Virtual Assistant, for Free
Would you like a
(virtual) personal assistant? Not as a status symbol (obviously not, it’s
virtual, who would see it?), but as someone that reminds you of that next item
on your to-do list or how bad traffic is on the route you will be taking. Sure,
you could search for all that info online, but what if the phone just “knows”
what is relevant to you and shows it before
you even ask? For free?
Mathew Ingram
talked about such a service, Google Now, in his article
titled “The Google Now dilemma: Yes, it’s kind of creepy — but it’s also
incredibly useful”. So how does Google Now work?
“…it just collects a broad range of
information about you and your activity from your search history, your
calendar, your email, web services you are signed into, and so on, and then
uses that to show you information that is relevant to what you are doing or
where you happen to be.”
It does all this
only if you give permission for the feature to activate: and unlike Facebook,
the default setting is No. So what are some of the things it could do for you?
A couple of examples would help understand:
1) Using your mail or calendar, it figures
out your next appointment. Using GPS, it knows where you are. Add Google Maps
into the equation, and it knows what route you could take to get to that
appointment. Combining all that with traffic details, and it can suggest you
start earlier than planned!
2) Using the booking details of your flight
(in your mailbox), it internally queries about flight timings and tells you
that your flight just got delayed by an hour.
3) The GPS info says you are in a new city;
so it pops up the list of tourist spots that you might want to visit. Along
with the weather forecast.
Now obviously
all this means Google is accessing a lot of your personal data. That, of
course, raises concerns about misuse:
“Are there ways Google could use this
information that I might not like? Of course there are. But I trust that Google
is aware enough of the dangers — both legal and commercial — of engaging in
that kind of behavior that they will avoid it.”
So Ingram’s
assessment about the privacy v/s utility tradeoff?
“In return for providing some anonymized
data and behavior patterns, I get access to a personalized assistant that is
not only more unobtrusive than any human version would be, but is also faster
and completely free. That’s a pretty good bargain.”
What’s your
take? Good bargain or is it the slippery slope to losing all privacy?
Comments
Post a Comment