Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday April 05 2019, @12:57PM   Printer-friendly
from the how-many-are-seeing-red? dept.

According to Doug Lynch at xda-developers.com:

Android TV owners recently received an update across multiple platforms that have started to display sponsored content with a "Promotional Channels' title in the launcher of the Android TV software. We're currently seeing reports that it has shown up in Sony smart TVs, the Mi Box 3 from Xiaomi, NVIDIA Shield TV, and others. This has been an incredibly off-putting change for a lot of Android TV users. What makes matters worse is people were unable to disable the ads at first, but Reddit user Felisens seems to have figured out how to disable them.

[...] Update: Google's response

A Google spokesperson gave us the following statement:

Android TV is committed to optimizing and personalizing the entertainment experience at home. As we explore new opportunities to engage the user community, we're running a pilot program to surface sponsored content on the Android TV home screen.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by darkfeline on Saturday April 06 2019, @08:57AM (3 children)

    by darkfeline (1030) on Saturday April 06 2019, @08:57AM (#825327) Homepage

    > you'll still be *product*

    Uh, that's not how it works. In the ToS for the consumer products Google can use your data for ads. In the ToS for the enterprise products Google cannot use your data for ads. If they do, you can sue Google for violating the contract.

    Even if you personally cannot sue Google due to legal fees, all of the businesses and schools using the same product can, and I'm sure there are lots of lawyers happy to lead a class action for blatant breach of contract against Google.

    >So who do you think they're going to prioritize?

    They're going to prioritize not breaching the terms of their contract, as they are a huge fat target for any lawyers looking for a quick paycheck. For example, G Suite can also be used for HIPAA data, and HIPAA is one of those rare regulations that actually has a bite (millions of dollars per year per violation category plus potential criminal penalties).

    --
    Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Saturday April 06 2019, @10:46AM (2 children)

    by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Saturday April 06 2019, @10:46AM (#825339) Homepage Journal

    Uh, that's not how it works. In the ToS for the consumer products Google can use your data for ads. In the ToS for the enterprise products Google cannot use your data for ads. If they do, you can sue Google for violating the contract.

    Does the ToS cover Google services like Search, YouTube and Chrome, or just G Suite apps?

    If not, you're still product when you use those services.

    I'm glad you've found a tool set that meets your needs.

    I prefer my data and tools to be local, including mail clients, mail servers, data storage, productivity apps, etc. As such, G Suite really isn't for me.

    In any case, I'd appreciate it if you could confirm whether or not your G suite subscription covers stuff like search and youtube. Thanks!

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    • (Score: 2) by darkfeline on Saturday April 06 2019, @09:47PM (1 child)

      by darkfeline (1030) on Saturday April 06 2019, @09:47PM (#825515) Homepage

      > Does the ToS cover Google services like Search, YouTube and Chrome, or just G Suite apps?

      Just the G Suite apps, and for good reason because the ToS on them is very tight. I don't see how other things like YouTube could even work because there's no way to provide those services while allowing you to have full data ownership. G Suite also guarantees feature support, so that would mean YouTube cannot change any features without at least a year of advance notice for example. Chrome ToS only applies to Google's sync service, the only data that Chromium itself sends is metrics which can be disabled or compiled out.

      You can disable non-covered services on your G Suite account, which is what I do to draw a very clear line on data ownership. All data on my G Suite account is owned by me, and I have a separate consumer account when I need to deal with other Google services, with the full understanding that the data there is not fully owned by me.

      On a side note, everything on Google cloud platform is also covered by a similar enterprise ToS, even if you use a consumer account. For better or worse, all of Google's services have their own ToS. It means more ToS to read, but it also means your interaction with each individual service is compartmentalized.

      I heartily recommend reading the ToS of every service you use. This is basically the equivalent of reading the fine print on credit cards/loans and it being tedious is no excuse; it can only come back to bite you in the ass.

      > I prefer my data and tools to be local, including mail clients, mail servers, data storage, productivity apps, etc. As such, G Suite really isn't for me.

      Sure. I don't see how G Suite prevents that however; I personally use POP and local backups of data, so I'm basically using G Suite as a cloud backup (e.g., Dropbox) and as an SMTP/MTA service which is annoying to set up yourself (you need to set up rDNS, DMARC, DKIM, SPF, spam filtering, webmail if you want it, and stay off blacklists). But whatever works for you.

      --
      Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
      • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Saturday April 06 2019, @11:06PM

        by NotSanguine (285) <NotSanguineNO@SPAMSoylentNews.Org> on Saturday April 06 2019, @11:06PM (#825540) Homepage Journal

        I heartily recommend reading the ToS of every service you use. This is basically the equivalent of reading the fine print on credit cards/loans and it being tedious is no excuse; it can only come back to bite you in the ass.

        I couldn't agree more. And not just for online stuff. One should do so for anything that has service associated with it, like mobile phones.

        I'm basically using G Suite as a cloud backup (e.g., Dropbox) and as an SMTP/MTA service which is annoying to set up yourself (you need to set up rDNS, DMARC, DKIM, SPF, spam filtering, webmail if you want it, and stay off blacklists).

        I've been fortunate in that I have six static IPv4 addresses (yes, this is a consumer DSL link, but I've had this service for nearly 20 years) that I use to host my own DNS and various services on several domains.

        SMTP/SPAM filtering is really easy to to set up and configure. Sendmail/Postfix/Exim configs aren't too onerous and SpamAssassin is also easy to configure.

        SPF is also pretty easy to configure. DMARC/DKIM is a little more challenging as it requires DNSSEC, but I haven't found it to be a big deal.

        As for blacklists, I've run into that twice or three times over the past 15 years or so, and it is a pain in the ass, but as long as you use appropriate blackhole lists and don't allow your mail server to be an open relay, it's not really a big deal.

        I know, it's a bunch of work. But I set much of this up long before there were "cloud" (read: someone else's servers) services.

        I don't recommend doing so for most people. I've been doing this sort of thing, both personally and professionally, since the early 1990s (starting with KA9Q [wikipedia.org] back in 1990), so my perspective (and experience) is significantly different from most people.

        What's more, I spent quite a few years doing InfoSec work professionally, which has made me quite conscious of the issues associated with anything connected to the Internet. As such, I don't store my data on any device or services over which I don't have full control. I've made exceptions to this rule, but only with data I've locally encrypted myself, with keys generated/managed/accessible only to me.

        Yes, I realize that I'm much more paranoid than most folks. But that's nothing new. I recall sitting through a "securing Sendmail/DNS" session at SANS in 2000 and realized halfway through that I was much more paranoid in terms of locking things down than the presenter himself.

        But whatever works for you.

        Quite. For us all.

        --
        No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr