[thedance]

It's not. The extent to which old-line businesses like telcos and banks will literally sell your data is way beyond anything Google has ever contemplated. I can call a credit card data clearinghouse and order all of the transactions of every age 30-35 male in Akron, Ohio in December 2019 and they'll put that in a spreadsheet and send it to me. It really is important to distinguish between "selling your data" and what Google does in the course of business, because if you are unable to make that distinction then you aren't aware of the terrifying scale and specificity of the data provided by other industries.

[JohnFen]

In my opinion, what Google does is better than just selling raw data. But not that much better -- Google still has the raw data, after all, and other entities get most of the benefits of access to that data.

That's why I consider it splitting hairs.

> if you are unable to make that distinction then you aren't aware of the terrifying scale and specificity of the data provided by other industries.

I am aware of the difference, and you're right, it's terrifying. But it's no less terrifying that Google can still do this.

[ta999999171]

I'm more worried when I CAN'T buy that data - because then I have no idea what they're holding onto (for private deals, either with corps, defense contractors, .gov, etc).

[mankyd]

You don't have to buy it. It's free: https://takeout.google.com/settings/takeout

[ta999999171]

Surely they wouldn't collect, or create data based on, things that aren't here!

/s

[dang]

Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News? You've been doing it a lot, and we're trying for a bit better than that. We've already had to ask you once before.

The idea here is: if you have a substantive point to make, make it thoughtfully; if you don't, please don't comment until you do.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html