[HN Gopher] Google settles account settings lawsuit less than on...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Google settles account settings lawsuit less than one week after
       being filed [pdf]
        
       Author : 1vuio0pswjnm7
       Score  : 157 points
       Date   : 2023-09-20 10:38 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (oag.ca.gov)
 (TXT) w3m dump (oag.ca.gov)
        
       | degenerate wrote:
       | If you want to disable Google location history (AND/OR) limit
       | data collection to 3 months, you can do that here:
       | 
       | https://myactivity.google.com/activitycontrols?settings=loca...
        
       | lucb1e wrote:
       | Warning: not just pdf, but forced download. Have fun cleaning up
       | your downloads folder...
       | 
       | Now that I've got this garbage on my pc anyway, might as well
       | copy the some headings so you can at least know what it's about:
       | 
       | > I. GOOGLE DECEIVED USERS INTO ENABLING THE L OCATION H ISTORY
       | SETTING
       | 
       | > II. G OOGLE MISLED USERS INTO BELIEVING THEY HAD CONTROL OVER G
       | OOGLE ' S COLLECTION AND USE OF THEIR LOCATION DATA
       | 
       | > III. GOOGLE DECEIVED USERS ABOUT THEIR ABILITY TO OPT OUT OF
       | GEOTARGETED ADS
       | 
       | (Caps lock theirs; spacing theirs; using capital i as roman
       | numeral lookalike (instead of unicode) theirs; I imagine this is
       | also fun for screen readers.)
        
         | Etheryte wrote:
         | > Warning: not just pdf, but forced download. Have fun cleaning
         | up your downloads folder...
         | 
         | Not if you configure your browser correctly? Why would you
         | allow random sites to save files without even prompting you for
         | it?
        
           | TonyTrapp wrote:
           | Because it's the regrettable default these days and 90% of
           | people probably don't know how to change it. Convenience
           | beats security, again.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | lucb1e wrote:
           | Because I don't want the file dialog asking me to manually
           | choose save it or cancel the download...
           | 
           | Chrome iirc popularised automatic downloading for all file
           | types but I'm using Firefox.
           | 
           | What browser do you use that has a "force inline viewing of
           | downloads rather than downloading them" option? I'd like that
           | 
           | Edit: wait, this server doesn't actually send the content-
           | disposition:attachment header. Why doesn't Firefox download
           | this to /tmp/mozilla_${USER}0 and open the default viewer as
           | it does for other files that aren't downloads?!
        
         | kyralis wrote:
         | You have a bad browser/PDF viewer. The "spacing" issues are a
         | result of using small caps as a title style, which is hardly
         | unusual - especially in legal documents.
         | 
         | This is both visually accurate and not a forced download for me
         | using Safari.
        
           | lucb1e wrote:
           | I blame the document format. No "bad" browser/viewer would
           | put random spaces in in the middle of a word when using HTML,
           | OpenDocument, LaTeX, or I imagine anything but the OCR-like
           | processing that you have to do when trying to interpret a PDF
           | file. If they wanted it to be accessible, they could have
           | chosen a different format, or to make it compatible with the
           | most popular freely available reader. Not sure what
           | specifically they want me to use?
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | bradrn wrote:
         | > using capital i as roman numeral lookalike (instead of
         | unicode) theirs
         | 
         | At least that much is correct. Quoth the Unicode Standard:
         | 
         | > For most purposes, it is preferable to compose the Roman
         | numerals from sequences of the appropriate Latin letters.
         | 
         | [from https://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode6.0.0/ch15.pdf]
         | 
         | Note that Unicode has a lot of characters like this --
         | compatibility forms which are present to allow lossless
         | conversion to/from other character sets, but shouldn't be used
         | in any new text.
        
           | gundmc wrote:
           | Honestly I had no idea there were Unicode characters for
           | Roman numerals separate from the letters they are composed
           | of.
        
             | whatamidoingyo wrote:
             | Same. You learn something new every day, eh?
        
             | lucb1e wrote:
             | > separate from the letters they are composed of
             | 
             | I didn't actually realise they're letters. To me it's
             | distinct symbols just like 0 is a distinct ascii symbol
             | from O.
             | 
             | Now that you mention it, I realise that I knew that five is
             | V and M is a thousand or something, but the symbol for
             | one/1, is that actually defined as a capital i and not just
             | a line of some form? Since surely the digit for one came
             | before the latin script
        
               | janc_ wrote:
               | Latin (and ancient Greek) didn't have dedicated symbols
               | for numbers, but at sone point the Romans started using a
               | shorthand system based on existing alphabetic symbols,
               | which we now call "Roman numerals".
               | 
               | It's quite possible the "I"s started out as just a line
               | to mark one item before the shorthand was developed, but
               | certainly over time it became identified to capital "I".
        
