
Google Suppresses Memo Revealing Plans to Closely Track Search Users in China - halestock
https://theintercept.com/2018/09/21/google-suppresses-memo-revealing-plans-to-closely-track-search-users-in-china/
======
JoshMnem
> "The Dragonfly memo reveals that a prototype of the censored search engine
> was being developed as an app for both Android and iOS devices, and would
> force users to sign in so they could use the service. The memo confirms, as
> The Intercept first reported last week, that users’ searches would be
> associated with their personal phone number. The memo adds that Chinese
> users’ movements would also be stored, along with the IP address of their
> device and links they clicked on."

This seems to be the direction for all users of Google. The new version of
Chrome signs you into the browser even if you don't want to sign into the
software itself. You can't really use Google's browsing device (Google Chrome)
without providing your identity, if you ever want to sign into a Google
website.

Support for Firefox is more important than ever.

~~~
krn
I installed Chromium on Ubuntu today, and on the first run was given an
opportunity to opt _out_ from Google's personalized ads being shown to me
based on my entire web browsing history. It was that moment when I realized,
that what I had just installed was not primarily a web browser, but a Google
application with a web browsing feature built-in. Because everything in it was
built to optimize Google's ad revenue. It even had an ad blocker enabled by
default, which made Google's ads stand out by disabling the ads by others.

~~~
apostacy
I am so saddened by how much we trust Google. I wish we regarded Google
software with more suspicion. Would people have been nearly as upset if it had
been Google that acquired GitHub?

I miss the days of being suspicious of Microsoft. But Microsoft isn't nearly
as diabolical as Google, nor are they as competent.

~~~
blacksmith_tb
I'd argue MS has become less diabolical as they've become more competent (VS
Code, e.g.). Google is more complex, they are certainly looking more
diabolical, not quite sure about the more competent - I suppose it only
matters that they are competent enough to be dangerous.

~~~
deegles
That's because Microsoft's incentives are more aligned with ours. Better, more
user-centric software == better outcomes for users, more Microsoft
usage/profits.

Google, on the other hand, is fundamentally incentivized to sell ads, which
requires collecting data. The more data they collect, the more money they
make. As the saying goes, we are the product. No amount of hand-wringing or
shaming is going to change that fundamental fact.

I think that in 100 years we're going to look back on how personal data is
used the way we look at barbaric medical practices of the Dark Ages. People in
general just didn't know or expect better.

~~~
AnthonyMouse
> That's because Microsoft's incentives are more aligned with ours. Better,
> more user-centric software == better outcomes for users, more Microsoft
> usage/profits.

Microsoft is in the same business as Google. Search, Bing. Gmail, Outlook.com.
GCP, Azure. They even operate an ad network.

Google has some bad incentives but Microsoft has all the same ones. If not,
why isn't there a single button for "never send any of my personal information
to Microsoft" anywhere in Windows 10?

~~~
krn
> Microsoft is in the same business as Google.

Microsoft and Google may have competing products, but they are in completely
different businesses. Microsoft is in the business of software, Google is in
the business of data. That's why there's a public Bing Search API[1], but
there's no public Google Search API.

[1] [https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/cognitive-
service...](https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/cognitive-
services/bing-web-search-api/)

~~~
AnthonyMouse
> Microsoft and Google may have competing products, but they are in completely
> different businesses. Microsoft is in the business of software, Google is in
> the business of data.

In what way are Windows and Edge "software" but Android and Chrome are not?

> That's why there's a public Bing Search API[1], but there's no public Google
> Search API.

The company that is operating a data service is the one _not_ in the data
business?

~~~
krn
> In what way are Windows and Edge "software" but Android and Chrome are not?

> The company that is operating a data service is the one not in the data
> business?

