
Google to buy 6.6% stake in ADT in home security push - 80mph
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-google-adt-stake-idUSKBN24Z1A6
======
cpwright
Lots of the comments don't trust Google, but I'm not sure I would trust ADT. I
was looking to buy a house, which had an ADT system installed. I just called
them up, asked about the address, how much monitoring would cost, etc. and
they told me what kind of panel, sensors, etc. were installed at the house. No
verification at all. Clearly this would help with their sales, but from the
perspective of someone who owns the system; I would not want them to give out
details of my security system to anyone.

~~~
selykg
These types of home security systems are more a deterrent than they are
anything else. In fact, the ONLY reason I think I'd personally invest in would
be automated alerts for fire or emergency situations.

If someone wants into your house, they will get into your house. There's giant
glass windows in most homes these days and door locks are hardly much more
than a speed bump.

All you should look at ADT for is simply making you not the easiest house to
get into. But if someone wants into your house, a security system is unlikely
to be something that stops them.

Edit: to be more clear, I think the deterrent part is the equivalent of
putting an ADT sign in a window or nearby. THAT is the deterrent, not the
system itself.

~~~
snarfy
It's peace of mind.

I know 100% if someone wants into a house, they will get into the house. I
know that when people put 'this property protected by Smith & Wesson' signs on
their house, it only informs burglars there are guns to be stolen. I always
joked I don't want ADT, just the sign.

But now that I actually have an alarm system, it's great. If I leave for the
weekend, I know nobody has broken in. It won't stop them, but I at least know.

~~~
thedogeye
All ADT does is call the police. During the most recent civil unrest incidents
the police were not responding to 911 calls like this, making it pretty
useless when you actually need it.

~~~
Pfhreak
Police don't really respond to alarm calls anyways. The high degree of false
alarms generally puts responding to these at the bottom of the list of things
to respond to.

~~~
closeparen
In a city. In a wealthy suburban community the police are usually happy to
have something more exciting than off-leash pets and minor traffic violations.

------
kyrra
(Googler, opinions are my own)

I wonder what this says for the Google/Nest Security product future. The
existing Nest Secure[0] is a well designed product, but also rather limiting
(only one base unit, which is frustrating for houses with multiple entrances,
or large houses). The Nest Secure was released ~3 years ago, and there have
been some minor feature improvements, but no hardware additions or changes.

[0]
[https://store.google.com/us/product/nest_secure_alarm_system](https://store.google.com/us/product/nest_secure_alarm_system)

~~~
pnathan
Nest Secure owner here. I like the system a lot, ya'll need to invest a bigger
team in maintenance. _not_ a new product or a rewrite.

Some buggieness.

The single base unit worked well enough for me when I had a 3-entrance house.

~~~
kyrra
Sorry, I should have clarified my point a bit on multiple entrances. I have my
keypad near one door, but the other doors are on the opposite side of the
house. So my kids may open another door and start the alarm countdown going,
won't get there in-time to turn it off all the time. I'd like to be able to
have 2 keypads.

As well, there is the siren problem. The siren is not loud enough to be heard
in all corners of my house well. I'd like to be able to have a siren in my
bedroom so if it does go off in the middle of the night, it would be very
clear to me.

~~~
pnathan
yeah, that's fair. the system really needs investing in by big G.

------
abstractbarista
Seems like a bad idea to me. But I'm someone who would never use or recommend
ADT in the first place. People don't seem to realize... You can run your own
serious alarm system (DSC is a great brand) and then self-monitor with devices
like the Envisalink. This integrates with Home Assistant too. All the awesome
functionality for $0/mo.

~~~
marcinzm
>All the awesome functionality for $0/mo.

Except the time it took you to research, install, validate it's running, and
do general upkeep. Also doesn't help you if you're on vacation with limited
internet service.

~~~
pc86
And most importantly, the fact that _you_ have to respond even with your own
monitoring. That's most of what you pay ADT for. If they get a ping, they call
you. If they can't get in touch with you, they dispatch the relevant people.

Yes you can set this up yourself (and spend a lot more on the hardware, which
they generally give to you pretty cheaply or even "free" because you're
signing a contract) but when you go hiking in the mountains and someone uses
your Facebook posts as a cue that you're out of town, you're SOL.

