But Apple also take around £20bn/yr from Google to make sure Google is their default search engine, according to the books Author. Google CGAF what it does with your data.
You do have a choice of default search, and have done for quite some time. I don’t use Google as default search, I do occasionally use the Google app. My default search is DuckDuckGo and has been for a number of years. I also use the OrNET Browser app, which has full VPN.
It's not so easy to be under the radar, but it's not too hard either
It's amazing isn't it - and I guess it's an integral part of enshittification* - the extent to which things that haven't been explicitly excluded will be used by some tech arsehole as a way to make more money. I'd guess the reason permission isn't needed for battery life is because nobody at Google thought that it would be used in that kind of way; so Uber saw it as a big opportunity.
TBH even if battery was a permission gated api, there would be some bollocks about 'we need this to provide you with a great service' and 99% of people would just say 'ok'.
Not to defend Uber, who rightfully earned the title of the 'worst brogrammers in SV'. But this might not have been as intentionally nefarious as it seems (as in load of tech bros sitting in a meeting room with a list of 'people most likely to anxiously accept a surge price rather than wait').
When you are at the kind of scale that Uber are (and have been at for a long time), you'll have lots of algorithms automatically trying to attempt to optimise for a variety of things. Theres lots of approaches to this, but one is to identitify cohorts (eg women, not that the algo knows the significance of this!), and then to conduct experiments offering different prices according to a variety of parameters (such as battery status).
The algo will be able to determine a 'scenario' (g=F && b < 10) where surge pricing is likely to be accepted and then roll that out over the wider network, then continue to test and evaluate.
I've over simplified for explanation, but hopefully it makes sense. There's a certain 'algorithmic banality' to all this, it doesnt require some gilet twirling villan. Once algorithmic dynamic pricing meets a databroking dragnet (Uber knows your phone contract, your marital status, everything you've ever put online and lots of other stuff it statistically infers), stuff like this will just emerge. It's not just about showing you adverts for the garden shed you already bought
So how do they know they are a lone female?
This is what people don't get about data collection and combination... lots of disparate data points can be used to assume things about you that you wouldn't expect. Remember the stories of Amazon guessing correctly women are pregnant before they know themselves? They'll be lots of that. But if you don't buy into that (because you still think that companies only know what you directly tell them) then there's the fact that both drivers and customers can state they prefer do deal with females... pretty easy to work things out from that:
Remember the stories of Amazon guessing correctly women are pregnant before they know themselves?
Actually it was Target.
The Target story was about a teen pregnancy, and AFAIK was not true. All hearsay plumped up into a story that has stuck around like an urban myth. The Amazon stories on the other hand are multiple and real.
The Target story was about a teen pregnancy, and AFAIK was not true.
Nope. The Target story was about them using customer purchasing data to know when their female customers were pregnant and send them special offers in their voucher books.
We've all heard of allegations of phones and smart speakers listening to our conversations, because people swear they haven't searched for something and all they did was talk to someone about the thing. However, the other person might have searched for it, and they know you met them and spent time at the same location.
When this happens it's fun to try and work out how they know - because smart phones and speakers definitely are not listening to you directly, this has been proven multiple times.
No, they are just listening for trigger phrases and will then snap into active listening. So they are _kinda_ listening to you all the time and, I'll bet with the right warrent, they could be listening actively all the time.
Interview with the author. Good listen.
We've all heard of allegations of phones and smart speakers listening to our conversations,
It's one of the many reason why the MOD and others get borderline hysterical about personal electronic devices.
PEDs are a leaky sieve of data and information, not only for what's contained in a single device but also the risk due to the proximity to other devices.
The exploitation we were educated on by nerds was based on hostile actors, imagine what the companies who own the tech can access after we've given them permission.
However, the other person might have searched for it, and they know you met them and spent time at the same location.
I personally don't see much difference between a speaker listening and a device tracking me and my acquaintances. It is all still invasive data.
From a mental health point of view, I also dislike the micro-targeting of adverts.
If you start worrying about something and google it, you are then bombarded by adverts all over the place, youtube, tv, podcasts, social media, news sites, its inescapable, even with ad blockers. You couldn't design a better system to give the most of the population anxiety.
I personally don't see much difference between a speaker listening and a device tracking me and my acquaintances. It is all still invasive data.
Sure. What did you agree to when you signed up to use the service, by the way?
Anyone who claims they read and understand all the small print in service agreements and contracts we are faced with in modern life, is just plain lying.
We depend on legislation and governance to protect us from unfair contracts and to protect our privacy, unfortunately with governments in the pockets of the tech bros, that just isn't happening any where near the required level.
