Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Online Privacy Worth Less Than Marshmallow Fluff Six Pack

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the sounds-about-right dept.

Chrome 223

nonprofiteer writes "With a program called Screenwise, Google is offering a total of $25 in Amazon gift cards to anyone willing to install a Chrome browser extension that will let the search giant track every website the user visits and what they do there over a year-long period. Google says it will study this in order to improve its products and services. Forbes points out that $25 in Amazon credits isn't quite enough to buy a six pack of Marshmallow Fluff ($26.75)." The money isn't much as a pure trade for privacy, but I suspect that many people would like to have their preferences be among those that shape how Google — and other companies, too — actually organize their interfaces. (Note that the tracking can be selectively turned off by the user.)

cancel ×

223 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

If any google employee can stomach what I surf (0, Flamebait)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986111)

...More power to them. Hope you guys like watching a lot of midgets shitting on grannies. And I mean a *LOT* of midgets shitting on grannies.

Oh, excuse me, I mean little people.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (1)

torgis (840592) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986167)

If you're gonna go PC, you might as well go full PC. "Little people shitting on the age-enhanced." That sounds good, right?

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (4, Funny)

windcask (1795642) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986911)

Perhaps "Height-disadvantaged persons defecating above the long-lived?"

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38987073)

George Carlin would be proud.

Surf's not up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986315)

If any google employee can stomach what I surf

Big words for a kook Haole come to the North Shore try to surf Pipe with the local boys.

Re:Surf's not up (2)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986387)

Your Wolf Pack doesn't scare me, bra. I'm as good as ANY of you!

Re:Surf's not up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38987037)

It's "brah." He's not a c-cup.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (1)

SirGarlon (845873) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986409)

if only there were a moderation option, "-1 too disgusting even for Slashdot"

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (2)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986553)

The real question is ... What the hell is "marshmallow fluff"?

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (3, Funny)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986633)

Google would show good humour if "marshmallow fluff" were the name of the next Android OS release.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (1)

Binestar (28861) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986717)

Next Android release will be Jelly Bean.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (2)

GrumpySteen (1250194) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986711)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshmallow_creme [wikipedia.org]

And one of the reasons it's popular:
http://www.marshmallowfluff.com/pages/fluffernutter.html [marshmallowfluff.com]

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986999)

I'll stick with Marmite+Peanut butter, thanks...

Begs the question though, isn't there anything on Amazon that costs $26 and that people have heard of it?

(Cue the "begging the question" Nazis...)

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (1)

jdgeorge (18767) | more than 2 years ago | (#38987035)

It's an edible product that appears to be terribly overpriced.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38987085)

I'm more curious why I've seen similar substances named 5 times in one day, and what sinister subliminal message is going on. Between fark and slashdot.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986663)

Hope you guys like watching a lot of midgets shitting on grannies. And I mean a *LOT* of midgets shitting on grannies.

It's people like you that will completely skew the results and ruin the Internet.

When I search for Mickey Mouse I don't want to come up with Debbie Does Disney, I want some family-friendly, pre-censored search results. And I don't want any Catholic priests or evangelical preachers signing up just for the 25 dollar giveaway. There is enough perversion on the Internet without search results being based on the sexual fantasies of religious leaders.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (1)

asdf7890 (1518587) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986735)

That shows how blinkered you are. Not all old people are little you know.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986901)

I think that is why the Google are offering this All the Gay Midget Amputee Scat porn they could ever want to Fap to on the cheep

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986947)

I look at the most disgusting porn legally possible just because i know either some government spook (DHS, NSA etc...), or some nosy employee at my ISP or somebody else (marketer?) has to be looking at what i surf, if they want to follow me in to the bowels of hell they can be my guest,

Yes (5, Insightful)

Anrego (830717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986163)

This is one of those statements we need to hear from time to time to shock is into realizing that the vast majority of people out there do not value online privacy to the degree that the Slashdot crowd generally does.

The vast majority of people out there probably rank "letting a company mine my browsing history" somewhere around "filling out a survey".

Re:Yes (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986197)

The vast majority of people are too stupid to see the difference. That doesn't mean there's not an important difference. If the vast majority of people jumped off a cliff, would you too?