Don't get me wrong I love looking at all the home security stuff you can do,
and it does indeed sound like a neat project. But you're really paying these
companies for monitoring and automatic (human) response, not the security
systems themselves.

~~~
marcinzm
> And most importantly, the fact that you have to respond even with your own
> monitoring.

So true, my dad has a monitoring system he built and he constantly looks at
his phone as a deer or bear or something triggers it. I'd imagine the lost
productivity for people who depend on the flow for work would be immense.

------
kbos87
ADT’s pricing and go-to-market approach is draconian in 2020. Long term
contracts, expensive equipment, and high pressure sales tactics couldn’t be
any different than my experience with a Nest home security system. Will be
interesting to see if and how ADT evolves because of the ownership stake.

~~~
ec109685
I agree. They want a two year commitment and $55 a month, plus $1000 for the
installation. That is absurd for what their monitoring service entails.

------
MattGaiser
I am fascinated at the anti-Google attitude here.

Why exactly do you think some other home security company would not also use
your data? Except they will secure it poorly with a default password.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
Fundamentally, the reason I'd rather anyone _but_ Google have my private data
is Google's ability to use it effectively. Many companies can vacuum up data,
few are prepared to do anything intelligent with it. Not only does Google have
far more data, it's able to _use it_. That makes them way scarier than ADT.

~~~
cromwellian
Really? because there are many examples of smaller less sophisticated
companies getting owned by hackers. ADT might not do anything with your data,
but hackers have lots of uses for it.

So in your world, Google being able to sell target ads is more dangerous to
you, then hackers getting access to your security cams or baby monitors, or
stealing your personal dox and reselling them on darknet markets for bitcoin?

There are millions of people who have been harmed by identity theft from
databases going around of people's personal info that have been hacked from
less secure companies.

There was have been cheap IP cams that have had backdoors that were exploited,
unbelievably, to build a search engine for readily available for pedophiles
([https://ipvm.com/reports/the-search-engine-for-hacking-ip-
ca...](https://ipvm.com/reports/the-search-engine-for-hacking-ip-cameras))

You have millions of people scammed by Indian call center scammers by taking
advantage of terrible Windows security.

You have tons of scammers buying people's personal financial information from
existing databases that are traded.

These are all real, palpable harm, where people have gone bankrupt, spent
years cleaning up identity theft, had their children's room monitored by
pedophiles and pranksters, etc

~~~
ocdtrekkie
> You have millions of people scammed by Indian call center scammers by taking
> advantage of terrible Windows security.

You know where all of those scams come from? _Targeted Google Ads_... So yeah,
Google being able to sell and target ads is extremely dangerous, especially
when they enable ads to be targeted at vulnerable populations like senior
citizens.

Funny story, the attack chain here starts with Google Ads, usually to push a
Google Chrome extension in the Chrome Web Store, and _then_ people end up
letting a scammer onto their PC. And yet "terrible Windows security" is what
you are worried about?

I have been asking Google and Googlers alike to address these concerns for
years, and Google's movement on it is far too slow, because the systems they
use are far too profitable to change.

~~~
cromwellian
> You know where all of those scams come from? Targeted Google Ads

No, quite a number of them are done via SMS and VoiceMail spam, e.g.
Robocalls. What, you've never gotten a text or voicemail threatening you with
a federal bench warrant unless you call up and pay money?

~~~
ocdtrekkie
I've actually spent a very large portion of time over the past decade helping
seniors deal with scams, and figuring out where they came from. I trace back
every scam call I deal with to how they got to it. Google is the top offender.
And malicious, scammy ads that push malware have actually been _reinstated by
Google_ only hours after I've gotten a Googler to take it down.

Here are screenshots of malware showing on the top search I see seniors search
for, tested just now:
[https://imgur.com/a/rIAMjpM](https://imgur.com/a/rIAMjpM)

Google sells scammers the ability to squat the trademark of a competitor,
MapQuest (very likely illegal in it's own right, no ads are served on a search
for "google maps"), which is commonly searched by senior citizens. The ad is
barely perceptible from a real, organic result, and claims to be MapQuest. And
the result is a page that only functions when you install a malicious web
browser on your PC.

