The problem with this analogy is that it implies Google has people opening and reading your email. That's what makes people uncomfortable. Gmail on the other hand uses algorithms to read and analyze email and to form profiles and target advertising. Most people are relatively unconcerned about that.
My thoughts exactly. I couldn't care less about a computer running natural language processing on my mail, especially if it will make advertisements more relevant to me.
Wonder why they only used Google as an example. Apple has the same ecosystem setup. Even Microsoft has a similar setup. At least Google tends to be fairly transparent for the most part.
Plus, that is the price you have to pay to be synced up with all of your devices/info/data. I don't see this "Indie OS" phone creating the same type of ecosystem without any of the drawbacks.
Apple's revenue comes from selling hardware.
Google's revenue comes from selling users (you) to advertisers.
- Who really sends that much snail mail for this to even be a good idea?
- Stamps aren't expensive.
- I'd rather not have people open, read, and take photos of my mail.
Sooooooooo what is his solution?
It's pretty easy to point out the "boogie man in the closet." It actually takes thought to solve that.
The "solution" is what the post is advertising, which is the 'Indie Phone' that has a custom OS that protects your data rather than tracking it. Dunno how well that's gonna work.
Huh. But how does that solve for the problem he's talking about here, which is Gmail "reading" your email? My phone does not have anything to do with my email account and access.
Yeah, that's why its a pretty stupid article.
I don't see the point in using this service, but I do enjoy the weird marketing angle where, in order to sell a product, you list all the bad things another company does.
I think it's called /s
Wait... Is Google the Hydra of real world?