this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2026
108 points (98.2% liked)

Technology

79476 readers
4257 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Google has firmly rejected allegations from a prominent consumer advocate that its forthcoming Universal Commerce Protocol (UCP) for AI-powered shopping agents could enable data-driven overcharging. The claims, sparked by a viral social media post, have ignited debate over privacy and pricing in the era of artificial intelligence.

Lindsay Owens, executive director of the Groundwork Collaborative, warned that the protocol integrates shopping into Google's AI tools like Search and Gemini, potentially using chat data for 'personalised upselling' to inflate prices. The tech giant, however, insists the features are designed to enhance user choice and value, not exploitation.

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Cory Doctorow is right.

The dream of big tech is social media without socialising, search engines without searching, online shopping without browsing.

[–] Rooty@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

"Just empty your wallet into our bank accounts, peasant"

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 20 points 2 weeks ago

Why would they be doing it otherwise?

[–] tabular@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago

"Enhance users choice". Even if I assumed good intentions, what the hell is a chatbot going to do??

[–] dan1101@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago

Do not give Google or any AI your credit card number.

[–] Flaqueman@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago

Pressing X now

[–] SlippiHUD@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Coding AI will do things you expressly forbid it from doing that irreversibly harm you. I can't imagine shopping AI is going to be any better, between buying bullshit you didn't ask it to, to spending all your money until your card declines instead of adhering to the budget you gave it.

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Just tell us how you are going to prevent this abuse, and how your policies forbid it. It’s easy Google. Just do that and you will quiet all concerns.

[–] ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I mean, not really...their policies are subject to change at any time to whatever they see fit. Their track record doesn't exactly inspire confidence that they won't abuse it.

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 3 points 1 week ago

Here's some documentation: https://developers.googleblog.com/under-the-hood-universal-commerce-protocol-ucp/

What this does is if offers a API for agents to communicate with online stores: check products, apply coupons, process transactions and so on. And the critics say that this will be used to funnel more data about the user to the store so it can "adjust" prices. Which is nothing new. Companies already are using all the data they can get their hands on to screw you. If you're naive enough to give data about to you AI bot controlled by a corporation and then send this bot to a store controlled by another corporation to do shopping for you then yeah, you will be screwed.

[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Hasn't it already objectively been used to facilitate an indirect syndicate and subsiquent price fixing in the retail market? I fail to see why other markets would be any different.

[–] deadymouse@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It seems to me that it is better to use instead of an expression - in the era of artificial intelligence - in the era of the threat from artificial intelligence, and to add: from those who promote it at any cost for profit.