Dev.SN ♥ developers
Sections
Dev.SN
from the why-get-the-milk-for-free-when-you-can-buy-a-cow dept.
The Guardian has an article about the usage stats of apps and the Web on mobile devices.
The prediction that mobile web use would overtake apps has been disproved by data from analytics firm Flurry ... The idea that people will shift from using native apps on their smartphones to using HTML5 websites offering the same functionality hasn't played out ...
They don't say where that prediction came from, but I could have told them it was dubious years ago. For most users, apps are simply more convenient. I'd bet that a lot more Android and iOS users know how to find their app list than know how to find their Web bookmarks.
But personally I go to significant lengths to avoid apps that I think should just be websites instead. One reason is security; I don't want to be running someone else's code just so that I can read their text. But is my attitude correct? With web browsers having so much functionality these days, perhaps using a dedicated newspaper app with just the "full network access" permission would be less of a security risk than visiting that same newspaper's website using Firefox for Android, for example? Bear in mind the latter also has permissions for the camera, microphone, GPS, NFC, device accounts, 'run at startup', etc.
Also from the article:
For Google, the indifference of smartphone users to the mobile web in favour of apps presents a problem because in general it cannot follow users' activity inside apps ... The search company has begun an initiative offering links to in-app content for Android developers which it will be able to index.
Is avoiding Google another reason I should learn to love apps instead of the Web?
(Score: 2) by bucc5062 on Wednesday April 02 2014, @09:34PM
An honest question to this "and they want it to better control you"...how?
How can they/do they control me when collecting this data? Understand, I am in agreement that collecting data about me sucks and I do what I can to limit it, but in the end, control?
I don't get swayed by ad, I'm not suckered into buying what I don't want so I'm missing control. I fear the NSA and my government using information to put me in jail, but I would hope that is the difference between google/FB/whomever tracking my interests and the government.
Again, I do what I can to limit my public exposure knowing I have to balance convenience and privacy. Thoughts?
The more things change, the more they look the same
(Score: 2) by combatserver on Wednesday April 02 2014, @10:41PM
Your question would best be answered not by myself, but by available information. A Google search for "behavioral modification patents" is a good place to start. Please, don't take my word for it--look into this yourself, as only you can convince you. But, I'll throw you a couple links to start with (derived from aforementioned Google search).
http://www.google.com/patents/US20100297591 [google.com]
http://www.examiner.com/article/subliminal-behavio r-modification-through-tv-computer-described-us-pa tent [examiner.com]
Now, keep in mind that the easiest way to implant subliminal information through monitors is by not increasing the duration of images, but rather the frequency of those images being displayed. Google Glass uses OLED technology that has a refresh rate upwards of 100,000 frames-per-second. Handy, if you want to insert an image 10,000 times a second without the viewer realizing it.
Combine this all with software that constantly pushes new "commands" to the viewer, analyzes the result, alters the "commands", etc, etc. Real-time, self-correcting behavioral modification.
Here is an interesting document from Midlands Tech that discusses such behavioral modification in terms that can be easily converted into code for processing.
http://www.midlandstech.edu/sbs/pilkingtonl/218uni t6.htm [midlandstech.edu]
So, you see, you could be under the influence of such behavioral modification simply by viewing this response.
I hope I can change this later...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 02 2014, @11:09PM
(Score: 2) by bucc5062 on Thursday April 03 2014, @07:15AM
I remembered that the idea of subliminal ads had been attempted early on on the field of Movie/TV and was quickly rejected, with laws being put into effect [dev.soylentnews.org] to stop such action.
So the idea of Google pushing 10000 images a sec into my brain is not possible for two at least reasons,
1 - It would be quickly discovered and publicly renounced
2 - It would be in violation of the law.
3 - You'd have to be wearing Glass
I can accept that product placement, constant ad placement can potentially have an effect on people, but this is why we have adblock plus, no script and such. To combat that effect. I am sorry, but I cannot accept your position on this nor give into the FUD.
The more things change, the more they look the same