when you installed the Cannon software that allows this?

If I were in this position I would try installing the software on a machine with no ethernet connection or wifi hardware. It would be interesting to see how the software reacts to this environment (perhaps it would allow the pictures to be transferred or give you and error as to why not).

-gauss

I was wondering, was it just the first time the camera software is used. Perhaps to check if registered. Check for updates, etc.

Could try, without photos to allow it once, then block it and try again and see if it still wants to connect.

 

[Brat]

I have had the Samsung phone for a couple years, occasionally take pictures and have not known them to be made public by Google in the past. I don't mind Google (or other similar companies) pushing ads to me, after all they need to make money on service. I do however object to grabbing pictures I have taken and posting them without my express consent for that specific picture. Although this wasn't an issue in this case there are times when people meet for coffee and don't want someone to know about it. For example I plan to schedule a 'coffee meeting' with an executive to discuss subordinates. Neither she nor I want a pic of that activity to show up on Google Maps.

 

[braumeister]

I do however object to grabbing pictures I have taken and posting them without my express consent for that specific picture.

I may be dim today, but I still don't understand where the pictures were "posted" and where (in what application) you saw them.

 

[Brat]

Notice that I received a 'Thank you for sharing' email from Google (which I posed earlier) and a link to Google Maps. I deleted them as soon as I became aware.