Frugaling

Save more, live well, give generously

Google is the Internet, Too Big to Fail

By 6 Comments

Share This:

google is the Internet, Too Big to Fail
Today, I woke up late, turned on my cellphone’s screen, and saw six new emails. I touched my fingerprint to the display, unlocked the phone, and briefly checked the messages. The contents and senders weren’t all that important though. What was striking, in this brief moment, was what I realized: Google is the Internet.

We’ve been living with the Internet as we know it for a couple decades now. Technology companies have come and gone, but the behemoths have grown to epic proportions. Amazon, Apple, Google, Facebook, and Microsoft have all become some of the largest companies in the world. But there’s a distinct difference between those other names and Google (or, Alphabet, as it’s now called).

The company launched on August 18, 2004 on the Nasdaq Stock Exchange as GOOG. The four-letter ticker symbol was met with great fanfare and excitement. People wanted in on this inventive company that was revolutionizing search, ads, and online video.

Founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, penned an IPO letter before the launch of the stock. They detailed how Google would be different from all the rest. Shareholders wouldn’t be given special privileges and likely wouldn’t benefit from dividends (any time soon). Their votes wouldn’t matter, as control of the company would steadfastly be kept with those in leadership. And the stock could trade wildly, as profits weren’t of utmost importance. Page and Brin wanted to, first and foremost, build great technologies.

This focus on innovation over quarterly profit gains was a winning combination. Alphabet now sits as the second largest market capitalization — to Apple — in America. From a scrappy startup to tens of thousands of employees and billions in profits, this has been a meteoric rise. But it hasn’t always been an easy ride.

Every step they took, they were met with scrutiny. Countless antitrust lawsuits suggest Google is being monopolistic or manipulating search results in their own favor. There are accusations that the company doesn’t respect user’s privacy, and can be easily compelled to hand over what they know to information-hungry government surveillance organizations. They’ve been sued for driving around neighborhoods scanning people’s wi-fi networks and locations, too.

Despite these challenges, their efforts don’t seem to be slowing. The company is creating new hubs around the country. Heck, just north of where I used to live in Colorado they’re building an extensive mini-campus for Googlers! Lest you think construction and new-hires are their only areas of growth, think again. Alphabet is branching into artificial intelligence in mind-bending ways, too. The team, aptly named Google Brain, is leading the charge to develop machines that think for themselves, learn, and become smarter. Right now, they’re capable of beating chess and go champions, moving objects more efficiently, and finding answers more rapidly. In time, it’s easy to see these technologies testing humans’ capabilities.

Amidst this rapid ascendency into artificial intelligence and machine learning is also a company with more earthly ambitions: storing the world’s data. When I get on my smartphone or computer, check my emails in Inbox by Gmail, type out a note about research in Google Drive, write new appointments in Google Calendar, conduct a Google Search to find the 2004 Founders’ IPO Letter for this article, check a stock price on Google Finance (GOOG is at $782 right now), and then wrap this all up by looking at photos from last week on Google Photos, Google is at the heart of it.

Importantly, amidst this growth is an important consideration: most everything is free. For the frugal people that follow my blog, I wouldn’t be surprised if you embraced this cost-effective solution as I do. If you use other technologies, you’ll be spending a small fortune in comparison to Google’s products. Want to get an Apple iPhone? It’ll cost you $600-800 off contract. Google’s smartphones cost about $300-400 less. Want to use a word processor? Microsoft’s will cost you about $10 per month for access. Google’s is free. Interested in getting a new laptop? A good Mac or PC could run you $800-1000. Google’s Chromebooks are about $200-500.

Yes, people will argue that you’re sacrificing your privacy. Some say, “If you use Google, you’re the product because they sell your data to advertisers!” While factually blurry, the gist is true. We’re exchanging this right to services (like the Google Doc I’m typing this into) for our data and privacy. Contrary to popular belief, no individual advertiser has my data; instead, Google aggregates the world’s data for its advertisers.

The cost savings that Google has handed to us has led to an information revolution. Schools can afford to reduce technology costs, while increasing students’ access to the Internet and productivity tools. If we want an answer to Pythagorean theorem, we just Google it. Want to take a free, online course? Google it and start watching the YouTube videos. The answers are there for the taking. Information has been democratized and it’s not because of a government agency or hardware manufacturer. It’s this one software and search company.

So here we are, with Google as the Internet. It’s everything we interact with and rely on to get things done; at least, for much of us. You might be thinking I love this progression, advancement, and technological prowess. But to be honest, I’m concerned.

Here we are in the 21st century, and one company seems to be leading everything. If there’s real competition, they either build their own competitor or swallow it up through acquisitions. People are getting rich — wealth is spilling into their coffers. Meanwhile, we place our trust, data, and reliance on this one company to handle it all.

We don’t get to vote on Google’s proceedings. They aren’t a government agency. What they choose to do with our data is their decision. And even if we used tools like Google Takeout to take everything off their servers, we’d probably end up using Google Search, YouTube, and other Google services to get through our day. We’re stuck with this Internet leader — for better and for possibly worse.