What's incredible here, is that you'll blame Microsoft for your company's ad
platform, make MapQuest look bad (because you served a fake MapQuest site to
people looking for it), and promote Google Maps and Chromebooks as an
alternative... all while raking in the cash from the scam ads. Google is a
business that operates on the revenue from scams. Every supposedly good thing
Google does, and every paycheck it issues, is coming from ripped off
individuals. The entire product cycle and marketing direction reinforces this.

This search term has seen nothing but malware and scams since at least 2013.
If Google had any interest in protecting consumers (or not violating antitrust
and, honestly, trademark laws), Google would not serve ads on this search
term, ever. Feel free to investigate this internally, I am confident nothing
will change.

~~~
cromwellian
> Google is a business that operates on the revenue from scams

I highly doubt these scams make up a significant fraction of Google's revenue.
It is much more likely these are simply the failures of false negatives in
automation falling through the cracks.

Besides the ad target scams, the Web itself is full of these scam malware
sites. If you search for things to download, organic search results often send
you links which eventually terminate in malware, especially true of searches
for porn, software/music/movies.

I will raise this MapsQuest scam internally, so thanks for the report (note, I
have nothing to do with ads, I work in research thats not ads related)

~~~
perl4ever
Probably nobody cares, and there's nobody in particular I would like to tell
this to, but I recently experienced a Google service that made me feel more
positive about them, even though I have eaten up the negativity recently to a
certain extent.

That service is the call screening. Where you can (I'm not sure if it's
standard on all Android phones, but I have a Pixel 3) have your virtual
assistant talk to an unknown caller and transcribe whatever they say (but they
always hang up).

It just made me momentarily feel so much better about Google, the sense that
this one little thing actually improves my life by leveraging the dystopian
tech infrastructure. I don't hate the bots _that_ much, I hate them not
working for _me_.

I just thought I'd share this because you must be bombarded with anti-Google
stuff these days.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
> the sense that this one little thing actually improves my life by leveraging
> the dystopian tech infrastructure. I don't hate the bots that much, I hate
> them not working for me.

The problem is, you have become part of the problem. Because the bot working
for you is now annoying _other_ people. Surely, you realize the companies that
employ annoying bots all hate dealing with them themselves, but it improves
_their_ lives to subject you to them.

~~~
perl4ever
>you have become part of the problem

I don't think so, because to me the annoyance experienced by people who make
unsolicited calls to me isn't important. It's not part of "the problem" from
my perspective.

They are presumably being compensated.

------
heimatau
Wow. Crazy. Google is starting to leverage their position. They now selling
12.8x this buy in corporate bonds. I think this is the beginning of many plays
by Google/Alphabet.

[1] -
[https://twitter.com/zerohedge/status/1290338641919856640](https://twitter.com/zerohedge/status/1290338641919856640)

~~~
gabagool
What does this mean?

I clicked on your link. I'm also not sure what "SELL $5.75 BILLION OF ESG
BONDS IN CORPORATE RECORD" means?

~~~
kissickas
Alphabet is selling some record amount of corporate bonds, which OP states
they're using to finance this purchase (and that they raised 12.8 times this
amount so there's plenty left to make more acquisitions).

More detail on Alphabet's bond sale:
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/on-small-
business/al...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/on-small-
business/alphabet-borrowing-575-billion-in-largest-corporate-esg-
bond/2020/08/03/f483a1de-d595-11ea-a788-2ce86ce81129_story.html)

------
jedberg
There was an article where they interviewed a bunch of burglars and asked them
the best way to secure your house. First they listed off all the things that
don't work, like alarms and cameras. Then they said:

\- Number one, have a TV on. If they see a TV on they assume people are home
and watching.

\- Get a big dog. If they have to choose between a house with a dog and one
without, they'll chose the one without.

\- Get motion activated security lights. Always-on lights just provide extra
light for breaking in, the motion sensors draw attention (although most
robberies happen during the day so it's sort of a moot point).