       | aaronmdjones wrote:
       | Now if only they could get to fixing my account settings.
       | 
       | https://support.google.com/accounts/thread/222903183/u
       | 
       | > This question is locked and replying has been disabled.
       | 
       | Oh, nevermind then.
        
         | joeframbach wrote:
         | It likely sensed your hostility in the phrase "what the hell"
         | and auto-locked.
        
       | dandare wrote:
       | Reminds me of how google moved maps.google.com to google.com/maps
       | so that they can ask for location permission in your browser for
       | the whole google domain.
        
         | nextaccountic wrote:
         | Is there any browser that can allow location just for urls
         | under google.com/maps?
         | 
         | Firefox should do this
        
         | vore wrote:
         | But your browser tells you when your location is being used?
         | It's not like Google can secretly use your location without
         | your browser alerting you to it?
        
           | noarchy wrote:
           | >But your browser tells you when your location is being used?
           | 
           | Is that a question? Yes, it does, at least mine does.
           | 
           | >It's not like Google can secretly use your location without
           | your browser alerting you to it?
           | 
           | Same thing, ts that actually a question? You shouldn't have
           | location permission being used without your consent.
        
         | trissylegs wrote:
         | They also did that for chat. When hangouts was replaced with
         | "chat" chat moved to mail.google.com. Which means allowing
         | notifications for email allows it for chat as well.
        
           | mananaysiempre wrote:
           | Huh? There has been chat in the Gmail web interface since
           | before Google defederated from Jabber, although I believe it
           | didn't have notifications aside from changing the window
           | title, for lack of browser APIs at the time.
        
         | whyenot wrote:
         | So I guess they have gone a full 180deg on that "Don't Be Evil"
         | thing. For Google employees with a moral compass, that must be
         | a little confusing/upsetting.
        
         | rootsudo wrote:
         | Wow, that is sneaky. I didn't even notice, the dns record is a
         | redirect. Wow.
        
           | n2d4 wrote:
           | You can't redirect sites like that with DNS. All of those
           | domains resolve to the IP of a load balancer (probably the
           | same one minus some anycast routing), which then decides
           | whether to show the requested service based on the HTTP Host
           | header, not the DNS record. You can quickly verify this by
           | looking up mail.google.com via DNS and putting that IP into
           | your browser bar, which will redirect to google.com instead
           | of opening Gmail.
           | 
           | A CNAME record would just mean they use the same load
           | balancer.                   $ curl -H "Host: mail.google.com"
           | 142.251.16.17         ...gmail-specific html              $
           | curl -H "Host: maps.google.com" 142.251.16.17
           | ...gmaps-specific html              $ curl -H "Host:
           | www.google.com" 142.251.16.17         ...google search-
           | specific html
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | stasmo wrote:
         | I use http://google.com.au/maps for maps now because of that
         | sneaky behavior.
        
           | dunham wrote:
           | Interesting that the colors are different for parks and
           | water.
        
           | KMag wrote:
           | Clever workaround!
        
           | zelphirkalt wrote:
           | I use openstreetmap for years now. Because of a never ending
           | shit stream of abuse and rule bending and just plain illegal
           | activities from Google.
        
         | yborg wrote:
         | Also didn't notice this. It's actually kind of impressive how
         | they hard they went into breaking the "Don't Be Evil"
         | typecasting.
        
           | zaxomi wrote:
           | When they sent out the directive to remove "Don't Be Evil"
           | someone was too lazy and just removed "Don't", so ever since
           | then it's been "Be Evil".
           | 
           | That explains a lot, doesn't it?
        
             | Jensson wrote:
             | "Be profitable" is enough to explain everything, no need to
             | go further than that. Every large company does similar
             | things, because that is where "be profitable" takes you
             | until regulations catches up.
        
             | m463 wrote:
             | Remember when microsoft first created windows, you would
             | launch it by typing:                 C:\> WIN
             | 
             | (I can't recall, did they have paths then? was it C>
             | instead?)
        
           | phero_cnstrcts wrote:
           | And YouTube's slogan was "we'll never show ads".
        
             | amelius wrote:
             | Really?
        
         | gnu8 wrote:
         | Google should move maps to a subdomain so they can request
         | location permission for only that app!
        