A company in the software business charges for the usage of its software
(Windows, Bing API). A company in the data business gives the software for
free, and monetizes the data it collects about its users (Android, Google).

~~~
AnthonyMouse
> A company in the software business charges for the usage of its software
> (Windows, Bing API). A company in the data business gives the software for
> free, and monetizes the data it collects about its users (Android, Google).

A services API isn't software. You're not buying a copy of the code and
running it on your computer. And Google offers the same category of thing
(paid services), e.g. the Google Maps API or G Suite, while Microsoft offers
free services equivalent to google.com and gmail.com like bing.com and
outlook.com.

Meanwhile Microsoft has been giving away actual software like Windows 10 for
free, along with a variety of other things like IE/Edge (including for non-
Windows platforms), VS Express, the Skype software, etc.

They're direct competitors operating in largely the same markets and using the
same business models.

~~~
krn
> A services API isn't software. You're not buying a copy of the code and
> running it on your computer.

It's called SaaS, which stands for "Software as a service"[1].

> They're direct competitors operating in largely the same markets and using
> the same business models.

Google generates 84% of its revenues from ads[2], Microsoft generates 95% of
its revenues from software[3].

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_as_a_service](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_as_a_service)

[2] [https://martechtoday.com/google-posts-31-1b-in-total-
revenue...](https://martechtoday.com/google-posts-31-1b-in-total-revenue-
beats-top-and-bottom-line-expectations-214433)

[3] [https://www.microsoft.com/en-
us/Investor/earnings/FY-2018-Q1...](https://www.microsoft.com/en-
us/Investor/earnings/FY-2018-Q1/segment-revenues)

~~~
AnthonyMouse
> It's called SaaS, which stands for "Software as a service"

In other words, you're not buying a copy of the code and running it on your
computer. So the provider has all your private information.

And if that's "software" then how is Google not a "software" company? All
their services are that.

> Google generates 84% of its revenues from ads[2], Microsoft generates 95% of
> its revenues from software[3].

It's understandable that you missed this, but the distinction you're making is
arbitrary. Microsoft can book ad revenue under software and service categories
because the software/service is what generated the ad views. They definitely
make more than 5% of their revenue from ads.

Percentages are also useless in general. If Google merged with Amazon (which
has much higher revenue) then most of their revenue wouldn't be from
"advertising" but how would that change their incentives at all? If anything
it would be worse -- now they're providing more non-advertising services to
you and have the incentive to spy on you via those services to increase their
ad profitability.

------
wrs
Ouch. It must be really fun for Googlers to hear their company is working so
hard to repress dissidents trying to reveal its secret project to help China
repress dissidents.

~~~
devoply
Fact of the matter is that there is a Chinese internet and a US internet.
Going forward there will be a Chinese internet, that some authoritarian
countries will adopt that are a part of the Chinese sphere of influence.
American companies, and the American government through them want a foothold
on that internet. This is the only way for them to do so.

[https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/20/eric-schmidt-ex-google-
ceo-p...](https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/20/eric-schmidt-ex-google-ceo-predicts-
internet-split-china.html)

~~~
lph
The idea that this appeasement will make Google a contender in China is
blazingly ignorant of Chinese politics. No foreign company will ever be
allowed to gain significant market share; it would be seen as a national
security threat. The only way for Google would be to forge an equal
partnership with a Chinese tech giant---Tencent, Alibaba, Huawei, or maybe one
of the two dominant cell carriers.

Google is selling out for nothing.

~~~
thisgoodlife
That's bs. Apple is making billions from China each year without any bs
partnership.

~~~
2600
Regarding iCloud, Apple has made decisions to bring Chinese iCloud in
compliance with Chinese regulations. Chinese iCloud accounts, data, and
encryption keys are stored with a Chinese firm overseen by the Chinese
government.