~~~
smaili
Playing devil's advocate but assuming they're being truthful what's in it for
them to expose the very strategies they use?

~~~
Pfhreak
I would assume so. Pride and bragging about how easy something is would lead a
lot of folks to just straight up tell you how they've outsmarted security
gear.

Humans will always be humans, and humans LOVE to tell you how they've beat the
system.

------
marc__1
I haven't seen anyone posting, but on the ADT investors relations website
there is a presentation [1] and [2] webcast outlying the M&A rationale.

Briefly speaking, it is to be expected product integration (starting with
Google Cloud for ADT video) and in the future some 'automation' and newer
products.

By the way, can there be any 'synergies' between ADT and Fitbit?

[1]
[https://s22.q4cdn.com/631128414/files/doc_presentations/2020...](https://s22.q4cdn.com/631128414/files/doc_presentations/2020/08/ADT-
Google-Partnership-08.03.2020-Final.pdf)

[2] [https://investor.adt.com/events-and-presentations/events-
cal...](https://investor.adt.com/events-and-presentations/events-
calendar/event-details/2020/ADT-Partnership-Announcement-Conference-
Call/default.aspx)

------
culturestate
I get it, it makes business sense - that’s a huge install base to push smart
home products to.

At the same time, I would have a hard time naming a company that I’d trust
_less_ to integrate into my home security than Google.

Privacy, (lack of) customer service, service continuity...I know these aren’t
issues that would worry most consumers but they would all be on my mind.

~~~
noad
I'm trying to think of any company I would trust for a camera in my house and
am drawing a blank. Google is pure evil for sure, but which company is better?

It it even possible to roll your own LAN solution any more? The tech giants
have become so hostile to anyone who dares to try to control their own data
that I never even hear it discussed any more.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
Most IP cameras support standard methods of accessing their video feeds. A
program like iSpy will work fine, you just want to also have a firewall that
will block your cameras' attempts to call home and not set up any cloud
access.

~~~
_coveredInBees
Is that still true? I wanted to buy an IP camera to monitor our puppy's crate
a few months back and I was shocked to find that pretty much all the cheapish
IP cameras that used to support this a few years back have all moved to a
cloud-only offering where you have to access your video via their app which
streams your video to their cloud service (hard no).

I was amazed that not a single product in the sub $100 range on Amazon seemed
to support direct LAN access. I ended up going with the Wyze cam, which still
has that issue, but I'd trust a bit more over the no-name Chinese brands still
running 10 year old Linux kernels on their cameras.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
I referred to iSpy both because it's a great free/open product, but it also
has an excellent camera database with all of the video feed URLs for different
model cameras. Check it out:
[https://www.ispyconnect.com/sources.aspx](https://www.ispyconnect.com/sources.aspx)

From my experience, many cameras won't publicize/document this information,
but it's still available/possible for almost every one.

~~~
_coveredInBees
Ah I see. Thanks for replying. It unfortunately looks like iSpy doesn't have a
mobile client? Many years ago I used to use Robert Chou's "IP Cam Viewer"
which was a no-nonsense app to connect to different IP cameras, but
unfortunately that doesn't work with a lot of the changes that camera makers
have made on their end to prevent direct IP connections.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
In my case, I'd strongly want to avoid direct IP connections to my cameras
from a smartphone. That'd suggest very easy outside access to devices that
have questionable security.

~~~
_coveredInBees
Ah, yeah for my use case it was purely for use within my LAN and camera
firewalled externally.

------
gigatexal
I like Google. The search engine is amazing. BigQuery is awesome — it’s really
something only a Google could pull off — but, but, I think this might be DOA
for the same reasons that make Google search and ads so good: the data. I
don’t want Google in my home like this with a view of everything coming in and
going out (yes yes they can already see the amazon orders in my gmail account,
but still) or who is coming or going.

------
jhallenworld
One thing missing in this area is a low cost combined alarm and home
automation. Some have nice home automation (Smart Things, for example), others
have a nice alarm system (Ring). But nobody has a good combination of both
together. At least part of the problem is that the alarm system does not want
to trust third party devices for triggering the alarm. This means that they
are treated as second class citizens.

So an example of this is that I have water monitors and a water main shutoff
valve that works with Smart Things. But Smart Things doesn't have an alarm,
and Ring doesn't support the water monitor and shutoff valve..

Not sure I'm happy with ADT, since they are expensive (per month monitoring).
But they do have name brand recognition.

~~~
cloudking
Check out Home Assistant, it can pull off the automations you describe. You
can run it on a Raspberry Pi 4 [https://www.home-
assistant.io/](https://www.home-assistant.io/)

------
jdeibele
I had bought a new Nest thermostat and was going to install it at about the
time that Google went from having different things Nest-integrated to having
them be Google-integrated. I chose to sell my thermostat to somebody and buy
an Ecobee specifically because Ecobee wasn't owned by Google or Amazon.

