As for Google’s intentions, I like to think that the ball-of-worms that is advertising tech can be partitioned away from the conversation about Android possibilities. But, maybe not, as Antoine also suggests.

And it’s my respectful opinion that you’re too optimistic about Google’s intentions regarding data mining/spying in service to their all-important advertising business, just as Brett appears to be much too sanguine about telcos and cablecos crippling commercial innovation in their short-sighted drive to extract monopoly rents for their networks.

“…I’m not sure I follow what you’re saying about Hackers and Outfits, but maybe this will help: we need inventions that mother necessity here. That’s why I pointed to what Kynetx and Ifttt are doing: putting in front of individuals ways of programming their worlds. Once an individual is not merely a “user” or a “consumer,” but an independent operator with full agency, a world of possibilities opens up. But we need demo proof of what can happen, and it’s not here yet…”

I totally agree. IFTTT/Kynetx/(and to some degree) On{x} are seeming to get to that point. When people can see that they can program their words, and that programming isn’t (always) so complicated to do/understand, then yes they will go with it.

For that demo proof, I thought that Bots was perfect for this as it was simple enough to not scare folks, but there was no programming involved. That next step would be allowing some machine learning to provoke people to program their world – I am assuming that’s what Google Now is proposing that folks do (that does seem to be how the recommendation engine for Amazon works). Besides data collection and more behavior bending, I don’t know that Google or anyone else really has an incentive to grow computing usage like that – though I would say that doing so would be so beneficial for everyone.

I can acknowledge the better UX and (still) better universe of apps, but that isn’t enough to compensate for Apple’s near-totalitarian approach to the ecosystem. I refuse to iCloud or iMe or whatever other “service” it is they want me to connect to. I have never synced the device to a computer, and don’t even have iTunes installed on any of my machines.

BTW, in the vein of a souped-up ifttt, check out Microsoft’s on{x}. It’s an Android-only solution that their Israeli R&D team built that takes recipes, tasks, and life automation a step further than what the average Joe can do with ifttt. My only MAJOR beef with it is that MSFT is requiring a Facebook account for signup, which annoys the hell out of me.

I’m not sure I follow what you’re saying about Hackers and Outfits, but maybe this will help: we need inventions that mother necessity here. That’s why I pointed to what Kynetx and Ifttt are doing: putting in front of individuals ways of programming their worlds. Once an individual is not merely a “user” or a “consumer,” but an independent operator with full agency, a world of possibilities opens up. But we need demo proof of what can happen, and it’s not here yet.

And Brett, I know that Google spies. That’s how it gets data it uses to provide various services. I’d much rather see all of that spying as opt-in rather than opt-out (and I don’t even know to what extent that’s possible). And I’d like to see more transparency in (and obviousness to) what Google actually does with personal data. While it may not be possible to distance this conversation from the one about spying, that’s what I’m trying to do here. This post calls for leverage of the Android platform in new directions, because it’s already popular and lots can be done there because it’s (at least relatively) open. FWIW, I never claimed to be a “consumer advocate.” By now you should know I avoid the term “consumer” when better terms will do; and I’d rather act than merely advocate. Finally, I regard calling people names (e.g. “shill”) as a personal attack — essentially trolling — and I won’t tolerate any more of it.

You are advocating that users allow Google to know every intimate detail of, spy on, and manage users’ lives. And you claim to be a consumer advocate? Hah. You’re a shill for Google.

Google and an Open Android
Don’t know if that can continue as it was, but will get some of that (near) direction seen with Symbian and other platforms. Even Google’s latest of making the Android SDK no longer a freebie points to more a controlling of something, not actually open, but more like flexible.

Hackers and Outfits
I admire all of the efforts, but they aren’t answering the question (to consumers, and even somewhat not to carriers) about what they solve that makes sense enough to be disruptive. Just making a platform that fits on cheap hardware isn’t enough, there has to be some knitting of context and behavior to options beyond the mobile/wearable/utility dial… if the consumer/prosumer segment is the target. If the target is to enable a wide open market of sellers and opportunities, then open access has a tougher nut to crack, the one you’ve seen with Linux and Maemo, how to have a compelling enough UX that makes disruption good for all. Something like what Firefox did on the side of the browser wars despite Opera and others being present. Be a vector that hacks at the behavior and the context, not just another food color choice in the cabinet.