Viewing 5 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #2398

      Steve
      Participant

      A patent filed by Google in 2016 has revealed a plan to make a device able to “take control of your parenting for you” the device essentially spies on what your children is doing and if they are doing something Google believes is wrong (maybe Google should refine its own moral compass before scolding others?) it will issue a verbal warning to the child.

      For me this raises a few questions…

      Is society really getting to the point where we are so reliant on technology now that we need a device to tell us how to raise our kids?

      No device is unhackable! Would you really want to have something this intrusive in your house when a security flaw/bad actor working for google (<<<thats happened in the past where a google employee preyed on children via gmail using elevated access) could make it possible to spy on you entire family?

      Does google have a creepy idea team who come up with creepy ideas to try out?

      What will be next?

      Even ex google and facebook workers find what these company are doing by exploiting children wrong and set up a group called “Center for Humane Technology” wanting to repent for what they have done in the past.

    • #2399

      chris
      Participant

      Blimey Google would have freaked out if it had existed when we were kids…. bonfires, tunnels in the garden, petrol and sodium chlorate & sugar explosions, neighbours’ kids tied to trees and pelted with apples, bikes crashed into cardboard boxes, tree climbing, we even climbed down into a disused septic tank and built a platform out of oil drums.

    • #2400

      damon
      Participant

      @steve From the always reliable faux news:

      “In another patent application from September 2016, Google imagines how it could take control of your parenting, your relationship with your children,” Carlson explained. “Google’s smart home system could detect children near a liquor cabinet for example, or in their parents bedroom, infer that ‘mischief is occurring’ and deliver a verbal warning.”

      Which is less alarmist than:

      “and if they are doing something Google believes is wrong”

      The future, for some, is a home automation system, with cameras, voice control etc. Connected cameras are used for home security, sending an alert if someone is in your house. This seems like a simple geo fence. If jnr goes into one area an alert is triggered and a message is delivered from a google home smart speaker (one presumes.)

      It’s hardly google grassing you up to social services, for being a bad parent.

      Having an always on camera and voice assist in your house may be a massive intrusion for some. There does seem to be a lot of people who willingly trade privacy for convenience and possibly an elevated sense of security.

    • #2401

      Steve
      Participant

      @damon I get what you are saying and I wouldn’t mind so much this technology if it was being made by another company. But for me personally after the revelations revealed by Wikileaks during the last presidential election that Eric Schimdt (CEO of alphabet google at the time) thought it would be a good idea to create a voting database using harvested data from peoples phones. This all very much comes across 1984 to me rather than improving peoples lives. If google felt so strongly about improving peoples lives they would at least pay more cooperation tax but because tax isn’t on Googles terms or something that benefits them they don’t want to know.

      • This reply was modified 3 years, 5 months ago by Steve.
    • #2419

      damon
      Participant

      after the revelations revealed by Wikileaks during the last presidential election that Eric Schimdt (CEO of alphabet google at the time) thought it would be a good idea to create a voting database using harvested data from peoples phones.

      Bonus points for mentioning wiki leaks. I’ve seen a Podesta mail. It seems to me that it was just another business supporting their favorite brand of politics. I’ve not seen anything about “harvested data”. Could you point me in the right direction?

      if google felt so strongly about improving peoples lives they would atleast pay more cooperation tax

      Agreed.

    • #2420

      Steve
      Participant

      @damon here is the link:

      https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/37262

      The wikileaks leaked email gives a glimpse into the workings and intrusiveness of the people at the top of Google.

      In the email Eric details his plans very clearly…

      “Key is the development of a single record for a voter that aggregates all that is known about them. In 2016 smart phones will be used to identify, meet, and update profiles on the voter.”

      Going on to detail how they plan to target people based upon information they gathered.

      “In the case where we can’t identify the specific human, we can still have a partial digital voter id, for a person or “probable-person” with attributes that we can identify and use to target.

      What is proposed in this email seems to suggest Eric and co want to herd voters like cattle.. “Analytics can model demographics, social factors and many other attributes of the needed voters.” which is of course valuable information that could be used to exploit voters.

      Google has a lot to gain or a lot to lose if the wrong person gets in the WhiteHouse for example section 230 of the communication decency act is just one reason. The allows Google not to be held responsible for obscene/illegal content on its search engine. Google lobbied very hard and under Obama it paid off giving them more Whitehouse access then any other company in history.

Viewing 5 reply threads

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

[snax_content]