So far Amazon seems like its treating its acquisitions better as far as
customers are concerned. Ecobee does make a model with Alexa built-in but I
got an older one that doesn't have that.

I am really tempted to buy some Eufy 2K cameras, which I hear are decent
quality and integrate with Homekit. Apple has tougher security requirements
than Google or Amazon and the products that meet it seem better, even if more
expensive.

------
TheSoftwareGuy
Interesting. 6.6% seems like a pretty insignificant investment. Does anybody
have any idea what 6.6% could really get them?

~~~
JimRyan
Private information about the operation of the company which they can use
themselves to compete with them. I'd certainly be very worried.

~~~
vdfs
Then shutdown their competing offering in 2-3 years once it's mature and have
a user base

------
exabrial
Remember: Google doesn't think they're invading your privacy when _they_ are
making money on it. It's only a violation of privacy if _their competition_ is
making money on your privacy.

------
Danieru
ADT and other American security is broken. They are missing the hard part of
an active security system: response.

In Japan there is a company called Secom. This company has a near monopoly on
security systems. They have this monopoly because instead of just calling the
cops they have staff on patrol who respond to alarms. You can imagine the
install base moat required to have active personal patroling constantly.

The end result is alarms get checked. Every time we mis-unlocked our office a
Secom person would stop by soon after to check. No idle phone calls from a
phone center, the staff checked the premise themselves.

Of course similar services must exist in the states for businesses, but
without the install base they cannot be priced reasonable for home use. Secom
is used everywhere, from uppper class homes to museums.

~~~
noelsusman
A ton of companies in the US offer this, including ADT.
[https://www.adt.com/patrol](https://www.adt.com/patrol)

------
sradman
Google's blog post _A partnership with ADT for smarter home security_ [1]

[1] [https://blog.google/products/google-nest/partnership-adt-
sma...](https://blog.google/products/google-nest/partnership-adt-smarter-home-
security/)

------
athenot
I'm on a "low Google diet" myself as I'm not at all a fan of how my data gets
scooped up and resold.

That being said, while I disagree with their business practices, I think their
information security is one of the best. For contrast, imagine Equifax running
your home security... :)

~~~
waihtis
Its not an infosec problem, but a privacy problem

~~~
antoncohen
In what way? What privacy breach are you worried about?

For example are you worried that a real human at your home security company
will be invading your privacy? When they do are you worried that real human
will take personal action against you? Or are you worried about automated
systems building knowledge about your life based on home security data? Or are
you worried about your home security data used in aggregate? Maybe you are
worried about attackers getting access?

Internal infosec and privacy controls/policies are required to protect you
from some of these. Some of these threats may be more likely from Google, but
I'd say some of them are more likely from other home security providers (keep
in mind that a lot of home security products are actually intended to have
another human monitoring your home).

~~~
anamexis
I would say these are the obvious ones for Google:

> Or are you worried about automated systems building knowledge about your
> life based on home security data? Or are you worried about your home
> security data used in aggregate?

------
huphtur
For those "loving" the ADT home security commercials, check out the story of
"Blue (Da Ba Dee)" by Eiffel 65
[https://youtu.be/epnsRRPtoeU](https://youtu.be/epnsRRPtoeU)

------
diogenescynic
Google is an awful service provider. Ever had a Gmail account get hijacked?
Good luck getting it back. Google doesn't give a crap about helping its
"customers" because its products are free so they have this awful take it or
leave it attitude. You can't rely on that. They did the same thing to Nest.
They'd change your thermostat and shut things down, potentially at your home's
risk. Just a really careless and inconsiderate company who I avoid doing
business with.

------
pseingatl
Get a fumigation sign. The skull and crossbones and threat of death by toxic
asphyxiation will keep all but the most determined burglar away.Few burglars
go out on a job with respirators. Add a bit about asbestos being found "on
site." An ADT sign is nothing but an "all clear." The police won't help,
they're too busy selling drugs, forfeiting automobiles and investigating
possible misdemeanor counterfeit bill passing cases.

------
gnicholas
Huh, looks like Google used to offer a cellular-based backup option, but cut
it off a few months ago. Some folks were upset that the only way to get that
now is to pay Brinks ($29/mo or $20/mo with 3-yr contract).