As much as I love the company and everything they’ve done to make the Internet more affordable to everyone, I wonder what it might look like if something failed, new leadership took over that wasn’t friendly to users, or if governments around the world started demanding even more from Google’s servers. Right now, Google is too big to fail. And just like banks, that’s a frightening proposition — no matter the cost savings.

Pay for privacy: Apple’s new marketing campaign against Google

By 5 Comments

Share This:

On August 31st, news companies started reporting on a nasty, targeted attack on a variety of celebrities. Of no real fault of their own, these (mostly) female celebrities woke up to a shock: nude and intimate photos and videos, which were leaked onto the Internet. The “anonymous” hacker seemed to specifically target some of the famous celeb’s Apple iCloud information.

See, Apple has long been a terrible cloud provider. Their iCloud service has frequently suffered security leaks, downtime, and inexplicable bugginess. The beleaguered service hasn’t ever gained traction. Unfortunately, without the cloud, Apple’s future revenue might eventually suffer.

The release of private, celebrity photos came at a terrible time — just two weeks before the new iPhone 6 and Apple Watch keynote by Tim Cook. Apple’s taciturn answer: this is not the fault of iCloud servers or our security. Well, if it was that simple, we could pack our bags and move on from this perverted mess. And as a shareholder, I’d love to!

Reality is far murkier here. As it turns out, there were weaknesses in Apple’s iCloud security, which allowed hackers to penetrate into the “Find My iPhone” portion of the website, and repeatedly guess passwords without any restrictions. Through a brute force application (guess-and-checks tons of passwords over and over again until it gets a winner), the accounts were compromised, illegally downloaded, and provided access to a wealth of explicit photos. Likewise, this determined hacker and/or collective aimed for simple security questions, which were easily guessable for public icons like Jennifer Lawrence. This ultimately allowed for a massive leak of data. While Apple claimed innocence, they quickly rectified security gaps and patched problem areas. The hack was rendered inert; albeit, the damage was already done.

As media consumers, we seem to gravitate towards one scandal or story, and then quickly drift to the next — barely remembering what was important in the first place. This quick consumption of news seems to reduce the real importance of important stories. Frankly, it’s yet another consequence of the 24-hour news cycle — it’s literally endless. Apple is relying on us to rapidly forget the iCloud hacks of 2014.

It was a recipe for disaster, but now Apple is manipulating the message for public gain and increased profit. The genius is mind-bending, and it starts with the distinction between privacy and security. By definition, privacy is the right to be left alone. Simple as that. If you’d like to search for strange Christmas ornaments privately, the assumption is that you’re not tracked, nor should you be concerned about others chiming in on that search. Security, on the other hand, is about being free from danger or threat. From the mall cop to the password on your email account, security attempts to protect us from external threats.Privacy and security can be overlapping concepts, where security is necessary for privacy. Without security, privacy quickly disappears.

The point is, privacy and security are different, and Apple is purposively confusing the two. By hacking the iCloud accounts of various celebrities, this mercenary crew showed wicked flaws in Apple’s “secure” platform.

The evil brillance at Apple has been a prolonged offensive on Google’s data-mining business. Tim Cook has repeatedly spoken about the privacy and security embedded in Apple’s products, along with their commitment to respecting individuals’ rights. Each time Cook has mentioned their push for privacy, it’s come with a dig against Google. In the preceding video, Cook lambastes competitors for tracking users, while emphasizing Apple’s age-old push to “try not to collect data.”

Even in the recent keynote address, Apple executives emphasized the privacy features every step of the way. With the recent introduction of payments via Apple Pay (hold an iPhone in front of a receiver to pay), the company said they wouldn’t monitor transactions — that they were between you, the merchant, and credit card company. If you didn’t know better, you might assume that Apple is the most private company in the world.

Apple is clearly trying to quickly evade and rebrand themselves as the last privacy conscious mega-cap company in the country. And if people don’t pay attention, it just might work. If you are a consumer and you hear about individual hackers, corporate espionage, and governmental spies, you’ll want the most private hardware system you can find. Unfortunately, it’ll cost you and arm and a leg (around $1000 for the Macbook Air), and may not even be more secure than other platforms.

Take the Google Chromebook, for instance. This computer costs about $200 to $300 depending on the model you choose. The computer automatically updates to the latest operating system, protects you from viruses and malware, has a verified secure boot (which prevents internal changes from the operating system by outside hackers), and lasts about 10-12 hours on a single charge. These are considered one of the most secure systems on the market today. Chromebooks are perfect for most everything, and they’re a real threat to Apple’s business model. To save all that money, you sacrifice a bit of privacy to Google’s servers, but none of the security.

That’s the problem: Google and their Chromebook line is a threat. Apple has a moment to quickly switch the media spin cycle to full blast, argue that they’re a privacy-focused company, and get you to pay about $800 more on a laptop than necessary.

Apple Pay More For Privacy

We live in a world where privacy and security are threatened in a multitude of ways — not least of which by capitalistic disinformation. From private hackers to the NSA, security is being attacked. And as security goes, so does privacy. But privacy should be a right; in fact, it’s a part of the Fourth Amendment. Privacy is a right afforded to us by our constitution, and one that we must continue to defend. We should never need to pay for privacy, as Apple would have us believe.

Best Of

Recent Posts

Follow