You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
1

[–] Secret555 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I have some insight to this story but with a different project I worked on about 3 years ago. Was working in a startup developing a fitbit type of product for pets. The idea was that you could track your pets movements and different stats through an app. We even Incorporated​ a type of avatar which would show if the pet was stationary or was moving a several differing speeds. We could track the pet in two axis and were hoping to incorporate the third to indicate if the pet was mounted on furniture. It was a pretty intense little project.

Lo and behold who became quite interested in the project but Google. They actually were providing advice and suggested we add features like microphones into the device so that we could add audio feedback of the pet. Eventually they stated that they were quite interested in the device as they could map the interior of households and use it along with their mapping software. As it was pretty much impossible to convince home owners to allow such mapping of their household on an individual basis this would circumvent the need to ask for permission. All of us on the team were disgusted at Google's attempt to spy on our clients privacy in such a way.

Obviously the microphone would have been another way to give them access to private conversations. Their perspective in basing it on animal versus human travel was that humans tend to navigate through habit and are limited by obstacles such as tables. While animals tend to root around and seek areas that were less hospitable considering average human height. Therefore the layout of the dwelling would be more accurate and defined in greater detail. The idea of the third axis which was the height of the particular animal was something they were seriously pushing us to incorporate into the product was to get a better understanding of furniture, staircases or other defining variables within the household.

We eventually ran out of funding and without a fully functional prototype beyond what had completed the project came to an end. They never really provided us with any financial backing but we were invited to their offices quite often to provide product updates. As a team we were at odds as to how we would ethical approach the issue if they had decided to buy us out or fund us. For a little proof of this claim Google CleoCollar and you should find some remnants of the project. Many details were still in development but with a little more r&d the project would have come to fruition.

0
0

[–] stillinit [S] ago  (edited ago)

Very interesting. This deserves it's own thread. Relieves me somewhat that the team you were on felt uncomfortable with what google wanted. If there was no integrity on that team, it would have been another mainstream google product that is used to give our information to Zionists. Really sheds some light on how google takes over all these up and coming neat projects, and turns them to shit for nefarious purposes.

0
1

[–] Secret555 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

It was quite interesting to see their corporate mentality at work. They are definitely efficient at finding solutions to any obstacle that might impede their future agenda. Whatever that may be?