Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

How Nest and FitBit Might Spy On You For Cash

Posted by Soulskill on from the don't-let-them-take-your-analog-shoelaces dept.

Nerval's Lobster writes: "Forbes offers up a comforting little story about how Nest and FitBit are planning on turning user data in a multi-billion-dollar business. 'Smart-thermostat maker Nest Labs (which is being acquired by Google for $3.2 billion) has quietly built a side business managing the energy consumption of a slice of its customers on behalf of electric companies,' reads the article. 'In wearables, health tracker Fitbit is selling companies the tracking bracelets and analytics services to better manage their health care budgets, and its rival Jawbone may be preparing to do the same.' As many a wit has said over the years: If you're not paying, you're the product. But if Forbes is right, wearable-electronics companies may have discovered a sweeter deal: paying customers on one side, and companies paying for those customers' data on the other. Will most consumers actually care, though?"

19 of 93 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Nobody cares by Narcocide · · Score: 2

    Who are you?

  2. Re:Nobody cares by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Funny

    You know whats creepy? People trying to tell me that other creepy people aren't really creepy because other creepy people really are creepy.

    It's creepy all the way down.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  3. Re:Nobody cares by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 2, Informative

    Good question seeing how there are image management companies that will do precisely what this person has done on behalf of companies with image problems such as Google.

  4. Depends on if it is in aggregate. by captaindomon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Will they care? It all depends on the data being shared is in aggregate. I don't care if people know that the average person in my city walks a thousand steps a day, and that still has a lot of value for health care companies, and I'm happy to contribute to that. I *DO* care if they know the details about me *individually*. There is a big difference.

    --
    Just because I can hook a shark from a boat, I do no offer to wrestle it in the water.
    1. Re:Depends on if it is in aggregate. by sjames · · Score: 2

      I don't trust any device that insists on reporting to 'the cloud' rather than to a machine of my choosing. Even if it says it only reports to the machine of my choosing, I don't really trust that it doesn't also report to 'the cloud'.

      The cloud has no legitimate need to know. That's why my 'smart tv' is a laptop loaded with Linux connected to a not so smart TV.

    2. Re:Depends on if it is in aggregate. by jordan_robot · · Score: 2

      I bet that same TOS also states that FitBit has the right to change the TOS at any time.

  5. FitBit and Nest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Two companies whose products I will never, ever buy.

  6. Will it matter? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You start with the ones who don't care, give them discounts on their insurance premiums or electric bill or whatever. Over the course of a few years, you futz with the prices until it's less of a 'discount' and more 'the only way to approach the price you used to get'.

    At that point, the ones who do care can either suck it up and wear whatever herd-management-solution you feel like telling them to, or they can pay (probably increasingly steeply) to maintain their precious little objections.

  7. Not the same, but tangentially related... by mmell · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Snapshot from Progressive Insurance. Start by giving them a break in return for some seemingly innocuous monitoring; sooner or later, they'll either start requiring it or they'll start expanding the data they're allowed to collect and sell. What, you thought they were doing all this wonderful stuff just to save you money?

    Remember folks - first hit of the crack pipe's free . . .

    1. Re:Not the same, but tangentially related... by reebmmm · · Score: 2

      Insurance is a weird thing: it works because you pool a bunch of risk and spread the associated costs across all your insured. At the moment, Snapshot only gives discounts to those drivers that establish that they are in fact in the lowest risk pool: few miles driven, during "safe" times, in a "safe" manner (e.g., few hard stops). There's no incentive, currently, for otherwise safe drivers to participate -- such as those that drive too many miles.

      However, I consider myself a safe driver but just have too many miles. Heck, I even have a dashcam (I don't live in Russia, either). But other than my clean driving record, I don't have any other driving behavior-based way to lower my risk profile or premium. I would LOVE if Progressive mandated Snapshot, increased rates of those that had poor overall driving techniques (fast acceleration, hard braking, etc.) and lowered the rates for the rest. People whose rates increased would likely flee Progressive, but the risk for the pool would go down (and with it my premiums). Mandated Snapshot won't happen of course for lots of non-obvious reasons, though.

    2. Re:Not the same, but tangentially related... by simtel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If someone has to habitually hard-stop, then there is a very good chance that they're habitually driving too fast for conditions and/or not leaving enough space to stop in. This data is being used to establish the driving habits of the user - and as such the one or two 'avoid accident' stops will become outliers. It's the habits that push people into the higher risk pools, not the outliers.

