This sounds like an excellent use of the data Google has. It prevents real people from getting sick. Consent shouldn't be needed for this. The only harm I see is encouraging us to like that one company has all this information.
you know:
- google knows where you are
- google knows what you search
you probably don't know: when you search for food poisoning symptoms, google looks back in your location history the time that food poisoning takes to incubate and guesses which restaurant poisoned you
1
1
just so you know, this tweet of yours that used the word consent so freely allowed the author to make apparently correct generalizations about mozilla employees that are now being read by everyone who saw the original tweet:
amazing split on the quote tweets here between "this is a horrifying and egregious violation of user trust" and "this is great and we should do more of it" and embarrassingly there's mozilla engineers doing the latter
1
1
1
Which part do you consider the privacy violation?
If it's that Google needs better user consent to gather/store the information about search or location history, that's entirely reasonable. That's also not the "this" I was referring to.
1/2
Jul 25, 2020 · 4:41 AM UTC
1