           | turtles3 wrote:
           | Unironically this? It might violate gdpr to get consent for
           | the purposes of maps but then use it in more contexts. I
           | guess they might include all purposes when the user is asked,
           | and at that point it boils down to whether the user is being
           | asked consent for overly broad purposes or whether it is
           | legitimate to bundle all the Google apps together.
           | 
           | It's internet explorer all over again.
        
         | crazygringo wrote:
         | Is that actually known as the reason for certain, or is that
         | reason being assumed?
         | 
         | Because I've seen that presented as a hypothesis but never any
         | actual evidence. I recall another hypothesis had something to
         | do with better Maps integration on Search pages.
         | 
         | I'm sure there are lots of potential internal technical reasons
         | for such a switch. Location permissions is just one
         | possibility.
        
           | mike_d wrote:
           | Things that are searches (like maps) moved onto the search
           | domain (www), other stuff like docs and ads stayed on
           | property specific subdomains. Anything not a core google
           | service (experiments and projects built by outside vendors)
           | moved to withgoogle.com.
        
           | gerdesj wrote:
           | I dimly recall it being noticed at the time but I suspect it
           | was really a convenient side effect ie a contributory factor
           | and not the primary reason.
           | 
           | I think "branding" is far more likely. google.com is the
           | brand and a single entry point landing on search which then
           | points you at what you "need". Note how you search and can
           | click on the buttons underneath the bar to move into images,
           | maps etc. Maps is just another specialized form of search.
        
           | mcast wrote:
           | I'm almost certain the main reason for switching was to bring
           | more cohesiveness between Google apps and/or legacy
           | infrastructure reasons.
        
         | quitit wrote:
         | Similarly Google (and Facebook) moved to a combined privacy
         | policy - it effectively grants permission for all services to
         | collect all types of data, including data you wouldn't expect
         | each service to be collecting. All while using examples that
         | mislead the user into thinking such data collection is limited.
         | 
         | For example, if one reads the Privacy clause regarding
         | collection of financial/transactional information they might
         | assume that this is due to Google Pay, what they'd be missing
         | is that even services such as Gmail, Maps and Photos are also
         | collecting financial data. As mentioned, where examples exist
         | in the policy, they always paint a more obvious, narrower
         | collection of data.
         | 
         | According to Google's own admissions on the App Store, their
         | services such as Maps, Photos and Gmail each individually
         | collect location, financial history, purchases, contacts, user
         | content such as photos, videos, audio (and any others), search
         | history, amongst other personal data. The majority of this data
         | has no bearing on the apps functionality whatsoever and
         | comparable services don't collect -any- of this information.
        
           | choppaface wrote:
           | This was a primary goal of Google Plus: empower cookie /
           | fingerprint joining. Even if Plus were to fail they'd still
           | be able to harvest gmail and youtube for everything else.
        
           | jkubicek wrote:
           | > even services such as Gmail, Maps and Photos are also
           | collecting financial data.
           | 
           | Do you know how this would work? How would Google Maps
           | collect financial data on me?
        
             | tyzoid wrote:
             | Ever searched for hotels by filtering on price via maps?
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | jonas21 wrote:
             | Maps and Photos let you enter your credit card info to buy
             | stuff in the app (you can order food in Maps and prints in
             | Photos).
             | 
             | This is not unusual. Every app that offers food delivery or
             | prints also lists "financial data" on their App Store
             | privacy label.
             | 
             | As far as I can tell, the Gmail app does not collect
             | financial data (it's not listed in the App Store privacy
             | label).
        
               | ChuckMcM wrote:
               | The gmail app collects purchase receipts that come to
               | your email account. (or at least it used too).
        
             | m463 wrote:
             | Even just your zip code is a huge financial predictor.
        
           | EMIRELADERO wrote:
           | Is that privacy policy also present in the EU? This screams
           | GDPR violation.
        
         | willio58 wrote:
         | Wow, so plainly evil it's crazy.
        
       | dragonwriter wrote:
       | Why does the HN headline link to the lawsuit complaint and not
       | settlement information, since the headline is about the
       | settlement?
       | 
       | https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bont...
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | aa_is_op wrote:
       | Because it was a slap on the wrist. Pretty sure big tech
       | companies have their own people in power positions in the states
       | they operate from. Especially California. You don't build a
       | trillion-dollar empire and leave it to chance.
        
         | diogenes4 wrote:
         | > Pretty sure big tech companies have their own people in power
         | positions in the states they operate from.
         | 
         | Not really necessary when service providers have such massive
         | ability to dictate the contract you sign to use the service.
        
