Discussion on:

Google's privacy policy? Why the EU should just back off

Maybe that's why I use Scroogle instead of blindly trusting an entity that is at its core about monetizing my traffic.

You refer to Watson as "he"...How do you know Watson's gender is male?
I guess you're a Republican.

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

louishelps = Well - he has a male voice is the first clue....

since it doesn't actually have a meaningful gender, being a machine and all.
At least I hope the IBM didn't fit it with genitalia...

Knowing just how evil Google is, I do not think the EU is unreasonable at all. The question is who/or what is Google to go about acting like big brother? Telling the world who or what should be seen based on its "bias" of search results. At least the EU (government) has been democratically elected (largely, we hope). Google is a commercial organization owned by a few youngsters with very little real world experience.

The Google SERPS are purely algorithms written, not by God, but by a faceless imported programmer from India (a la Panda update) that will determine what results are presented to me.

Think again.

And for they record, Google have in the past shown ill-use of the info they collect. What they are doing is wrong, pure and simple.

On the one hand, I do agree with you, it is unknown what google will do with our information. There is always a trade-off between privacy and efficiency.
Government is there to protect us from greedy corporations and misuse of our data.

On the other hand, living in Germany I have to clear a misunderstanding. The EU is not a government. It does not even have a democratically elected parliament.
There is a EU Parliament, but it is dictated upon the people living in the member countries.

The EU is really unpopular by the citizens. They always try to restrict our lives with additional unnecessary laws and have dumb demands to companies and people living in Europe.

Therefore, it happens often that the EU-Ministers do only follow the oppinions of a select few lobbyists (Pharma for ACTA) and not the voice of the people. They would actually prefer to put as back in the middle ages and cut off everyone from the internet, who gets caught burning a copyprotected cd only once, which is illegal even for backup purposes in Germany...

Actually, they don't understand anything that google is up to!

I really like how I can now back up all my data at once and even see all the data that google has collected about me.

if you don't want to control nasties on the Web and allow them to make it into Skynet you're welcome but you don't have to force your misguided beliefs on anyone else and nor do you have the right to.

Google on the other hand is welcome to try but they also have to expect Governments to put up objections and prevent them from getting their way on World Domination. Nothing new there.

If you find the Eu's actions so objectionable perhaps you shouldn't ever go near the place as most people there feel that they are doing the right thing in protecting them from the Big Bad Corporations who will do as they please when they want and to who they want.

Col

HAL 9000 = 42!

HAL 9000 = I don't believe in belief systems. And how do you know what 'most people think' - a bit of a misguided assumption don't you think! And boy have you got a shock coming when IPv6 takes over....I'll blog that one when I get a chance

The EU privacy protections are the result of a tug'o'war; the Corpies are trying to loosen it up, while the people are trying to defend themselves from corporate spying.

We don't need no stinkin' commentators shilling the Corpies' viewpoints.

The idea that a "sentient web" will arise, which will make people "more effective" is TOTAL BUNK. People already have all the tools they need to be "more effective"... and we all know it.

We're not living up to our potential of "more effective" because we are PROCRASTINATING. If the Corpies are allowed to rape our privacy to make this "magical web", and IF it "magically" makes us "more effective"... then we'll only PROCRASTINATE HARDER.

In the old days, people like Cochrane would be tarred and feathered for trying to sell us all out. Maybe it's time to be traditional about it?

What a one-sided article! Fails to understand or even mention the valid reasons behind the opposing point of view.

The thrust of this article seems to be about 'efficiency' for the end user, but what I see is our privacy being taken away in order to provide better advertising / marketing, not better 'efficiency'

BT has always been staunchly behind the notion of private enterprise screwing over the consumer!

AnsuGisalas = How did BT get in here? I don't work for BT - just my own company!

So, which one is lying?

I agree that a sentient web is a wonderful goal, but agree entirely with @bboyd.

Well, I fully expect a sentient web to be smart enough to see what's wrong with the world... people

AnsuGisalas = Machines are smart, but they aint mean - unless we teach them that is. If we program them to kill people - then that is another debate and another problem set...

So are they smart enough to work out that Humans destroy more than they produce?

Once the Smart Web does that what's the next Computer Logic telling itself Humans are not needed and then it starts to take steps to eliminate them.