~~~
bduerst
Yep. Apple moved their keys to be stored locally on state-owned servers,
meaning that Apple has given the Chinese government access to Chinese user
data. Apple even updated their TOS for it.

~~~
IBM
Not according to Apple [1]:

>Apple says the joint venture does not mean that China has any kind of
“backdoor” into user data and that Apple alone – not its Chinese partner –
will control the encryption keys.

[1] [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-apple-icloud-
insigh...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-apple-icloud-
insight/apple-moves-to-store-icloud-keys-in-china-raising-human-rights-fears-
idUSKCN1G8060)

~~~
cromwellian
China goes so far as to require Android users to install a surveillance app in
some provinces
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jingwang_Weishi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jingwang_Weishi))
so you think the Chinese government would really allow the sale of unbreakable
end to end encryption domestically just because it's Apple?

What would be the point then, as anyone wanting to avoid Chinese surveillance
could just buy an iPhone. They wouldn't go through huge, immense trouble
rolling out a massive surveillance apparatus on this domestic internet only to
allow the world's most popular phone to be sold domestically as a simple
circumvention.

No, Apple obviously made a deal as they are totally dependent on China for
manufacturing their phone as well, they have no leverage. The difference is,
Apple's culture of secrecy seems to prevent their employees from leaking
dissent externally, so whatever they did, the details aren't public.

~~~
IBM
>so you think the Chinese government would really allow the sale of
unbreakable end to end encryption domestically just because it's Apple?

Yes. Apple has even said this in court filings during the FBI legal fight [1]:

>Finally, the government attempts to disclaim the obvious international
implications of its demand, asserting that any pressure to hand over the same
software to foreign agents “flows from [Apple’s] decision to do business in
foreign countries . . . .” Opp. 26. Contrary to the government’s misleading
statistics (Opp. 26), which had to do with lawful process and did not compel
the creation of software that undermines the security of its users, Apple has
never built a back door of any kind into iOS, or otherwise made data stored on
the iPhone or in iCloud more technically accessible to any country’s
government. See Dkt. 16-28 [Apple Inc., Privacy, Gov’t Info. Requests];
Federighi Decl. ¶¶ 6–7. The government is wrong in asserting that Apple made
“special accommodations” for China (Opp. 26), as Apple uses the same security
protocols everywhere in the world and follows the same standards for
responding to law enforcement requests. See Federighi Decl. ¶ 5.

and Craig Federighi's declaration [2]:

>5\. Apple uses the same security protocols everywhere in the world.

>6\. Apple has never made user data, whether stored on the iPhone or in
iCloud, more technologically accessible to any country's government. We
believe any such access is too dangerous to allow. Apple has also not provided
any government with its proprietary iOS source code. While governmental
agencies in various countries, including the United States, perform regulatory
reviews of new iPhone releases, all that Apple provides in those circumstances
is an unmodified iPhone device.

>7\. It is my understanding that Apple has never worked with any government
agency from any country to create a "backdoor" in any of our products and
services.

>I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
America that the foregoing is true and correct.

Apple has leverage in China because they indirectly employ millions of people.

>No, Apple obviously made a deal as they are totally dependent on China for
manufacturing their phone as well, they have no leverage. The difference is,
Apple's culture of secrecy seems to prevent their employees from leaking
dissent externally, so whatever they did, the details aren't public.

Lol. I'm sure Federighi perjured himself because the Apple Cult is _just that
strong_.

[1] [https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2762131/C-D-
Cal-1...](https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2762131/C-D-
Cal-16-Cm-00010-Dckt-000177-000-Filed-2016.pdf)

[2] [https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2762118-Federighi-
De...](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2762118-Federighi-Decl-
Executed.html#document/p1)

~~~
bduerst
The FBI is a US Government Agency, not China.

And even then, the declaration you quote (made in a US Court case referring to
the FBI) was made two years before Apple gave the keys over to China.

Apple has deleted VPN apps from the Chinese store at the request of the
Chinese government. They also added a clause to their TOS that allows the
state-owned data company to access all user data. When they rolled this out
and gave the keys to China, they only gave their users the option to delete
their account, not opt out.

I'm sorry to be the one to have to break this to you but Apple is acquiescing
with the Chinese government surveillance demands.