Re:Yes (1)

masternerdguy (2468142) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986229)

They aren't too stupid, they just haven't been exposed to enough of the underlying framework of the world to know there is one.

Re:Yes (5, Insightful)

Anrego (830717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986313)

I don’t equate it to stupidity. It’s not that people don’t understand the implications of this. It’s made fairly clear.. “every site you visit will be known to us”. It comes down to having different priorities.

The Slashdot crowd is privacy sensitive. It’s important to us. The fact that it’s not important to others is something we have to learn to accept. We can’t always write it off as “well, they are just stupid.. if only we could explain it to them in the right way..” because they have a valid opinion. They’ve chosen to live a certain way, and privacy is not a priority to them.

Re:Yes (4, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986463)

âoewell, they are just stupid.. if only we could explain it to them in the right way..â because they have a valid opinion. Theyâ(TM)ve chosen to live a certain way, and privacy is not a priority to them.

We can tell this is not the case, because when people get bitten by the obvious consequences of surrendering their privacy, they complain. If they knew and expected those consequences, they wouldn't be bothered when it happens. And yet we still hear stupid people complain about how facebook shared their data in a way they don't approve of. Tough shit, that's what you signed up for.

Re:Yes (2)

Anrego (830717) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986887)

And yet we still hear stupid people complain about how facebook shared their data in a way they don't approve of.

I actually don't see this happening. Not saying it hasn't, I've just never really seen it. Occasionally I'll hear one of my non-geek friends state "ya know, facebook owns everything you put there" .. but it's stated in more of an "interesting trivia" manner than a outraged "stop using facebook" manner (for the record, I'm the stubourn friend without the facebook/twitter/etc in my social circles).

The only people I hear complaining about facebooks no-privacy privacy policy are like minded geeks who know better and as you said, if they sign up anyway, they have no right to complain.

Re:Yes (1)

prestonmichaelh (773400) | more than 2 years ago | (#38987257)

I don't equate it to stupidity. It's not that people don't understand the implications of this. It's made fairly clear.. âoeevery site you visit will be known to usâ. It comes down to having different priorities.

The Slashdot crowd is privacy sensitive. It's important to us. The fact that it's not important to others is something we have to learn to accept. We canâ(TM)t always write it off as âoewell, they are just stupid.. if only we could explain it to them in the right way..â because they have a valid opinion. They've chosen to live a certain way, and privacy is not a priority to them.

I agree that it is just a matter of opinion. Honestly, if it is completely open and upfront like this, I really have no issue with it. I am actually considering trying to sign up for this, and I have a BS in Computer Science, work in IT, and visit Slashdot daily. I honestly don't really see what all the concern is about.

It wouldn't be very hard to get most details of my life from just a little browsing habits, and really, I can't think of anything I would care about other people knowing. If anyone asked me straight up, I would probably tell them. I am completely fine with people that want to keep there privacy and don't even see it as "they have something to hide", but I honestly don't care. I generally assume that anything other than thoughts that are only in my head are known to others and my thoughts can probably often be inferred. Maybe I am just too simple minded though.

If I have a choice to keep things private if needed (maybe I need to overthrow a king or something), then I am cool with companies "invading" my privacy. There just needs to be an opt-out, even if that opt-out is "don't use the service (read Facebook)".

Re:Yes (4, Interesting)

gparent (1242548) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986455)

The vast majority of people might just do less weirdo shit on their computer than you? What exactly is wrong with Google having access to my entire search history with my consent? Microsoft Windows has a similar feature where you can turn on performance counters in the OS and aggregated data is then used to make features shaped more like the user wants them.

It's not like they're saying "We'll read your entire search history, tough shit", they're offering people to willingly give them that information, and for the bother, they are compensated with a minor bonus.

Re:Yes (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#38987083)

It's not like they're saying "We'll read your entire search history, tough shit"

Which, they're probably doing anyway.

Even if they don't admit it, I'm pretty sure Google already has this if you're searching while logged in.

Their latest changes to their privacy policy really only amounts to "we can (and do) already do this, we're just making it clear to you".

Re:Yes (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986977)

The vast majority of people are too stupid to see the difference. That doesn't mean there's not an important difference. If the vast majority of people jumped off a cliff, would you too?