       | benburleson wrote:
       | I wish Google could have decided to stick with their "Don't be
       | evil." ethos.
       | 
       | Instead, I find myself continually extracting their products from
       | my life.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | marymkearney wrote:
       | This complaint is one of the clearest, most concise pieces of
       | legal drafting I've ever seen. It's only 7 pages! The small
       | inline graphics in the pleading are innovative and effective.
       | Great lawyering, kudos to the AG's office. This is likely a big
       | reason behind the quick settlement.
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | Hmm, did they use an LLM to make it this concise?
        
       | 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
       | https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-bont...
        
       | Garvi wrote:
       | Google has the power to shut down my business if I express the
       | wrong opinions on social media sites like HN.
        
         | TrendyCPU wrote:
         | The power Google has over small, local businesses is
         | ridiculous.
         | 
         | I work for a small local business. We've been struggling to get
         | rid of the "lead generation" spam from the Google Maps
         | listings. This is costing us on the order of thousands to tens-
         | of-thousands a month in work. (That's significant for our
         | business, on the ~10-15% of monthly revenue.)
         | 
         | I dug into these listings. I discovered the company behind
         | them, a marketing firm in Hawaii. I uncovered a network of 80+
         | listings across the US they operate. I even discovered their
         | recruiting websites where they pay people to create the
         | listings for them and go on to pay people for 5-star reviews.
         | 
         | I provided all of this information to Google via their
         | "business redressal form." Nothing. It's been months. I keep
         | reporting the listings. Nothing.
         | 
         | We're losing work. Other local contractors are losing work. And
         | Google twiddles its thumbs.
         | 
         | What good is it for Google to have a policy if they're not
         | going to uphold it when their inaction is harming others?
        
           | froggertoaster wrote:
           | Do you have links handy to other articles about this issue?
           | I've never heard of it and I'm curious.
        
             | TrendyCPU wrote:
             | The most famous case is locksmiths.[0] Google recently went
             | after another company using the "rank and rent" scheme.[1]
             | 
             | The company which is causing us issues is also using the
             | "rank and rent" scheme. They're running listings for
             | everything from pool resurfacing to concrete driveways to
             | tree services.
             | 
             | The company recruits people via Craigslist with an offer to
             | pay them $50-100 to setup a Google Business Profile and
             | receive the post card with a code for verification. They
             | also offer $20 for a 5-star review.[2]
             | 
             | I am thinking about going to the FTC and the media at this
             | point. I've also discovered that there's a small community
             | but poorly connected that goes after this type of spam.
             | 
             | 0. https://searchengineland.com/googles-locksmith-spam-
             | problem-...
             | 
             | 1. https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-lawsuit-rank-
             | and-...
             | 
             | 2. https://archive.ph/SWNEU
        
           | pixl97 wrote:
           | >I provided all of this information to Google via their
           | "business redressal form." Nothing. It's been months. I keep
           | reporting the listings. Nothing.
           | 
           | You don't go to Google if you want a Google problem fixed.
           | You go to social media and yell about it.
        
           | savingsPossible wrote:
           | I am a bit out of the loop. I did not understand
           | 
           | > We've been struggling to get rid of the "lead generation"
           | spam from the Google Maps listings
        
           | Spivak wrote:
           | I'm surprised at that level of loss you haven't just end-run
           | around Google and the lead-gen firm and gotten together with
           | your peers to blackball them. Those lead-gen companies can't
           | actually deliver real service, they still need someone local
           | to your community to pick up the lead and do the work.
           | 
           | I doubt it would take very long before they realized they
           | can't fill any contracts and give up. And plus wouldn't it
           | sound super cool to say you started a guild?
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | subroutine wrote:
         | But saying " _Google has the power to shut down my business if
         | I express the wrong opinions on social media sites like HN_ "
         | is something they're totally fine with?
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | "Oops, I thought it was my throwaway account."
        
         | mrguyorama wrote:
         | No, Google has the power to shut down your business _for
         | literally no reason!_
         | 
         | How we square this circle without removing the 1st amendment
         | right of free association isn't clear though. Maybe a cutoff of
         | "if you have more than 50 employees" or something.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | oblio wrote:
       | Ah, don't get me started about these dark patterns.
       | 
       | Google Maps, the native Android phone app, behaves like a crappy
       | website in navigation mode.
       | 
       | Google really wants to push the assistant, there isn't a way to
       | completely disable it in Android, disable all shortcuts,
       | basically make it go away.
       | 
       | So, in Google Maps, there's a Assistant bar at the bottom. That
       | only pops up when you're in navigation mode, and "conveniently",
       | slides up when you switch apps.
       | 
       | So if you're in another app and decide to exit navigation using
       | the X at the bottom left of Google Maps... the Assistant button
       | slides up and you accidentally press it.
        