------
prepend
I guess we’ll get a new blog post from Pichai about the people he fired
because tracking users against their wishes, exposing data against their
wishes, and compelling employees to delete their own files “contrary to our
basic values and our Code of Conduct.” [0]

Fortunately Google is an ethical company and not hypocritical when it comes to
very important issues.

Maybe this will be positive and result in new US law like the foreign corrupt
practices act of 1977 [1] that prevents US companies and their subsidiaries
from bribing officials in other countries, even when local law allows it. So
forcing US companies to follow the minimal US laws protecting privacy even if
to comply with other laws will be a net positive for humanity.

[0] [https://www.blog.google/outreach-
initiatives/diversity/note-...](https://www.blog.google/outreach-
initiatives/diversity/note-employees-ceo-sundar-pichai/)

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Corrupt_Practices_Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Corrupt_Practices_Act)

~~~
sincerely
Reminds me of this tweet:
[https://twitter.com/nmgrm/status/1038790691529273345](https://twitter.com/nmgrm/status/1038790691529273345)

>programmers get upset about the words “master/slave” in software now, but are
happy to keep constructing a global surveillance economy and becoming middle
caste

------
tomlu
Disclaimer: I work for Google. I also think that there is an anti-Google bias
on hacker news, holding Google to a standard not applied to others and taking
any excuse to roll out the same old tired rants in response to almost any
Google post (DAE Google Reader etc).

If what I read is true then this is the first thing that has truly rocked my
confidence that the company generally tries to do the right thing (while
making money of course, we're not a charity). I expect significant internal
backlash if they proceed and I hope they learn from this.

~~~
quickben
"I also think that there is an anti-Google bias on hacker news".

Nah mate. When a company isn't paying me, I am unrestrictedly free to be
objective.

The problem, with companies (and with mafia, etc) starts once you take the
money.

So, from that perspective, what you read from most of us, is more objective
than anything you read on your internal mailing lists.

We, unlike your HR, don't care about morale, perception and corporate tracking
pixels of stuff one isn't supposed to see or read.

HN crowd for the most part are smart and informed people. So, don't look at it
as bias, look at it as assessment.

~~~
ehsankia
So are you as critical with every other company that does business in China.
Are you gonna throw out half of the products in your house which are Made In
China? Are you also criticizing Apple and Tesla for doing business in China?

~~~
sparkie
It isn't just about doing business in China, but the nature of the business
(and propping up the Chinese regime).

Apple have had plenty of stick about their practices too. I think they just
have too many diehard followers that the negative information gets drowned out
by the positive.

I think there's a perception that Google is the one company that many people
are (or were) supportive of, because of their past stance with regard to
China. Google's former motto of "Don't be evil" convinced a lot of people that
they have strong ethical standards. This may have been true in the early days.
To me, it has not been true ever since Schmidt became CEO. I've been actively
avoiding Google as much as possible since around 2005, because it was
glaringly obvious even then that they were out to destroy privacy.

I also avoid Apple. Never liked their software, and they have pretty much the
same problems wrt privacy.

------
ipsum2
Genuine question: why is there not more outrage over Bing working in China?
Surely there's as much user tracking/censorship as Google is doing?

~~~
tareqak
Microsoft and Bing never started with the mantra of "Don't be evil". Microsoft
also has a much more established history of working with different government
agencies and foreign governments. The perceived contrast from what people
expect from Google and what Google is doing now is just that much more
glaring/obvious.

~~~
mtgx
And that is part of the reason why Microsoft has been hated/less trusted than
Google for so long (and still is).

Google is making a very big mistake ruining this image and supposedly core
principles with the actions it's been taking in the past couple of years. They
won't recover for decades from this, just like Microsoft still hasn't fully.

Google's "Don't be evil" has been a _huge_ branding asset, but it seems Google
has been too eager to step all over it and throw it in the garbage lately. I
wonder if it will be worth it. I _hope_ it won't be.