No, but that doesn't mean that I could stop them from jumping off a cliff with a well reasoned argument about why it's a stupid thing to do.

That 'vast majority' simply aren't going to listen to you. They're simply not interested.

Re:Yes (3, Interesting)

eln (21727) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986199)

I'm surprised they even bothered to offer the gift cards. Most people will gladly give up their privacy for free.

Re:Yes (3, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986205)

I'd happily do this. Of course, I don't actually use Chrome, so after the extension was installed they wouldn't get very much useful information...

Re:Yes (2)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986921)

This is what I was thinking. Install the tool bar on a virtual machine version of chrome. Maybe even bring it up from time to time and browse some crazy mix of sites to screw around with their data. Do they send you the gift cart as soon as you install it? $25 may be a case of marshmallow fluff, but it's also 2 or 3 paperback books, or many other useful things. Sign up under 4 different aliases and you could probably easily have yourself $100.

Re:Yes (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986351)

The vast majority of people out there probably rank "letting a company mine my browsing history" somewhere around "filling out a survey".

That explains the popularity of Chrome.
I seriously don't get this story. What does the extension do that Chrome doesn't do by default?

Re:Yes (1)

japhmi (225606) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986817)

How about "letting a company mine my browsing history for a browser that I don't use."

Sounds like $25 for installing something and letting it sit on my HD while I continue to use Firefox.

Re:Yes (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#38987215)

The vast majority of people out there probably rank "letting a company mine my browsing history" somewhere around "filling out a survey".

I've actually stated the bit about the survey elsewhere in the thread. Okay, I'm part of the vast majority who doesn't value privacy the way Slashdotters typically do.

So please educate me, I want to know: They're being up-front about what they want to do with it and they're compensating the volunteers for it. They can use another browser if they don't want Google to see something. So why is this worse than filling out a survey?

No, I'm not setting up an argument, no I'm not defending them, I really just don't understand the problem here. If Google had, for example, turned this on by default, or if the tracking method wasn't limited to using the Chrome browser, or if there were details they weren't being up front about, I'd get it. I'm not defensive, just baffled.

Of course (1)

masternerdguy (2468142) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986201)

The vast majority of people don't know or care about the technologies they use in their daily lives.

Re:Of course (2)

forkfail (228161) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986931)

Funny thing, though - a lot of people would whip out the shotgun if someone was peeping in their window or reading their private journals.

Re:Of course (1)

Lithdren (605362) | more than 2 years ago | (#38987217)

Unless they invited said people to look in said window or read said journal, as is happening here.

Its not like they're saying "We're doing this, and you cant stop us!" They're saying "If you're willing, we'll give this in exchange." Weather you find that exchange fair is one thing to debate, but dont try to drive the discussion to "spying" when they asked first, and give you something in return for the information.

Maybe Google can get my age and gender right (4, Funny)

sandytaru (1158959) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986235)

Since they got it so very wrong, wrong, wrong on the first go round.

Re:Maybe Google can get my age and gender right (5, Funny)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986573)

Sorry, I trust google more than some random person on the web. How do you know you're not wrong about your age and gender?

I think you should accept the fact that you're not what you think you are.

Re:Maybe Google can get my age and gender right (1, Funny)

0racle (667029) | more than 2 years ago | (#38987245)

There are, in fact, girls on the Internet.

No, there are not.

If they tracked me via Chrome... (2)

Rockoon (1252108) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986249)

If Google tracked me via Chrome, they would see 100% of all websites visited are *.netflix.com/*

Yeah, thats all I use Chrome for.

Re:If they tracked me via Chrome... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986789)

They are going to pay me for playing Angry Birds (the only thing I use Chrome for!)

Free $25? Sure. (1)

JustAnotherIdiot (1980292) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986267)

Oh, but I only use chrome maybe once a blue moon. But hey, that's still data! Pay up!

Who buys marshmallow fluff? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986275)

You could buy 24 bottles of beer!

Sounds like a pretty good deal to me.

Re:Who buys marshmallow fluff? (2)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986535)

That's less than one beer every 15 days for having google spy on you.

Free Money? (1)

tburke261 (981079) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986297)

What's to stop me from loading this up on a spare machine I never use (and has no personal data) and letting it 'run' for a year?