Since companies were allowed to settle out of court...
I was on the verge of subscribing to Spotify Premium when I discovered that a growing proportion of their output is created using AI with vastly inferior covers of classics which clearly do nothing to contribute to the original artists. This may only be news to me but is another example of tech companies luring you into a promise of good things only to enshittify them to chase profit.
i uae spotify a lot and have seen precisely zero of these supposed ai musicians
i uae spotify a lot and have seen precisely zero of these supposed ai musicians
I imagine your playlists/music of choice is rather different to "manufactured pop" music or similar that the "kids" listen to so the fact you have seen zero is not really representative of the platform , perhaps mores telling of your listening habits 😀 - it has been very widely talked about in the music press.
I only managed two months of my TNT subscription, all the CX racing in the world couldn't make up for how lengthy and intrusive the adverts were mid-race, I almost just sacked it off on principle.
Oh, and I'm pretty sure Alexa was serving us up some AI Christmas cover version slop this morning, even by cover version standards it was just too weirdly sort of generic and soulless.
don't use uber alexa google or amazon is a large part of the answer along with rejecting all cookies
I only managed two months of my TNT subscription, all the CX racing in the world couldn't make up for how lengthy and intrusive the adverts were mid-race, I almost just sacked it off on principle.
You managed 1 month more than I did.
i uae spotify a lot and have seen precisely zero of these supposed ai musicians
The last track I noticed was Ashes to Ashes by David Bowie so not the manufactured teen pop referred to above. It was vastly inferior to the original
Smart devices, doesn't really matter....as a non-expert it seems that what our phones share to other apps and our service providers gets sold on, and with the benefit of some unique identifiers, people who want to can trace all sorts of goings on. This was a few years ago, but I'm not sure things will have improved....
And what are you sharing from your sessions through strava or polar
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/12/19/opinion/location-tracking-cell-phone.html
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-42853072
https://theweek.com/94878/running-app-polar-flow-exposes-locations-of-spies-and-military-personnel
Ironically Amazon was highlighted for their dodgy practices, guess which retailler was top when I searched for his book?
Well of course it was, not really ironic, it’s not just Amazon sells on its own portal, plenty of booksellers all over the world do, so hardly surprising.
i uae spotify a lot and have seen precisely zero of these supposed ai musicians
That’s the point - they are very good at masking the fact that they’re a construct; Drake’s huge sales are made up of a load of AI bots, and recently an American country band that was selling millions of downloads turned out to be bogus. Just because you can’t see them, doesn’t mean they aren’t there!
i uae spotify a lot and have seen precisely zero of these supposed ai musicians
TJ, I would kindly suggest that you're "using" Spotify, but not actually listening perhaps?
Or you have a very specific playlist of artists and never stray.
I went back to (lossless ha) Spotify a couple months ago, and once a playlist finished, Spotify kept going with AI slop. There is no way out, suddenly you realise that the ongoing play is just middle of the road dross that is just garbage, all filler, no killer.
Back on tidal and they're better.
But ultimately, enshittification (my autocorrect is unaware which is good) is the human race being too lazy, and letting computer algos dictate what we should read, think, respond etc. We all have to be a bit more engaged, and only curate feeds that are real, actual people.
Don't let your IG or Tiktok just send you random sh1t, make sure you kick that to the kerb. We have to work at this, we can't let the Tuesdays running meta and X and socials hijack our frontal lobes...
Yet some on this very forum laugh at you when you try to maintain online privacy. We're well into Find Out territory here
Of course they do. The internet is full of corporate shills/defenders. They are not going to bite the hand that feeds!
susepic
nope. I know every tune thars played. i wonder if the fact I haveit on 12hrs or more a day playing specific playlist means it has more to work with so srerves up less ai slop? i would notice instantly if it did
Just because you can’t see them, doesn’t mean they aren’t there!
this is Spotify being gamed by third parties - very little of your subscription (or ad revenue if you're a free user) finds its way to the musicians you listen to as it is. Although theres a mechanism for artists to be paid by the number of streams its doesn't mean your subscription only/mostly goes to the music you listen to (a large portion goes to Joe Rogan whether you listen to him or not) But out of most people's ear shot people are uploading AI just so that hordes of bots can listen to them so people's your subs money (or your advertising budget) is going there rather than to the content creators that real people are actually listening to. It's not really the intention that you'd ever hear them but the bot activity makes it this slop seam popular and that can be how it finds its way into feeds more generally.