These days I distrust almost every move Google makes _by default_ , and I
imagine there is a growing number of people like me. Google may think "eh, so
what, we'll just lose a few percent of our users, but gain all of those juicy
killer machines and censorship contracts instead," but now people like me will
also be first in line to support governmental action against the company
(GDPR, etc), while before I would've been the first in line to defend it. So
Google won't be losing just users or even advocates, but it's also turning
them into _vocal enemies_ \- all in the name of continuing to grow those
quarterly profits.

~~~
JoshMnem
> These days I distrust almost every move Google makes by default, and I
> imagine there is a growing number of people like me.

Google has lost its way, not just with this, but with AMP/Chrome/URLs, and
their impending destruction of one of the great achievements of modern
technology -- the decentralized, open WWW. The Web was always under attack but
to see the fatal blows delivered by Google is very depressing.

I've already removed Facebook's companies entirely from my life. This year,
I'm working on moving away from Google as much as possible.

~~~
jacksmith21006
Google has not lost their way. They walked away from billions in China when
the government tried to hack Gmail accounts. Google made it so ALL people can
afford a smartphone not just the rich like Apple.

Apple on the other hand

[https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/03/apple-
privacy...](https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/03/apple-privacy-
betrayal-for-chinese-icloud-users/) Campaign targets Apple over privacy
betrayal for Chinese iCloud ...

~~~
JoshMnem
Smartphones are not necessarily good things. I think they are damaging
attention[1] and causing a lot of negative effects on society (social media,
fake information, etc.). Humans shouldn't be online at all times.

[1] [https://hbr.org/2018/03/having-your-smartphone-nearby-
takes-...](https://hbr.org/2018/03/having-your-smartphone-nearby-takes-a-toll-
on-your-thinking)

------
jaclaz
>Emails demanding deletion of the memo contained “pixel trackers” that
notified human resource managers when their messages had been read, recipients
determined.

This seems like the worst part (not that the rest is not bad), anyone has an
idea of what this "pixel trackers" are and how they actually work?

~~~
d4l3k
Pixel trackers are just small embedded images in the email that when they are
fetched from a server, the server logs it. Pretty simple way to track whether
or not someone has opened an email. It's my understanding that gmail however
downloads all images and then serves them from Google servers to avoid this
issue entirely.

Traditional email clients like Outlook/Thunderbird are susceptible to this
kind of attack. That's why they often ask you before loading images.

[https://smallbusiness.chron.com/set-email-tracking-
pixel-493...](https://smallbusiness.chron.com/set-email-tracking-
pixel-49332.html)

~~~
nil_pointer
Variants of "pixel trackers" still work fine on Gmail despite this. To this
day a lot of marketing, recruiters and others are tracking when you open their
message on Gmail.

~~~
Bedon292
How are these variants working? Curious about how they are getting around
google hitting all of them.

~~~
LucasBrandt
I assume Google doesn't request the image until the email is opened.

------
lolc
> “Leadership misled engineers working on [Dragonfly] about the nature of
> their work, depriving them of moral agency,” said a Google employee who read
> the memo.

Lying to our own colleagues now are we? The end justifies the means I guess.
Wait, what was the end again?

~~~
ccnafr
No offense, but Google is gonna launch that search engine regardless. Even if
it's gonna have to outsource coding to China itself.

~~~
lolc
How does that justify lying about it?

If you're going to lie to your colleagues better have a very good reason
ready. "They won't help me if they knew the truth" is not a good reason.

------
creaghpatr
Well sure, they censor/manipulate their users, why wouldn’t they do the same
to their employees?

~~~
collias
That fiasco earlier this year with James Damore comes to mind.

~~~
bduerst
Damore was fired for perpetuating gender stereotypes. Even he confirmed it.
That isn't unique to Google, and employee policy is not manipulation of search
results.

