NOT ENOUGH.
this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2026
403 points (98.8% liked)
Technology
79486 readers
5922 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I was recently sitting with a bunch of workers in a welding shop where I was having some work done, and we were discussing a particular piece of unusual equipment with a very unusual variation. In other words, not something that would normally come up in a normal conversation.
One of the guys gets a notification, looks at his phone, and there is an ad for this weird piece of equipment that I'd never even heard of before. He gasped, and held his phone up for the rest to see. Apparently, this had happened before, and they'd all been discussing it. Now it happened again.
They're spying on us every minute. I saw the proof that day.
Always the easy way out, littery a drop in the ocean, with zero actual consequences, these companies drink champagne and celebrate every time they receive this kind of a verdict
All these companies are spying on you. You cannot convince me otherwise. Too many suspect conversations have led to targeted ads and the like that make no sense UNLESS they’re always listening.
This settlement pretty much confirms it for me. If they did nothing wrong, why didn't they go all the way with it to prove these devices are not spying on you?
First time in years going to the optometrist. Next morning after making the appointment, I have glass advertising on my phone. Fuuuuccckkkk these guys!
So Apple paid for the same thing a couple of years ago, and Google pays for it now. Two of the biggest "phone/os" companies do spy on people and now it's a confirmed fact.
I was originally part of this class-action. When the lawyers decided to settle I refused to accept the settlement, purely because Google admitted no fault and also required us to agree that we couldn't ever sue over the issue again in the future even if new evidence came to light. The dollar amount they offered wasn't tiny (it wasn't large by any means either), but I felt it was in no way a valid amount for what was being claimed. Not to mention the lawyers were taking close to or maybe more than half of the settlement money, which I find offensive considering they decided to settle the case and allow Google to wash their hands of the matter. Luckily I reserved my right to sue again in the future, but I'd either have to go at it alone or try to form a new class-action suite. I'm still incredibly disappointed that the lawyers handling the case backed down and took the settlement, I would have rather lost the case and discovered the truth than take a pittance and let Google off.
Edit: I almost forgot, the most aggregious requirement to the settlement was the non-disclosure agreement that you had to accept which meant you couldn't say anything at all about the settlement or the case if you took the money. It also appeared to me that they were trying to apply the non-disclosure even if you didn't take the settlement, which I don't know how you can be held to a NDA if you haven't signed and accepted the NDA. The whole thing smelled of bullshit to me.
One would almost start to think the lawyers were out for the settlement money...
Oh, come on, not all lawyers are vultures who exploit the law for their own financial gain. Some of them are retired, or dead.
It was definitely the path that required the least amount of effort from them and they happily pocketed near 50% of the settlement.
It's a shameless plutocracy at this point. The mask is off, no one is pretending to follow the rules.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Settlements should not be allowed in cases where its companies versus people.
They should be a de jure admission of guilt, is what they should be
Yeah, why settle? They should stop spying on us and we all know that.
You'd rather have them drag it out in court until the person can't afford to fight the case?
I think we would all prefer if the US would stop pretending the 6th amendment didn't exist and if trials could be carried out without endless delays.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(9 replies)
Google really needs to be shut down.
Currently in the process of migrating out of their system now. I’ll keep my account and gmail addresses for rubbish and using Earth or Maps when necessary but I’ve moved all the important stuff to Proton and I’ve stopped using Chrome.
68M won't do shit but give a slap on the wrist. Make the amount in the billions and they'll learn.
Make it more than they earned, plus a large percentage, and factor in how likely they were to get caught. At the size of Google, companies are essentially just big statistics machines, doing risk/reward calculations. Imagine you have an illegal business opportunity that could make you $100M in profit per week. Your risk of getting caught is estimated at ~25% per week. And your fine for getting caught is $150M per week. Even though the fine is higher than the expected profit, your net profit per week averages out to +$62.5M.
That is the original $100M, minus the $150M*25% (or $37.5M total). Yes, some weeks will be a loss. But if the numbers stay consistent, you’ll make more in the long term simply due to the fact that you don’t get caught every time. As long as you manage to avoid getting caught for at least two weeks, (which shouldn’t be difficult, considering the 25% estimated chance of regulators catching on) you’ve already made enough money to cover the fine.
Of course the company will do the illegal thing, because the math says it will likely be profitable. And even if they’re caught, it was just the price of doing business. As long as they made more than the expected fine over the given time period, they have profited.
Oh, yeah. That $3.07 settlement covers the damages with a little to spare. Now I can put a down-payment on some French fries.
It's less about making you whole and more about hurting the corporation. Although that's a drop in the bucket for Alphabet. "Cost of doing business".
Sounds like neither
It's less like "hurting" the corporation, and more like the government &/or legal system claiming their share in the proceeds of the crime... essentially racketeering.
load more comments
(1 replies)
They had to pay pennies while hoarding in a huge profit. Well, that will teach them!
Google did not admit wrongdoing in the settlement of the class-action case
A settlement is an admission no matter what Google says. Headline should read, "Google Admits To Using Its Consumer Hardware To Spy On Users."
I wonder why these companies wouldn't want to go to discovery and further with such cases. Surely to have a clear, clean name they'd take these to the end showing they were not liable. It's a read between the lines scenario, they're afraid of discovery for some reason so don't want it to happen.
It's always not an admission. Sometimes it's more expensive to win a case than to pay out.
Not saying that's what happened here, but a settlement doesn't always mean the one who settled is at fault.
Google doesn't care about that kind of money, they care about the discovery process.
A settlement is an admission
I mean it's an "admission" that it would cost more money to fight in court than it would to make it go away. Or that they would likely lose, regardless of whether they're guilty of anything. Other than that, no.
Per user?
That would be a fitting fine, wouldn't it?
68 million is probably a rounding error in their yearly lawyer budget alone.
Buying themselves free, how convenient.
In the past gods absolved kings. Nowadays money absolves capitalists. Very convenient indeed.
The "In God We Trust" bit on our money leaves out that money is God now.
load more comments
(1 replies)
That is a paltry amount, whomever the class action lawyers are did a shit job, and should've taken it to a jury.
No doubt they figured a judge would overturn any large judgement though, the judges being so thoroughly captured by the rich, especially appeals courts and higher.
$68 million is chump change to Google.
This is like me getting a speeding fine for $1.
This is the cost of doing business for them.
Google spying on its users? To push ads? Preposterous!
68 m&m's? hey big spender!
No, 68Ms, that's only 34 M&Ms
My understanding of false accepts is when it think it hears the wake word and starts recording.
Sometimes it happens when I watch TV or rarely in a normal conversation.
If this happens, what else would you expect to happen? It's going to behave exactly as if you woke it.
Stop talking if you notice, but unless you expect a perfect wake word rate with zero mistakes there's nothing that can be done.
Now, if Google is intentionally waking it when it knows it's not the right word that's another matter entirely.
Edit: I'd refuse to accept any wrong doikg as well if it's legit false accepts. But if it was intentional, this isn't even a slap on the wrist for them.
Yeah them and every other tech company that has apps. The punishments should be much higher for companies who violate people's rights
view more: next ›