[superbcarrot]

1. The title mentions only Google.

2. The article then talks about both Facebook and Google and links to some of Facebook's most egregious incidents like data sharing, Cambridge Analytica, WhatsApp.

3. The article then proceeds to tell you how to leave Google.

It just comes across in a bad way. Don't mix up the two companies - they aren't equivalent. And if you want to give advice on leaving Google, do that instead of this switcharoo that uses Facebook's scandals as a reason to leave Google.

[mastazi]

I agree, Google is bad enough on its own, no need to compare. It gets less negative press compared to Facebook, probably because they managed their public relations better, but if you really look, you will find plenty of reasons not to share all your data with them.

(Having said that, Facebook is of course just as bad as Google if not worse)

[superbcarrot]

> probably because they managed their public relations better

It's not only PR. Google haven't violated their users' privacy to the extent Facebook have, it's not even close.

[m_a_g]

Can you elaborate on how you made that conclusion?

[judge2020]

At least on a standpoint of what ‘partners’ or ‘developers’ can access, Google hasn’t had a Cambridge Analytica scenario play out (that we know of) so all of the data they have gained via web tracking for the purpose of ads is securely stored in a Google silo.

[berlam]

I agree, but would like to remind you of the Google+ data scandal in 2018, which did not increase my confidence in Google's security measures.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Google_data_breach

[LadyNike]

> Within November 2018, another data breach was found within a Google+ API software update. The bug was fixed within a week and there was no evidence that any third party developer compromised the system.

Please explain how this is anywhere near the level of FB & CA?

[addicted]

A great heuristic to show this is the article.

It's titled how to leave Google. It concludes with how to leave Google. But the vast majority of evidence it uses to justify leaving Google are Facebook privacy examples.

I suspect the author, who is clearly no Google fan, put some effort into looking at Google's privacy violations, but even then had to resort to pointing to FB's instead to beef up their article.

It's certainly possible that Google has hidden it better, but there is no evidence to suggest that FB does not have the same, or better talent, for that matter, to do the same.

[nathias]

Facebook isn't reading my email ...

[numlock86]

Right, they don't. They just read your chats, your contact lists, get other peoples contact information without any consent or relation to Facebook at all and some other minor things like using your photos for ads of any kind or selling data to e.g. profiling companies.

[nathias]

I can avoid facebook completely, I can't avoid google.

[numlock86]

Care to elaborate?

My previous post had an argument about how you can't avoid Facebook, as someone who uses Facebook probably already shared your contact information from their phone with them without you knowing anything about it.

[tremon]

I'll grant you that Google haven't been caught violating their users' privacy to the same extent, but the rest of your statement is hollow conjecture.

[wepple]

The article seems to use examples of undeniably bad things Facebook has done to extrapolate to google, without providing any concrete examples.

Stating that FB/G use your data to provide targeted ads isn’t an inherently bad thing: it’s part of the arithmetic of getting incredibly useful tools for free. I’d argue the key piece is what types of ads, and the methods behind delivery are crucial. That isn’t mentioned at all.