~~~
collias
Do you have a source of him confirming it? Genuinely curious. I'm just going
off of his interview with Joe Rogan.

~~~
bduerst
>Damore has confirmed to multiple outlets that he was terminated for
“perpetuating gender stereotypes.”

[https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/8/8/16106728/google-
fire...](https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/8/8/16106728/google-fired-
engineer-anti-diversity-memo)

~~~
collias
Ok thanks, I think I misunderstood what you were saying.

I thought you meant that he went on record saying something like "I'm
perpetuating gender stereotypes".

Instead, it looks like he's just confirmed that _Google_ thought he was
perpetuating gender stereotypes, and that's what he was fired for, which is no
surprise.

~~~
bduerst
It doesn't really matter what he thinks he did, because NLRB deemed it a legal
reason for firing him. It's not unique to Google, and considering he's suing
for discrimination against white conservative men I don't think his lawyer
would let him say something like that anyways.

------
jarym
Honestly at this point I wonder how much there is between what US agents can
do with a FISA warrant and what Chinese agents can do with their surveillance
- if there is a difference it’ll be pretty small I imagine.

I’m not trying to justify Dragonfly but just pointing out that tech companies
are being pushed into more censorship and tracking by governments all over the
world.

~~~
zerealshadowban
Are there major Chinese companies currently investing in the development of
systems specifically tailored to help total surveillance of US citizens by the
US government?

------
Havoc
This whole thing feels like it's going to hit Google straight in the face like
a ton of bricks.

At a minimum there is some serious streisand effect potential.

~~~
oh-kumudo
I don't think so. Half of US's electorate already see Google as hypocrite.
Only ones will be truly annoyed is a certain fraction of its own employees.

~~~
kevin_thibedeau
Computers are magic.

Half of the US electorate is completely ignorant about what's going on. The
people that do know have no sway over a self-serving Congress.

------
imhelpingu
That would be really horrible, living in a country where Google functions as a
quasi-government entity consolidating everyone's access to useful resources on
the WAN and tracking users, on some secret police's behalf, under the guise of
marketing.

Who can even imagine such a thing.

------
chrischen
Why is there no such outrage over google closely tacking search users in
America?

~~~
dustinmoorenet
Because Google doesn't come to your house, take you in for questioning and
then pressuring you into confessing that you did something wrong which
disturbed civil order.

Stories about what happens in China:
[https://chinachange.org/](https://chinachange.org/)

~~~
echevil
They would still send your data to the government when there is a subpoena I
suppose

~~~
bduerst
If they didn't comply with subpoenas, people would be complaining that Google
thought it was above the law.

~~~
echevil
It does seem there’s little difference from what they’re trying to do in China
then.

~~~
SuperNinKenDo
There's a massive difference. Complying with subpoenas is not the same as
giving the government on-tap access to all data at their leisure. And for all
the US's problems, the rule of law and respect for the rights of citizen's and
responsibilities of the state toward them in the administration of justice is
leaps and bounds better and more transparent in the United States.

~~~
echevil
if you say so..