    3. Re:Not the same, but tangentially related... by SirAudioMan · · Score: 2

      I was going to post about this but you beat me to it! Each and every time I see those stupid Progressive commercials or similar I always think the same thing. Sure it seems innocent now, a reduction of 10-20% in your insurance rates now (woo hoo). But then next thing you know you are speeding (5-10 mph over) through a GREEN light with the flow of traffic and get T-boned. Now the person who T-boned you will likely get charged, and you will get off without a charge because you didn't cause the accident. The cop never caught you speeding so in the eyes of the law you are ok.

      Now comes the Progressive monitoring device. Your insurance company has a policy (that you agreed too when you signed up with them) saying that they can pull the data from the monitoring unit at any time. Maybe it's even automatic telemetry where it get's reported in real-time. Your insurance company pays to have your car fixed, and all appears well. Six months later you notice your premiums go up drastically even through you were not at fault and were no charged by the police.

      What has happened? Your insurance company has looked at the data and decided that because you were speeding you breaking the law and thus a higher risk driver! Bingo your rates increased and all because you VOLUNTARILY gave the insurance company the ability to monitor your every move. Insurance companies do NOT have your best interests in mind - their primary goal like all for-profit corporations is to MAKE money. They simply can't be trusted.

      People say, yes but if I have one of those units and I never speed! I say, BS! I have very rarely met anybody who drives perfectly in the eyes of the insurance companies or the law. It's human nature to occasionally (or always) speed and break minor traffic laws.

      Mark

    4. Re:Not the same, but tangentially related... by vux984 · · Score: 2

      It's human nature to occasionally (or always) speed and break minor traffic laws.

      Indeed. I just had an argument with a local neighborhood group. They've gone and posted the speed limit at 10kph, but they don't want people to actually drive 10kph and even came out and admitted that... but they got the idea that you set it 10-15kph below what you want people to do, so they set it at 10kph to get people to drive 15 to 25 instead of.

      The problem though is that set at 10kph, with the expectation that we drive 15-25 is that legally we're doing 50% to 100% and beyond over the posted speed limit, which as you can imagine is not merely 'speeding' but 'excessive speeding' and 'reckless driving' per the letter of the law. Sure the cops are probably never going to bother with a speed trap to nail me going a measly 22kph, but an automated GPS insurance monitoring system... will probably record that I do double the speed limit habitually... and assess my premiums accordingly.

  8. Real Names? by retech · · Score: 2

    Is there ever a reason to actually register one of these products with your real name and info? Unless it's my bank, DL, or passport, I see no point in giving any of these companies real info.

  9. Everyone who can spy on you, will by guanxi · · Score: 2

    Isn't it obvious at this point that everyone who can spy on you, will? There is no legal regulation, or simple pragmatic or moral restraint.

    Remember Obama saying about the NSA, 'maybe just because we can gather some data doesn't mean we should' (paraphrased). It doesn't seem like others are even thinking about it, except Mozilla.

  10. Overcollection by Animats · · Score: 2

    The trouble with these things is that they want to "phone home" too much. For energy conservation, Nest talks to a Nest, Inc. server and tells it too much. The info it needs (outside temp, power grid load status) is freely available from read-only web sites. (Given a ZIP code, the National Weather Service site will return info in XML.) But no, it has to talk to the "cloud" and give out personal information. That's totally unnecessary.

    1. Re:Overcollection by Fruit · · Score: 3, Informative

      The reason for that is to allow people to control their Nest using their smartphone. And the reason they can't connect to their Nest directly is NAT. Of course it's naive to assume that this practice will stop if IPv6 ever takes off, but one can dream.

  11. Might? by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm already seeing ads for managers offering to sell me this information.

    I'm not sure you realize that it's already being marketed, not "will be" marketed.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  12. Nest not selling data by forand · · Score: 3, Informative

    The article is very misleading. Nest is working with some power companies which offer their customers financial incentives to allow the power company to dial back their AC units during high load times. Pepco in DC offers the same service but you have to pay for their thermostat. This isn't selling user information this is letting the power companies access their customers' thermostats if and only if that customer allows it. Nothing in the article says anything else is happening than this but states it in a very deceptive way. If the article actually had some evidence of something more nefarious it would be fine but as it is just doesn't stand up.

    This is a link to the Nest program: https://nest.com/energy-partne...