SKYNET by any another name still has the same effect.

Col

than on the internet?

nickweavers = Hurrah - a degree of agreement

I am in agreement with them. Google act as if they own the web. I will not do business with any company that require me to sign on google.

but if the EU fails to keep them honest, I'll have to start...

The EU are right to protect our privacy. We have already seen the FBI is to monitor conversations on Facebook and now Twitter is selling copies of all it's users conversations. One reason NOT to use these comercial spy programs. Why is the US so keen to monitor all our lives? Is there no privacy from BBig Brother uncle Sam?

"Uncle Sam" has been bought and paid for by Corporate entities... not the yanks' fault - apart from letting it happen, I guess.

AnsuGisalas = Could just be that they are more enlightened and future facing?

Watch your language! Future facing? You kiss your mother with that mouth?

The EU is a pretty good watchdog and it uses its powers in the interest of its members.
I will wait to see how this process will plan out before I make up my mind on its importance.

alfowler@... = They are great at spending taxpayers contributions for sure...but I'm not so happy as you re their effectiveness....it will be interesting to see ho all this pans out!

Ok, giving that (your blog), I can partially agree to your statement that Google uses this data for quicker access to what we all use and need. But I think the E.U. is right. I pointed out this in a previous blog when Google announced their new policy.....How much intell do they realy need? And, will Google release ALL Information on what data is collected, and to their extent of it being used? Lets face it, Gmail already knows any detail you send via email (great for storage by the way), would they use this info, could they sell this info? Hmmmmmm,,,, Google, I hope your reading this! Let someone (maybe from Tech Rep) have a meeting/ tour, and release the real deal! I don't care about you making money, you need too! It's about my privacy!

I don't want Google to know who I am, what I like and what I do. I don't want Google to invade my mind to discover the keys to what it is that makes me open my wallet. I want my internet to be soulless. If I decide I want my computer to 'know' my choices then fair enough. I'll use bookmarks or links. I'll happily use cookies as long as I retain control of them. To be honest, the less I see of Google the better. And the less Google 'sees' of me is infinitely more so.

All this optimism assumes responsible, ethical, legal use of our data, while every day brings more reasons not to risk that assumption. This is an interesting article, but only in terms of potential, not likelihood.

They always collected your data and used it for their purposes, the only difference is they bothered the make their privacy policy more readable.
Does it say in there that they intend to sell your browsing habits to third parties?



For many many years google has been tracking us, and you don't need an account to be tracked. Google analytics appears to be on every website now.

Slayer = Spot on! And if they upset us - the users - our walking away will hurt more than any political smoke and mirrors.

The EU is one of the few entities with enough power and enough backbone to protect individuals from excessive corporate power and greed. Thank goodness they're on these issues.

LedLincoln = Really - your talking about one of the biggest gravy trains on the plane with pretty huge levels of unnecessary bureaucracy, unparalleled levels of inefficiency, and a collection of bankrupt states...hmmm

The author seems to doubt his ability to think or be competitive without a "Big Brother" showing him the way; he needs it to: "... help me because I am the limiting factor. I cant read, think, type, search and assimilate things any faster. Only an intelligent machine can help me get smarter and work more effectively". I find it ironic that he uses the word sentinent to describe his ideal web experience. Sentinent is AN INDIVIDUAL " having the power of sense perception or sensation; conscious". To hand that over to a corpration, AN ARTIFICIAL ENTITY, which is pursuing a profit driven agenda is a slippery slope. It comes down to a critical simple choice really. Does the sentinent individual think for himself or does he forfeit that freedom to corporate slanted "groupthink"? Time to put down Ayn Rand and reread Orwell. We are way beyond 1984 already.

A bunch of Don Quiotes fighting windmills. Let???s face the fact that purpose of the web is to collect and disseminate information. Whatever you do on the web is a public knowledge, no matter what the ???privacy policies??? say, or the ???privacy watchdogs??? are supposedly guarding. So wake up, smell the roses and live with it. If not, don???t use the web.

d3d4E4 = In any public debate the negative voices always outgun the positive. That's the way it always is! A lot of time the negative reaction is emotional and unthinking, but I am more prone to ponder and try and weigh the pros and cons.

The technology that cannot be used for evil has not been invented yet. But in a commercial world you only lose the customers trust the once.

