We just don't have a whistleblower to testify that they sell the data yet, possibly because they have strict internal confidentiality policies.[1]
Disclaimer, about that Google Maps example, it's just my assumption, I don't know how it actually works.
[1]: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/employee-lawsuit-acc...
I'm aware of that. I used to be like your friends because I love technology. Though I didn't know it's an opt-in since I haven't seen those notifications. Maybe I missed it?
Even so, how do I make sure the data is not going to be misused? I practically not be able to do anything that I think I can to prevent data misuse. They collect my data even after I said no.[1]
Plus, those so-called passive metadata are more objective and valuable than the data you actively submit to them, don't you think? I can hardly fake these kinds of data, just like you don't ask what lab rats think, you run tests on them and then just observe how they are gonna react.
Giving away those data with good intentions doesn't necessarily mean it won't harm others in some other way. I have things to hide, especially with data companies thriving.
[1]: https://qz.com/1131515/google-collects-android-users-locatio...
Edit: In fact, believe it or not, I hate to point the Popular Time issue out. I was afraid of Google supporters' hostile attitudes against me or Google might consider this feature could heat up privacy concerns then kill it. (Very unlikely, because I'm nobody. :D) I find this feature is thoughtful and useful, I'm too selfish to watch it die. Besides, killing it doesn't do any good to the public, on the contrary, it will become less transparent how they are going to use user's data. I brought up this issue only because, with this whole FB scandal thing happening, I feel the public is playing favorites.
"Location History and Location Reporting data may be used by any Google app or service." [2]
It looks like you can turn it on or off, and delete your location history. I don't see a way to use Location History without having it also be anonymously used for traffic and other stuff. [3]
I've turned it off on my phone to see what happens. Occasionally I'll run across a permission dialog to turn it on.
[1] https://support.google.com/business/answer/6263531?hl=en [2] https://www.google.com/policies/privacy/example/may-collect-... [3] https://support.google.com/accounts/answer/3118687?hl=en
I wonder if most of users would read through ToS and support articles before they started using those features. It's just much easier to click on "I agree." I won't call it a trap, but it's pretty close. As a result, users are signing contracts they don't even bother reading. And eventually, users are the ones who get blamed by the company for not paying attention.
And again, we are not sure about how they are actually using our data. Before this FB scandal, some people might still believe FB wouldn't do things like this.
[1]: https://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/google-keeps-your-data-...
[2]: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2010/03/google-keeps-you...
But that's not the same as "know[ing] Google does the same thing" unless you define either "know" or "the same thing" very loosely.
Indeed, I don't know if Google does the same thing.
Google knows a lot.
It's just that Google maybe be a bit hesitant to sell data to 3rd parties, since they abuse them themselves :)
(and this is the price of a 'free' service).
[1]: https://gadgets.ndtv.com/apps/news/google-tracking-user-loca...
Which is the entire point. I know Google is taking data when I use Google products. The problem arises when Google freely gives my data to a random third party company I neither know nor trust, without my knowledge.
For another, I know what Google is. And where it is - they have an address. They're in the US. I could, if I wanted, sue them.
Compare that to a literally limitless number of unknown organisations all across the world? Yeah, I'd say Google is better.
[0] https://blog.google/products/gmail/g-suite-gains-traction-in...
Maybe I'm cynical, but whenever I see qualifiers around a verb I get suspicious. Something like "hey, we're not lying when we said we stopped scanning emails for ad purposes, but we are still scanning to improve other Google ecosystems tools like Calendar".
Off the top of my head, I don't think Google even has most people's friends lists (outside Orkut back in the day, and Google+, which isn't so popular). They do have contact lists in Gmail, which is a bit different.
There is address book spamming via mobile apps, but again, there are permissions. How good are they?
It seems like it's "the same thing" only if you ignore all technical detail. We should be able to do better than that!