5 ms·
>if a site doesn’t use RSS, Google will fall back to its existing content index to keep users updated. This sounds like an "embrace extend extinguish" strategy
by sthnblllII 5y ago
>if a site doesn’t use RSS, Google will fall back to its existing content index to keep users updated.
This sounds like an "embrace extend extinguish" strategy. Piggyback on websites that have RSS for basic functionality, but use Google's control over the browser to ultimately push websites into something like update aggregation to "reduce server load" that allows Google to track people even when they think they are using an open alternative. It's similar to Google's recent move on FlOC. Making small easily reversible moves towards an open web that protect Google's core position from regulation and users choosing alternatives.
EDIT: If Google deserved the benefit of the doubt they wouldn't still be reading people's email to build creepy profiles on everyone's interests and browsing history. I'm not a fool, I'll consider giving them the benefit of the doubt after they stop that and delete all the data they have collected.
- livre 5y agoYou may be right but I want to give them the benefit of the doubt, that may be just to keep the UI consistent and avoid the trouble of people complaining that they see the button on some websites but not on others.
- qbasic_forever 5y agoThey already did the extinguish thing when they killed Google Reader to try to prop up the failing Google+ network. RSS never recovered from that inflection point. I'm still mad.
- hopesthoughts 5y agoRSS has recovered fine, if it ever was actually wounded.
- pschuegr 5y agoGoogle is certainly not without faults, but it does not read your email. https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6603?hl=en https://support.google.com/mail/answer/6603?hl=en "We will not scan or read your Gmail messages to show you ads." Disclaimer: I currently work at Google.
- iaml 5y agoThe fact they are using this phrase implies they may scan or read it for other purposes, for example I'm sure they use it to train their neural networks. What else? I don't exactly know and that's a problem.
- pschuegr 5y agoIt's a valid point, being more explicit would be better. At minimum they are scanning it to ensure there are no viruses; my assumption is that they are not doing it for any other purpose, but that's just an assumption. To be argumentative, though, I would wager a lot of money that you don't know what _exactly_ your SMS messages are being scanned for either.
- iaml 5y ago> I would wager a lot of money that you don't know what _exactly_ your SMS messages are being scanned for either Precisely, this is why I try to limit my use of services that require my phone number for any reason, and sms messaging in general.
- notriddle 5y ago> The fact they are using this phrase implies they may scan or read it for other purposes Spam filtering.
- sthnblllII 5y agoOk. Why are we even sitting here speculating about it? Why don't they say what its being used for and instead leave it vague and open ended?