         | buro9 wrote:
         | > there isn't a way to completely disable it in Android
         | 
         | This is not true, as there is... just disable the Google app.
         | 
         | You will need to replace the launcher with the Nova launcher in
         | the process, and will likely replace the search box with
         | Firefox search. But the Google app and Assistant will be
         | totally disabled and unavailable anywhere in the Android
         | experience. If you find a link to it, it will ask to enable
         | which you can decline.
         | 
         | I found this out by Google having placed me in some experiment
         | earlier this year where my Pixel 6 Pro went from 24h battery
         | life down to about 3h battery life. The battery was being
         | drained by the Google app exclusively, and so without any fix
         | or published workaround I set about disabling the Google app.
         | 
         | Overall this has been a huge improvement, my battery under near
         | identical usage is now closer to 36h... and the Assistant not
         | being present I have since viewed as a bonus (at the time I
         | thought it a negative). I believe the issue is probably now
         | fixed, but why would I go back when this is a better experience
         | with more battery, disabling the Google app was like upgrading
         | my phone.
        
           | blackoil wrote:
           | This is what Competition law is primarily about if I
           | want/have to use App X, App Y should not be forced upon me.
           | It was the problem in Windows/IE or Android/PlayStore ...
           | 
           | Google, Apple, MSFT are abusing "monopoly" in one area to
           | extend their reach in other areas.
        
           | IG_Semmelweiss wrote:
           | Can you build on that ? In particular, did you lose voice to
           | text writing as a result ? This is my biggest fear.
        
           | tempodox wrote:
           | "just"
        
             | valvar wrote:
             | Yes, it's very simple. Just open the app info (by long
             | holding the app icon and pressing the little "i"), then
             | select "disable" and confirm the dialogue. Or did you mean
             | something else?
        
               | oblio wrote:
               | There are 10 comments above mentioning various gotchas.
        
           | snide wrote:
           | Highly recommend the above. Moving to a launcher, defaulting
           | to Firefox (yay adblocker), and replacing the default search
           | with Kagi creates a near distraction free experience on
           | Android.
           | 
           | Unfortunately the Reddit / X changes this year should remind
           | us these sort of 3rd-party workarounds will only exist for so
           | long.
           | 
           | I know it's a dream, but I'm looking forward to simple Linux
           | phones. Moving to GNOME / arch on my Desktop lets me do what
           | I want to do and somehow, magically plays any game from Steam
           | without a hitch.
        
           | panki27 wrote:
           | While you're at it, why not install a custom ROM without
           | Google Services (and use MicroG for notifications and stuff).
        
             | barrkel wrote:
             | Generally this comes with the downside of being unable to
             | use banking apps.
        
           | kwanbix wrote:
           | Wasn't Nova Launcher acquired by a very shady company?
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32150092
        
             | FireInsight wrote:
             | Lawnchair is a great alternative: https://lawnchair.app/
             | 
             | I personally also love Kvaesitso, which is a search-based
             | launcher kind of like KISS launcher but with a cleaner
             | aesthetic: https://kvaesitso.mm20.de/
             | 
             | KISS Launcher has the better smartly ordered search,
             | though: https://kisslauncher.com/
        
               | gausswho wrote:
               | Lawnchair on F-Droid says it's no longer maintained?
        
               | windexh8er wrote:
               | What's really odd is they support no app stores. Not
               | GPlay or FDroid. So they expect users to continually
               | download APK and update? Seems like a great pattern to
               | keep their user base small - but maybe that's what
               | they're after.
        
               | rjzzleep wrote:
               | Most of these apps are in the Izzyondroid fdroid repo.
               | It's there by default in Droid-ify which is much better
               | than the official fdroid client anyway.
               | 
               | https://apt.izzysoft.de/fdroid/index/apk/app.lawnchair
        
               | kwanbix wrote:
               | What do you mean? Lawnchair is on the playstore. The only
               | thing is that it tells me it was built for an older
               | version of android, so I cannot install it.
        
               | lucb1e wrote:
               | Wait, Google lets you view it but just not download?
               | 
               | Android is perfectly capable of running that afaik; I'm
               | sure that my current version (11 I think?) is at least
               | backwards compatible back till Android 4, if not Android
               | 2
               | 
               | You could try Aurora Store, which uses a pool of dummy
               | Google accounts to pull apks from their servers. I doubt
               | it has belittling restrictions like what you describe,
               | and there's also a manual download option which can
               | sometimes let you get old versions if the server still
               | has them and you know the build number
        
               | rjzzleep wrote:
               | I used it and it was better than the Pixel launcher in my
               | opinion, but yes it seems like the last update was a year
               | ago.
        