Re:Free Money? (1)

Jeng (926980) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986879)

Even better, run it in a virtual machine.

What if I don't surf with Chrome? (1)

HockeyPuck (141947) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986331)

Would I still get the $25 if I installed it and then did the majority of my surfing with IE/FF and occasionally surfed with Chrome, as there's probably some Terms of Service that requires a minimal amount of usage.

I wonder how much money I could make if I created hundreds of VMs and installed the plugin in those...

Re:What if I don't surf with Chrome? (1)

masternerdguy (2468142) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986411)

That reminds me of how it used to be ok to make bots that automatically clicked your own pay to click ads.

Re:What if I don't surf with Chrome? (2)

forkfail (228161) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986995)

Already way ahead of your.

I've got a pool contractor who will take credit at Amazon, and I'm buying enough Marshmallow Fluff to fill my new pool and go swimming in it.

It's not just the Amazon Gift Cards... (2)

Sedated2000 (1716470) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986335)

They also pay you $100 up front and $20 dollars a month for up to a year. For a low income family that could nearly cover the cost of their broadband internet.

Re:It's not just the Amazon Gift Cards... (1)

ticker47 (954580) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986493)

That's only if you choose to use the physical monitoring device. The amazon gift cards are for only using the Chrome browser extension.

Really? (1)

KingSkippus (799657) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986593)

Where did you get that information? I don't see any reference to payments other than the aforementioned up to $25 in Amazon.com gift cards anywhere.

Re:Really? (1)

Sedated2000 (1716470) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986673)

Check out the screenshotshere [arstechnica.com] . There is another part of the program that is a lot more lucrative, based on a router.

the Dutch paid $24 for Manhattan (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986349)

Why do I suspect that that historical event came up during the Google marketing meeting (probably near the end)?

We're is a recession here. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986353)

Would you rather suck a cock that went in goatse's ass instead for $25? Or work in a foxconn factory to make ithings? Your privacy is worthless, deal with it. We know you look at lemon party and you enjoy it.

You're looking at this wrong (1)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986361)

You're looking at this wrong; it's not that privacy is valued too cheaply- it's that Marshmallow fluff 6-packs are valued too highly.

Re:You're looking at this wrong (2)

forkfail (228161) | more than 2 years ago | (#38987051)

Sadly, though, the $25 is not enought to buy even a gallon of the rich, creamy, life giving ambrosia known as Tuscan Whole Milk, 1 Gallon, 128 fl oz [amazon.com] .

That would be a different story altogether.

Alternate headline (2)

sootman (158191) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986367)

"Online Privacy Worth More Than Marshmallow Fluff Five Pack"

See? It's a glass half full/half-empty kinda thing.

Great idea (5, Funny)

Megahard (1053072) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986369)

I'm installing it on the wife's computer.

Re:Great idea (4, Funny)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986507)

Install it on the library computer.

Re:Great idea (1)

lister king of smeg (2481612) | more than 2 years ago | (#38987055)

mod parent up +1 funny

Re:Great idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986739)

I've already been tracking your wife's computer usage, screenshots, webcam, etc - for years.

Re:Great idea (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38987159)

I've already been tracking your wife's computer usage, screenshots, webcam, etc - for years.

And she seems to enjoy watching midgets shit on old people.

Improve Services, or Something More (1)

jpwilliams (2430348) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986417)

With this data, they could make a major run at comScore, Nielsen, and other companies that provide demographic data for a fee. I wonder if there privacy policy addresses that. If they choose to compete, they could wipe out competitors on pure numbers alone, I imagine.

Sounds like a research project... (1)

Guidii (686867) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986431)

Is this any different than offering undergrads $20 to participate in a psychology experiment? What's the story here?

beach head (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986439)

this is just their "beach head", wave one. this will allow time for all the virus/malware programs to add support to not flag this program. the second wave will be when this is built into their chrome browser. the third wave is when you need to download this to get to your google account content.

Bullshit (2)

dcollins (135727) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986449)

"The money isn't much as a pure trade for privacy, but I suspect that many people would like to have their preferences be among those that shape how Google — and other companies, too — actually organize their interfaces."

Here's my proposed experiment. Make 2 offers:
(A) We track what you watch for a year, we will NOT use it to shape any interfaces, you get $25.
(B) We track what you watch for a year, we WILL use it to shape any interfaces, you get $0.