I assume the Brinks deal will be phased out and ADT will replace it? Given
what people are saying about ADT's pricing, hopefully their offer will be no
more expensive than Brinks'.

------
carterklein13
One of my biggest worries with this is that it will shut ADT off to all future
integrations outside of the Google ecosystem.

I believe that if ADT wants to stay competitive, they would hugely benefit
from a swath of integrations with different vendors doing different things to
allow for a modular home security experience.

I'm not sure that partnering with Google really accomplishes that... at least
not on its own.

------
tclancy
Be a hell of a thing to discover they shut the division down two years later
just as someone comes through the window.

------
dikaio
Unfortunately ADT is the worst security company out there or in the US for
that matter. Garbage.

~~~
C19is20
I'm in Europe. Interested in your comment. Got a source, or any further info?

------
sjbrown
"Home" security? ADT has cameras, door sensors, medical alerting "pendandts"
etc. installed in many more places than private homes. This deal seems more
about sensors and new streams of incoming data for Google.

------
smashah
Neutral news. I just hope this results in new products launching quickly. The
nest Yale partnership is disappointing to say the least. Despite the
naysayers, this can be a successful step in the right direction for nest as an
ecosystem

------
DesiLurker
Well great, if the thief carries a android phone for the first time in history
of mankind google would be able to run machine learning algos to predict where
the crime is going to be committed. /s

personally I would be more worried about ADT getting google data. plus ADT has
tie-ins with many police depts. this could go south really fast from here.
Also, google already has fitbit data so google is slowly spreading its
tentacles into our life in real world much more so than FB.

honestly I feel like I need to minimize my google usage right-bloody-now. a
slightly better web search is not worth all that shit it comes with.

------
DevKoala
ADT came pre-installed in my house. I deactivated it, and want to remove it
fully, but I haven’t gotten around it.

------
justicezyx
If Google pursued github and tiktok like msft I'll be more optimistic. ADT?
Not sure what they wanted here...

------
annoyingnoob
Pushing spy tools into more places, yuck.

------
jvm___
Telus in Canada bought ADT Canada to add to their line of home security and
home health monitoring.

------
dmode
ADT is a near scam home security company who force you into signing aggressive
3 yr contracts

------
nojito
Home Security Systems are largely marketing gimmicks.

I wonder if any of Google's large "diversification" pushes have yielded
success?

------
rednerrus
If you're planning on doing away with public police, private home security is
going to be BIG business.

------
justaguy88
This makes me uncomfortable

------
xen2xen1
Ring ring. Seriously, who doesn't think this is because of the popularity of
the Ring ecosystem?

------
throwaway122378
Well there goes me buying any ADT security products

~~~
firebird84
I was literally going to call them today to monitor my house's pre-existing
ADT (DSC I think?) system out of practicality. Now, I'm not so sure.

 _Edit_ I wonder what modern solutions exist in this space for takeover of old
systems. It feels like every alarm system installed is designed to extract
your money for components for 3 years or so and then immediately become
"discontinued." Most of the companies I see want me to buy a new system and
lock into 3 years of monitoring. It wouldn't be so bad if the components
weren't so damned expensive. $1k to fit out a small house, no smarthome
nonsense even.

~~~
cproctor
We just bought an old house that had been nicely taken cared for. There's an
existing wired alarm system which must have taken a lot of work to install. I
just installed my first server rack in the basement for network-attached
storage and to run services locally, including Home Assistant [1]. I'm looking
at Konnected [2], which makes an aftermarket alarm panel interface. I'd love
to hear what else folks have done.

\- [1] [https://www.home-assistant.io/](https://www.home-assistant.io/) \- [2]
[https://konnected.io/](https://konnected.io/)

~~~
firebird84
konnected.io looks fascinating. It seems to focus on wired systems, but I
believe the system I own is just an "old" wireless system. I'll look for
something similar for wireless systems. At least what I want seems possible!

------
throwaway6000
one of Google's best idea.

------
batt4good
Potentially a questionable investment with the police being abolished?

------
sanguy
Will they tank this like Nest and the prior home HW vendors.

Google is a data mining company. Nothing more, noting less. We are the
product. You are stupid to allow them into your home.