------
IBM
Ryan Gallagher seems to own this story like John Carreyrou did Theranos.
Pretty much every scoop about Dragonfly has been reported by him.

~~~
yuhong
I began working on the Google DoubleClick Mozilla essay earlier in the year,
though I am not as famous.

------
394549
> According to three sources familiar with the incident, Google leadership
> discovered the memo and were furious that secret details about the China
> censorship were being passed between employees who were not supposed to have
> any knowledge about it. Subsequently, Google human resources personnel
> emailed employees who were believed to have accessed or saved copies of the
> memo and ordered them to immediately delete it from their computers. Emails
> demanding deletion of the memo contained “pixel trackers” that notified
> human resource managers when their messages had been read, recipients
> determined.

Has the Dragonfly memo leaked publicly yet?

------
flyGuyOnTheSly
>Emails demanding deletion of the memo contained “pixel trackers” that
notified human resource managers when their messages had been read, recipients
determined.

The surveillants are becoming so paranoid that they are now surveilling
themselves.

------
noetic_techy
"Don't be evil"

History will judge them poorly for this.

------
throw2016
Google is already a creepy organization. Android is intentionally designed to
leak like a sieve, they are stalking people 24/7\. No one at Google can
pretend they are not building invasive surveillance systems, they can only
hand wave it away and attempt valiantly to 'normalize' it.

Whether it is amazon and its work practices, Google or Facebook the common
factor is there are thousands of employees willing to do their bidding without
protest, without mass resignations, without whistle blowers.

Its difficult to believe that after decades of posturing about freedom and
liberty there is only one person in technology who had the guts and integrity
to stand up.

Everyone else in spite of knowing what these companies are upto are lining up
to sellout. What these discussions do on technology forums is perpetuate the
illusion that people care and gives apologists and sellouts an opportunity to
normalize, diminish and dilute the implications of surveillance and stalking.

------
joering2
Let's forget childish arguments of who will do what to punish Google. Noone
will do anything; Congress in US is unable to call in top execs to answer
questions, meanwhile EU $5B penalty is a slap on GOOG wrist. They may as well
start a child kidnapping ring tomorrow and it would take years before any LE
would get to the bottom of this in such huge corp.

Users won't stop using Google because its good enough. Advertisers won't stop
paying for AdWords because these yield good enough results. But Google purpose
is not finding information; it is rather to search thru a huge mess (that
loosely organized internet is) and find info to a good enough extent. So other
than Duck Duck Go, who is working on search and what other alternatives do we
have today, and will have in the near future, please?

Anyone?

------
echevil
There are a lot more they can track than the search history. Google maps app
has a timeline feature that tracks every place I go :)

~~~
bduerst
You can turn that off here, FYI:
[https://myaccount.google.com/u/1/activitycontrols](https://myaccount.google.com/u/1/activitycontrols)

~~~
kart23
I've turned it off, but I found out that it removes a very useful feature: I
can no longer set a home or work address. Why is this? You could've easily
just stored those two addresses and not track everything else. They are
clearly incentivizing the user to turn on activity tracking. Now instead of
just typing in 'home', I have to input the entire address.

~~~
bubblethink
Yes, this bugs me too. They are also discouraging users like me from using
maps at all, which is fine. Their app, their rules. maps.me, here we go maps
and osmand all work reasonably well. Sometimes they aren't very good at
finding addresses, but you can usually get the coordinates from an address
using a separate tool or a web-search.

------
jarym
Do more evil

~~~
gaius
“Don’t be evil unless it’s scalable”

~~~
JorgeGT
Evil is trivially scalable, it just needs to be rebranded as good.

------
whatever1
Make sure they don’t catch you doing evil

------
RikNieu
At what point did they scratch out the "don't" and just switched to "be evil"?

------
GEmployee2018
Google is a private company. Google can do whatever it wants.

------
gaius
_Emails demanding deletion of the memo contained “pixel trackers” that
notified human resource managers when their messages had been read, recipients
determined._

Not very nice being tracked is it? I hope that will be a wake-up call for
everyone at Google.

~~~
dekhn
Many google engineers already knew that a great deal of information was being
collected on them.

~~~
gaius
But this will bring home the reality of how it can be used against them. Just
as they have helped to gather information that could be turned against
ordinary people very easily.

~~~
skybrian
Everyone knows that you can be fired or worse if you're caught leaking. It's
part of employee training and there are many reminders.

(Clearly, it's not working, but this is a wake up call for nobody.)

~~~
gaius
_Everyone knows that you can be fired or worse if you 're caught leaking._

But that’s not what’s happening. They are being reported to HR for even
reading it or being aware of it. _That’s_ why this is relevant. Just like the
way Google tracks people everywhere on the web, and would gladly sell their
browsing history to employers, insurers, anyone.

~~~
jrockway
Do you have a link to Google's website where I can buy someone's browsing
history? You did say they would sell it to anyone.

------
qubax
Google being google. It's strange people are still so shocked by what google
is.

------
mtgx
Google's new internal motto must now be: "Be _more_ evil."