My bet would be that the ratio of acceptances would be at least 10:1 in favor of (A).
I only see "being tracked is great as long as I get more targeted advertising" as a claim from Slashdotters.

Quoting the submission: (1)

Feyshtey (1523799) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986467)

Note that the tracking can be selectively turned off by the user.

Prove it.

Re:Quoting the submission: (1)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986761)

Yeah... and google will know what you're doing during the time the tracking is turned off too! We all will.

Re:Quoting the submission: (1)

forkfail (228161) | more than 2 years ago | (#38987089)

How do you know this isn't beta testing for a new Chrome feature? ;)

Marshmallow Fluff? (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986471)

I wasn't really sure what this stuff was so had to look it up.

Apparently one jar of the stuff is a lifetime's supply. So having your privacy being worth 5 whole lifetimes is a pretty good valuation.

Re:Marshmallow Fluff? (1)

JustAnotherIdiot (1980292) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986683)

If you click the links, you'll quickly find out that it's a 1 pound tub of marshmallow cream.
http://www.amazon.com/Fluff-Marshmallow-Unit-Pack/dp/B001686590/ref=sr_1_1?s=grocery&ie=UTF8&qid=1328792229&sr=1-1 [amazon.com]
I'd hardly call that a lifetime supply.

Re:Marshmallow Fluff? (1)

Darinbob (1142669) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986915)

I'm not so sure. I can stand one teaspoon a year. How many years is that worth?

Re:Marshmallow Fluff? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38987135)

One man's lifetime supply is another man's brunch.

not good data (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986503)

Chances are the users willing to do this for $25 are young and broke, this could end up biasing the results.

Re:not good data (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986621)

and use Chrome. That in and of itself biases the result.

I hate this trend! (5, Interesting)

governorx (524152) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986567)

Dear Google,

I am not the average user. I am a technical user that is intelligent and values privacy. Please make me a google that gives relevant technical results for my queries instead of the hodge-podge that the average illiterate user can understand and click-through. xxx-answer or some similar should never be a result.

The results from the 25$ incentive will most likely be skewed in an unfavourable direction when compared to the search results I am looking for - due to the demographic (which I foresee) partaking in this research experiment. Please reconsider.

Signed: The guy that is always finding google harder and harder to use.

PS - Give me the option to search using an older algorithm.

Wrong angle... (1)

Umuri (897961) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986583)

That will a fetch handle of rum or a 1.5 liter of vodka.

Most people will happily surrender tons of personal, and incriminating, information about themselves when offered or plied with aforementioned liquid.

So it's same old same old, just now with no hangover!

Steven Colbert said it best with 'Public-see' (1)

sohmc (595388) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986619)

People are willing to give up their privacy if it saves them 10% at Petco.

What's to stop you from taking their money and only using Chrome to visit a few websites?

This is Great! (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986637)

I would never do it, but at least it starts to give people an idea of how much google values their privacy and they can then ask themselves if their privacy is really more valuable than what google is able to get out of it.

I would like to propose the reverse program - I pay google $5 month in return for never, ever being tracked at all no matter how many of their services I use. Not the typical BS of still tracking but not actually "using" the collected info, I mean the people who pay get their info logged to /dev/null instead of google's permanent databases.

5 bucks up front for no privacy? Get real. (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986675)

You don't even get 25.00 up front, you get 5 dollars, and then every 3 months, they give you 5 more dollars. Anyone who signs up for this is my enemy.

Again with the headlines (1)

archen (447353) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986695)

What exactly does Marshmallow Fluff has to do with this? Is this some granular currency measurement that relates to libraries of congress? This is also based off of arbitrary pricing off Amazon. There is a LOT of stuff worth less than a Used Ethernet Cable [amazon.com] by that measure. What's the sample size anyway? If 2 people do this, is that considered "enough"? I can get two people to sacrifice their privacy for free by sticking a pop up window in front of them saying "naked chicks if you click here". This is non news really, and you can get people to sacrifice their privacy for far less than $20, especially if you give it to them in gas rebates.

Where's the drama? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986715)

The money isn't much as a pure trade for privacy, but I suspect that many people would like to have their preferences be among those that shape how Google â" and other companies, too â" actually organize their interfaces. (Note that the tracking can be selectively turned off by the user.)