Google are not doing anything radical or new here, it's just that the naysayers and lawyers are not sleepwalking anymore.

Thanks for your support - much appreciated.

It's the "digital push." What do I mean by that? Imagine a bell curve (representing analog) measured over 6 (whatever units you want to use) on the x-axis, and 0-1 on the y-axis: At 0-x it we have 0; at 1-x it starts to curve; at 2-x the curve begins to level off; at 3-x, it's pretty much level at 1-y; then the whole curve reverses, coming back to 0 at 6-x. Then we get all this "digital stuff" (including the "efficiency" of things like Google+). it also starts at 0, then at 2-x abruptly jumps to the 1-value, then at 4-x abruptly drops back to 0. Proponents say: "Look! All those people who were betweeen 2-x and 4-x get the1-value!" but what about the poeple between 0-1-x, and 5-6-x, who were at some positive value, but are now at 0?


To give an example: i was searching for an artilce about a girl who, after being raped , was strapped to a gurney in a hospital and left for hours that way. I thought it was from "48 Hours." so I searched: rape victim gurney "48 Hours"

What did I get? Things from the "New York TIMES" (I was searching for "hours," so I'm probably interested in returns with "time" in them), articles about getting out of BED (since "bed" is synonimous with "gurney"), and other totally irrelevant returns.

Before going further, check WEBSTER out:http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sentient

Now relate it to the authors article:This move is a big deal, but not because the EU is getting upset, but because it is another vital step on the path to a sentient web.

The author describes himself as: "Peter Cochrane is an engineer, scientist, entrepreneur, futurist and consultant."

Specifically, What kind of "Engineer, Scientist, entrepreneur, futurist and consultant."

What are his achievements? Which universities have awarded the degrees.

The comment: "Time to change these laws and attitudes, methinks. After all, they were drafted for a world based on paper, fax machines and telephones, which is long gone and irrelevant.

By gosh, had he thought about the fact that the internet is built basically on the tenents mentioned above. Yah, let's get rid of telephones - y'all in favor of dumping your Smartphones?

Reality needs to set in!?

I would be willing to wager the author has file drawer with paper to document what is deemed as necessary information. Else, if the internet (IE his computer failed and all files lost) he would be in a world of hurt. Just think about you as individual and your needs to have ALL kinds of backup to secure your private and business lives.

A menial example I experienced today.
My wonderful electrical utility has been overcharging me.
Do you think they have a way for me to retrieve past billing (other than potentially the phone and paper). HMMMM, guess there IS a need for those things.
What proof do I have - check register, cancelled checks (retrieve on the internet from the bank and then need to photocopy everything and forward the material as my "proof". Hmmm, more need for paper.

Let's look at the author's solution - "the Time to change these laws and attitudes, methinks. After all, they were drafted for a world based on paper, fax machines and telephones, which is long gone and irrelevant."

True, however, would you like to have GOOGLE et al have that type of access to your financial data. Not only access, someone(s) at GOOGLE or one of their business subscribers could "tiddle" with your account? Sound great??????

Sorry, but I would recommend that the author look below the surface of what he recommends and finds all the processes impacted and jeapordies?

That my friends is called System Analysis.

Sorry but I have to say this: To be a "futurist" ya got ta know: what/how/when/where/when/(who) before making proposing absolute solutions.

I have to do more work - but I LOVE and PROTECT my privacy!

I only have trust in (depends on your religious beliefs) GOD. I sincerely apologize to anyone who may be upset by that statement.

Lastly, how safe are you on the Internet. Just think about all the hacking which has occurred with corporations, governments, military.

Is your password, Anti-virus, Mal ware, communications (firewall) doing the job?

If you have gotten this far - Thank you!

I think if you're going to author an article like this one, the responsibility is on YOU to tell US what the gripe is before refuting it... don't end the article that way! How do I even know you understand their stance? Credibility lost.

I don't want a sentient web. I really don't like who this sentient web is working for.

Let's give the web some morals first.

I read the article as a piece of satire. I might be wrong but I just could not take the article's points seriously. Privacy is already an issue with all the apps and instant communication possibilities out there that no one can want a sentient web. I am just going to pretend that this article was submitted a few weeks early for April 1st.

Advantage Microsoft... now it will be Adwords vs. Adchoices


Sandeep Seeram