Away from Spotify - this years Christmas No 1 is interesting (In the context of the charts have hardly any relevance any more, at Christmas particularly). It's a song by Kylie that has only been released on Amazon so you can't hear in on Spotify or any other platform. Amazon only has about a 12% share of the streaming market in the uk. The way the single has reached the no 1 spot is amazon have included it in the mix any time Alexa users have asked for 'Christmas music' so it has for the most part been consumed passively rather than actively chosen
Amazon have managed to make one tune the most listened-to piece of music in the country, despite 88% of listening market not having access to it and despite those listeners that do not directly seeking to listen to it. They could just as easily do that without having Kylie in the equation.
I haveit on 12hrs or more a day playing specific playlist
Why not just buy that music if you are listening to it all the time - Why rent it?.
I've also noticed that a large proportion of the music it serves up is marked as "remastered" Is this another way of Spotify renaging on the original artist's royalties?
Hotel Chocolat got bought by Mars a year or so ago. You can tell, too.
Does a subscription to Deezer avoid most of this type of enshitification from Spotify?
Was using the free version of Deezer without adverts for years, not anymore though!
nope. I know every tune thars played. i wonder if the fact I haveit on 12hrs or more a day playing specific playlist means it has more to work with so srerves up less ai slop? i would notice instantly if it did
There's no way you are sitting concentrating on each track in a 12 hour session. Spotify could be serving you up Frank Sidebottom sings Sinatra after a couple of hours and it'd go right over your head.
A whistleblower from Facebook revealed that when a teenage girl takes a photo on her forward facing camera, and then deletes it WITHOUT even posting it to any platform, Facebook knows, due to camera and storage permissions.
The assumption that they then make is that the girl is not happy with her appearance and starts feeding her with content and adverts related to beauty. Beyond sickening.
Amazon must be the worst example.
Prime used to be genuinely brilliant and useful. It was like being back in the glory days of CRC, except the delivery was practically guaranteed rather than a fingers crossed 90% chance it'd make it the next day. I'd ordered brake pads mid ride on a trip and they were delivered ready for the next day!
These days, despite the proliferation of Amazon warehouses, it seems like anything I search for is drop shipped from China. And if it's being drop shipped from China then I know I can get it cheaper on Ali-Express.
I'd cancel it but I pay for the 'entertainment' streaming subs, she's paid for the sports ones as she's the football fan and I'd feel a little guilt that she'd end up picking it up anyway.
Was using the free version of Deezer without adverts for years, not anymore though!
Any particular reason? I'm trialling for free at the moment but will need to decide whether to sign up for an annual subscription in January 🤔
Amazon is the pits, I've just had my annual trauma of buying something from them after getting gift card from work for Xmas - both things I bought would have been cheaper elsewhere too.
There's no way you are sitting concentrating on each track in a 12 hour session. Spotify could be serving you up Frank Sidebottom sings Sinatra after a couple of hours and it'd go right over your head.
totally wrong. I would know within seconds if there was a cover in there. Music is in the aspie part of my brain.
I do love it when folk try to tell me what I think and do.
There's no way you are sitting concentrating on each track in a 12 hour session. Spotify could be serving you up Frank Sidebottom sings Sinatra after a couple of hours and it'd go right over your head.
totally wrong. I would know within seconds if there was a cover in there. Music is in the aspie part of my brain.
I do love it when folk try to tell me what I think and do.
Doubt that very much especially with modern A.I. music generation, and if you still think otherwise then there is any number of music distribution services/record companies/DAW companies etc who would gladly offer you whatever you ask for so they could learn from your knowledge
Doubt all you want. Pretty much every song I have ever heard is in my brain permanently. Anything new registers within seconds. Aspie / Squirrel brain
I also meant would the fact spotify has a very large database of music I have played make it less likely to do this?
There's a bit of further enshittification of Strava detailed here.
To be honest, I don't have a problem with this one, while it's crap to take away something which was free, it's hardly a core bit of functionality.
Doubt all you want. Pretty much every song I have ever heard is in my brain permanently. Anything new registers within seconds. Aspie / Squirrel brain
Ah OK, that's well outside my frame of experience. Apologies.
I can't imagine that anyone is really that interested in those year in... summaries that are proliferating in all sorts of areas, (my bank sent me one!) that it would persuade them into a paid subscription.
Whether you get AI generated music on Spotify depends entirely on your listening habits and how you use it. If you search for say: Led Zep IV, that's what you'll get. Similarly lots of the old Decca classical recordings are pretty accurate reproductions. If you click on the "Sad Songs for a Rainy Day" or "lo-fi study" playlists you're going to get a lot of generated content.
I'd imagine TJ is more of the former and less of the latter.