They're being told up front what is being offered in exchange for what. It's a browser extension so they could just flip to Opera or FireFox if they don't want Google to see. Some people might be enticed by Google improving their products with that information, and they get paid for it.

What's the drama? What does this even have to do with privacy? Are we going to complain about being paid to take a survey, too?

Re:Where's the drama? (1)

Beelzebud (1361137) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986747)

Then by all means sign up for it.

Re:Where's the drama? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986993)

I choose not to and.. .ack... ack... I'm being forced to do it against my will! Quick! Hit the moderate button!!

Re:Where's the drama? (1)

forkfail (228161) | more than 2 years ago | (#38987171)

I'm thinking that the primary source of the outrage is the fact that now there's been a dollar value assigned to your privacy, and that value is $25.00 at Amazon (which probably costs Google $20, because Amazon makes money off of shipping and such...)

I'm sure there's other reasons that are a bit more meta when it comes to privacy and how it's treated as well.

Marshmallow Fluff 6-pack (1)

Higgins_Boson (2569429) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986737)

I've got a marshmallow fluff six-pack.

Sadly and admittedly, it's only because I eat so many fluffernutters every week.

Someone... please... help me... *sob*

so the new google service will be (1)

P-niiice (1703362) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986781)

so the new google service will be a.. torrent site that lets you watch porn tube and download nzbs while.. looking for android roms in webcam rooms?

Eww (1)

Jethro (14165) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986787)

Frankly I'm a bit more shocked at how much marshmallow fluff costs. Whatever the hell marshmallow fluff is...

As long as they accept others value their privacy (2)

91degrees (207121) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986801)

It's a pretty subjective thing. I'll willingly tell anyone who really wants to know all sorts of things that others consider private (the colour of my underwear, various sex related things), but feel a little protective of all sorts of things. I'll rarely share my Slashdot username with anyone who knows my real name and vice versa.

I'll readily accept that some people really genuinely don't care at all about being spied on, and as long as they accept that I do, I have no quarrel with these people. I also understand that some people object vigorously to what I might consider some fairly minor infringements. I respect that as well, and feel that there should be no collection of personal information without a very compelling reason.

However, if people willingly give it away, and the deal can be clearly considered an honest and open agreement then who are we to tell them they shouldn't.

Marshmallow Fluff? All it takes is chocolate (2)

oneiros27 (46144) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986807)

Am I the only one who remembers the study that found people would give up their passwords for a chocolate bar?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3639679.stm [bbc.co.uk]

(and that a good percentage didn't even need the chocolate)

let the search giant track every website (1)

tokul (682258) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986827)

Like google analytics and adwords don't give them enough coverage and they need more.

Loaded Headline (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38986849)

How is this any different than those Neilson Ratings trackers people carry around with them? What some privacy wonks don't seem to understand is your right to privacy is just that. You have a right to it, but it's yours to give away (or sell as in this case). Not everyone wants to wear tinfoil hats. Not everyone wants to sit in social isolation from the rest of the world, but yes you should have a right to do so if that's what you want. You might not understand people might not want that, but you're wasting their time convincing them otherwise.

You may think people are getting bribed into trading their privacy here. On the contrary, some people simply don't care. And yes they do understand the massive evil corporate overlord spying implications, they still don't care. Your job isn't to change their minds.

Yes I appreciate the irony that this is being posted as AC.

I'd pay that yearly for Google to guarantee... (1)

eepok (545733) | more than 2 years ago | (#38986923)

I'd pay that cost yearly for Google to guarantee to not track my registered identities (work, personal). If that's the price they put on it, sure!

So our privacy is worth 2 cents a day? (1)

na1led (1030470) | more than 2 years ago | (#38987109)

Amazon is going to pay me 2 cents a day to know my private business. Gee what bargain!

We appreciate and are overwhelmed by your interest (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38987145)

"We appreciate and are overwhelmed by your interest at the moment. Please come back later for more details."

I'm underwhelmed that they're overwhelmed. This is /.

25 Bucks? (1)

RPGillespie (2478442) | more than 2 years ago | (#38987193)

Sign me up, I'll just start using firefox
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>