               | Geezus_42 wrote:
               | I have been using Niagara for years. They have a built-in
               | search, but it's better if you also have Sesame.
        
               | Scene_Cast2 wrote:
               | Lynx launcher (my personal favorite) is also pretty good.
               | I switched to it after Evie launcher development stopped.
        
               | FireInsight wrote:
               | Almost every launcher has a built-in search feature. The
               | difference with search-based launchers for me is having
               | only widgets or even just plain nothing on the home
               | screen, launching apps from a small favorites bar or by
               | typing the first few letters of the apps name. It's
               | honestly faster than looking at many screens full of
               | folders of apps ever was.
               | 
               | https://sesame.ninja/ Sesame is cool, but not FOSS, and
               | last time I tried it some years back it had some
               | limitations for free users or didn't integrate into my
               | launcher well or something like that.
        
               | kwanbix wrote:
               | Isn't Sesame also bought by the same shady company that
               | bought Nova?
        
               | 4ggr0 wrote:
               | I'm very happy with OLauncher :) Minimalistic, quasi
               | text-based. Swipe up to show all apps and show keyboard
               | by default for a fast search, swipe left to open firefox
               | and swipe right for signal.
        
             | ahstilde wrote:
             | Branch is "very shady"?
        
             | njroute22 wrote:
             | Believe it or not, the Blackberry Launcher is solid and a
             | great alternative.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | mananaysiempre wrote:
           | > just disable the Google app.
           | 
           | Since several months ago, disabling the Google app also
           | disables camera functionality in Google Translate (?!..),
           | which to an expat is absolutely crippling.
        
             | downWidOutaFite wrote:
             | I had no idea all the expats from before 10 years ago were
             | crippled.
        
               | Rebelgecko wrote:
               | FWIW WordLens came out in 2010
        
               | [deleted]
        
         | tomComb wrote:
         | I'm not sure the correct way to approach The problem is, but
         | it's more widespread than just the big guys.
         | 
         | Chess.com is annoying me by changing my settings every 1 to 2
         | months to put them back to what they want.
         | 
         | This sort of thing is really common
        
         | tmerc wrote:
         | If you open setting in maps, you can disable driving mode,
         | which gets rid of that bar at the bottom. I then couldn't
         | figure out where to turn it back on. There's still an assistant
         | button but in a less intrusive location.
        
         | IG_Semmelweiss wrote:
         | Google assistant randomly fires off for me in my heavily de-
         | googled 2017 LG phone.
         | 
         | It is so frustrating. I hate that app with passion, yet I can't
         | disable it in android.
        
           | iggldiggl wrote:
           | I've got no idea whether this still happens in more current
           | Android versions or not, but on my phone I also discovered
           | the weird phenomenon whereby force-stopping the Google app
           | resets the selected assistant app back to Google instead of
           | whatever else I might have chosen.
        
         | alberth wrote:
         | > _"don 't get me started about these dark patterns"_
         | 
         | Here's another dark pattern for you in a totally different
         | context.
         | 
         | So Google use to have all of it various services on a separate
         | subdomain (eg maps.google.com).
         | 
         | But they moved to having everything under www.google.com.
         | 
         | You know why, it's because when you allow Google Maps to
         | geolocate you (which is totally appropriate for a Maps use
         | case) ... now ALL of Google services get geolocation data about
         | you from Search, Gmail, etc since they are all hosted in the
         | same www root.
        
           | user3939382 wrote:
           | Nice benefit is the elimination of tons of CORS requests.
        
             | pc86 wrote:
             | No end user has ever been inconvenienced by a CORS request,
             | so not sure that's a "benefit" for anyone other than
             | Google.
        
               | tsunamifury wrote:
               | Sorry I find the ability to not allow geo for google.com
               | for more than a day annoying as hell and a stupid feature
               | where apple is over reaching.
        
               | pc86 wrote:
               | What does that have to do with cross-subdomain CORS
               | requests?
        
           | alexvitkov wrote:
           | that's actually pretty cool in a very fucked up sort of way
        
         | crawsome wrote:
         | >Google really wants to push the assistant, there isn't a way
         | to completely disable it in Android
         | 
         | This is why I switched to LineageOS. Google, the biggest ad
         | company on the planet, is not to be trusted with something so
         | personal as a cell phone.
        
         | lucb1e wrote:
         | Little protip: if you sign your phone up with Google, it
         | doesn't force the assistant on you at all. Don't remember
         | having to disable it, you just have to not consent to their
         | terms.
         | 
         | Side effect: you can kiss access to the monopoly on apk files
         | goodbye unless you want to use third party hacky methods that
         | use a pool of random people's accounts to talk to the google
         | apk servers...
         | 
         | Using one monopoly to gain market share in another :) The
         | pattern is _everywhere_ with google. I keep wondering why the
         | competitors like TomTom haven 't gotten them banned from the
         | country with antitrust suits. Instead, TomTom just cut their
         | losses, threw in the towel for their own map (which has
         | surprisingly good worldwide road coverage for a Dutch company
         | from the noughties), and is starting to use OpenStreetMap as a
         | base layer. I'm not complaining about OSM use, but they were in
         | the prime position to force Google to open the data they
         | funneled from their original monopoly
        
         | liquidpele wrote:
         | Used to love google maps, but I've switched to Apple Maps it's
         | been so bad lately. It's taken me in literal circles, decides I
         | need to do 2 uturns while sitting at a traffic light, gives
         | instructions that are unclear or too late, etc. I noticed Waze
         | got worse lately too, I guess they're integrating them more :(
        
         | ryukoposting wrote:
         | Huh, you can't disable Assistant anymore? When did that change?
         | My phone is old.
        
           | RuggedPineapple wrote:
           | I can on a Pixel 7 pro. Did for a while before deciding it
           | was useful and wanted it but didn't like it trying to pop up,
           | so I went from disabled, to off by default but callable by
           | dragging from one of the bottom corners and requiring me to
           | press the mic button for it to listen. Kind of the best of
           | both worlds, it stays asleep until I need to change whats on
           | the chromecast.
        
       | oblio wrote:
       | What's the amount?
        
         | jkaplowitz wrote:
         | According to the California OAG press release: $93 million,
         | plus injunctions which seem to be more about disclosures to
         | users and internal oversight than actually allowing users to
         | opt out of (or requiring opt-in consent before) tracking
         | location. Not the most user-respecting outcome to say the
         | least, though it could certainly have been worse.
         | 
         | Disclosure: I worked for Google more than 8 years ago, but not
         | in any role related to this news story. I have no relevant
         | inside information and I am certainly not speaking for Google
         | here.
        
           | gdprrrr wrote:
           | So, That's around 0,3% of the 280bn quotes in the PDF. The
           | equivalent for Person with an income of 100k would be $3.
           | Yes, you reading that right.
        
             | ocimbote wrote:
             | 100000 * 0.3/100 = 100000 * 3/1000 = 100 * 3 = 300
             | 
             | 0.3% of 100k is 300.
             | 
             | Unless you meant "an income of 100k cents" but that would
             | be quite unusual.
        
               | zoky wrote:
               | No, they made an order of magnitude mistake. Fairly
               | common, it happens.
               | 
               | However, in this case it has taken it from "ordering
               | bacon and avocado on my burger" to "two tickets to my
               | local sports team including beers and chili cheese
               | fries". So not enough to be exactly punitive, more like a
               | mild inconvenience. The point still stands.
        
               | robertlagrant wrote:
               | Payment could be in the form of a Chromebook!
        
               | tetris11 wrote:
               | (100*1e3) * (93*1e6) / (280*1e9)          > 33.21
               | 
               | That's about 4 lunches.
        
               | subroutine wrote:
               | $33 dollars is the correct amount lol. It's coffee time
               | fellas.
        
           | gerash wrote:
           | who receives this $93 million ?
        
             | zie wrote:
             | The state of CA. CA's elected representatives will spend it
             | on whatever suits their fancy.
        
           | gorjusborg wrote:
           | Slightly more if we include the future 'campaign
           | contributions' that may have been implied.
        
           | vgttvyggm wrote:
           | [flagged]
        
           | 2Gkashmiri wrote:
           | hey. been meaning to ask someone at google.
           | 
           | i read long time ago how many apps are NOT using play
           | services for location, like OSMAND~ and some other apps but
           | what does the user loose if the navigation app doesnt use
           | play location services?
           | 
           | i was talking to a cab aggregator last time and i said "oh i
           | dont use your app because using it makes me enable google
           | location which enables location sharing and i am not keen in
           | doing that and i hear, beyond its privacy implications, you
           | can avoid it".....
           | 
           | he was like "uh..... so why shouldn't we use it?
        
             | jkaplowitz wrote:
             | As I said, I last worked at Google more than 8 years ago,
             | and I didn't have a role relevant to this news story.
             | 
             | Therefore I don't have any more insight to add in response
             | to your question than the general public, with one
             | exception:
             | 
             | I'll note that Google is generally at least more
             | technically able to honor the privacy promises it makes
             | than a lot of small startups, such as robustly deleting
             | data it claims to delete and giving you a lot of controls
             | to request deletion of various categories of data.
             | 
             | Many startups do just enough lip service toward these
             | compliance obligations to avoid negative financial,
             | regulatory, or reputation consequences but don't actually
             | uphold their end of whatever they're supposed to do
             | (especially in places like the EU where strong privacy laws
             | exist). Google goes well beyond that.
             | 
             | Clearly Google is far from perfect in privacy matters. I
             | wish Google made stronger privacy promises and didn't do
             | dark patterns or deceptive explanations like what this
             | settlement is punishing. But it's easy to forget how much
             | of the industry is worse than Google in these regards and
             | how little of it is better, just because Google is so big
             | and so prominent.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | 1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote:
       | In the event title gets changed, here is the original title:
       | 
       | Google Settles Account Settings Lawsuit Less Than One Week After
       | Being Filed [pdf] (ca.gov)
        
       | pierat wrote:
       | Another nasty pattern is with Google Translate.
       | 
       | You want text translations from 1 lang to next? Cool. It works.
       | 
       | You want an image text-> translated text? You MUST install and
       | have Google app installed. No real reason other than to re-enable
       | more spyware and garbage.
        
         | Kokouane wrote:
         | I always wondered whether there was a purpose for that. It
         | probably is just spyware.
         | 
         | Also the Google app is required for many other apps, like to
         | use Google Podcasts.
        
           | gniv wrote:
           | This is probably just them shipping the internal org. The
           | Google app must have some functionality that all the others
           | need.
        
         | jwells89 wrote:
         | Has this perhaps changed recently? Tried navigating to
         | translate.google.com on both Android and iOS and the image
         | translation features appear without issue.
        
           | gniv wrote:
           | I think GP was talking about the Translate _app_ needing the
           | Google _app_. Translation can be done without a network
           | connection.
        
             | hot_gril wrote:
             | This truly sounds like a technical limitation and not some
             | scheme to get more spyware onto the phone. Like in theory
             | the Translate app could do it without the Google app, but
             | that would've taken extra changes that they didn't consider
             | worthwhile.
        
         | crazygringo wrote:
         | > _No real reason other than to re-enable more spyware and
         | garbage._
         | 
         | Why would the Google app have _more_ spyware than the Translate
         | app?
         | 
         | That doesn't make any sense. If Google wants to spy on you
         | they'll put it in _all_ their apps...
         | 
         | Regardless of what you think of Google, the reason a feature
         | lives in one app and not another is not to increase spying...
         | 
         | The same functionality spread across two apps doesn't spy more
         | than one.
        
           | diogenes4 wrote:
           | > Why would the Google app have more spyware than the
           | Translate app?
           | 
           | It's a different app on top of the first app? I don't
           | understand the question.
           | 
           | > Regardless of what you think of Google, the reason a
           | feature lives in one app and not another is not to increase
           | spying...
           | 
           | That's why google has apps at all.... They're a spyware
           | company. That--and depriving users of honest transactions--is
           | much of their business model. Especially post transition to
           | Alphabet.
        
             | crazygringo wrote:
             | >> Why would the Google app have more spyware than the
             | Translate app?
             | 
             | > It's a different app on top of the first app? I don't
             | understand the question.
             | 
             | It's irrelevant if it's a different app or a different tab
             | in the same app as far as "spyware" would be concerned.
             | 
             | 2 apps by the same company doesn't increase data collection
             | compared to 1 app, if they're installed on the same phone.
             | It's not like Google gets twice as much location data...
             | the number of apps is entirely irrelevant.
        
               | diogenes4 wrote:
               | > It's irrelevant if it's a different app or a different
               | tab in the same app as far as "spyware" would be
               | concerned.
               | 
               | It's only irrelevant in the technical sense of "could we
               | collect this data if we had another app". It's not
               | irrelevant in terms of hedging against uninstalling.
        
           | dharmab wrote:
           | Google is a large corporation. Anyone who's worked at a
           | company that large can assert that the left hand and right
           | hand don't always talk, and in fact may be antagonistic.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-09-20 23:01 UTC)