Google sniffing around

[mojoman]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8684110.stm

I'm not surprised. Not sure it's a blunder though.

[nadir]

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Google-Mac- ... -6574.html
found here:
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=51310

I don't like google. Not for reasons (- neither good nor bad ones).
I simply don't like it.

[craigevil]

All Hail the Mighty Google!

Wonders why Google is any worse than most ISPs that keep all user data for years, including VOIP conversations.

There isn't now nor has there ever been any privacy on the internet. If you want privacy move to a cave and do not have anything to do with civilization.

[nadir]

If you want privacy move to a cave and do not have anything to do with civilization.

What a nonsense. "Love it or leave it" sounds familiar? The 50's are back, huh?

[Raffles10]

People using unsecured wifi should realize that anyone can intercept their data, someone was bound to take advantage of it, not surprised it was google.

Governments have probably been doing this for even longer.

[BioTube]

Actually it's probably best Google was doing this and not the government - the former's only interested in hitting you with more effective ads.

[milomak]

i'm amazed at the paranoia people have against google and facebook.

if you fear government, it's probably too late as they probably have all the importnant information through tax laws.

[nadir]

So: BBC says it, the government says it and Google itself says it too.

Sure, sure: all the three of them are well known for being constantly paranoid.

[milomak]

So: BBC says it, the government says it and Google itself says it too.

Sure, sure: all the three of them are well known for being constantly paranoid.

i have no idea what you are trying to say

[ComputerBob]

i'm amazed at the paranoia people have against google and facebook.

Just as I am amazed at the lack of concern that some people have about their privacy.

[nadir]

i have no idea what you are trying to say

The OP gave a link to an article by BBC.
In the article it is said that:
"Google has admitted that for the past three years it has wrongly collected information people have sent over unencrypted wi-fi networks."
In the link i gave it is said that:
"German officials have discovered that the automobiles are not only scanning consumer-based networks ..."

You said people would be paranoid when it comes to google.
I said that in that case the three of them (Google, BBC and the government) must be paranoid too, cause they confirm what the paranoid ones do say.

Was not that hard to understand.

[MALsPa]

i'm amazed at the paranoia people have against google and facebook.

Just as I am amazed at the lack of concern that some people have about their privacy.

Anymore, I can't say that I'm amazed either by the paranoia or by the lack of concern. Often, just amused by both.

[milomak]

when it comes to facebook and google, i guess i just know that the information i provide is not anything i have issue with being in the public domain.

i guess for me the adage of not placing anything i don't want anyone to see applies. so what is on google, facebook or other has passed through my censorship standards. so if they have that info, good for them.

as an aside, do all the people who are paranoid in this thread not use gmail. for the record i don't for some 3 years.

edit: do you guys feel your ISP/email provider has better contractual terms than google?

[nadir]

You are using the wrong word: One would be paranoid if they would not do it. Else it's not paranoia.

Of course nothing of what i do is of any importance: so who ever has got that info can't do much with it. That's not the point.

Yes, i got a gmail account. I needed it for google-docs. Besides that i don't use it.

do you guys feel your ISP/email provider has better contractual terms than google?

No. And as far i can see no one has said so. I may easily avoid Google. I can't avoid an ISP. I could avoid an email provider.

#### ### ### ###
@MALsPa: At minimum being paranoid is a bit more of fun and the drugs are better than being buried alive.

[milomak]

as a general question (not aimed at you), why do people not make the same noises against "regular" ISPs if they do not have vastly different terms?

[nadir]

as a general question (not aimed at you), why do people not make the same noises against "regular" ISPs if they do not have vastly different terms?

Short ago the laws in germany have been changed. ISP's are supposed to store data for half a year - of everyone.
There was quite an amount of noise against it. (The same laws are valid for europe/EU, if i am correct).

To be honest: I for one can't hear much noise against Google

Google is very present. Thats all about it. I guess. I install linux: it is there. I install firefox in windows: it is there. I go to the library: its the start-page. I hear the people talking: " i googled this and that". And so on.
Thats the thing i don't like about it. The lack of choice. Pushiness.
And a bit more, but not -mainly- the security/privacy stuff (more the style: young, cool, happy: colored. part of it.)

Yep: you didn't ask me. I answered anyway.

[MALsPa]

@MALsPa: At minimum being paranoid is a bit more of fun and the drugs are better than being buried alive.

[dzz]

Is not paranoia fear of that which does not exist and a mental illness?

Data collection in the manner described here is actually happening. Do people really believe google have simply "made a mistake" and the purpose is restricted to just serving ads? The potential for serious abuse is obvious, such activities MUST be publicised and challenged.

[ComputerBob]

as a general question (not aimed at you), why do people not make the same noises against "regular" ISPs if they do not have vastly different terms?

For me, there are several reasons, including the fact that my ISP's business plan is not based on it collecting as much of my private data as possible and then exploting that private data to make a profit.

In response to those who characterize the more-careful among us by using the derogatory term, "paranoid," how would you like it if we started characterizing you by using the derogatory term, "careless?"

The fact is that we are not paranoid. And you are probably not careless. We simply have different privacy standards and different levels of risk tolerance. So let's all show a little respect for differences of opinion.

[MALsPa]

Sometimes I really am too paranoid. Sometimes, I'm too careless. I guess both "paranoid" and "careless" can be derogatory terms. So I guess my feelings should be hurt.

They aren't.

Data collection in the manner described here is actually happening. Do people really believe google have simply "made a mistake" and the purpose is restricted to just serving ads? The potential for serious abuse is obvious, such activities MUST be publicised and challenged.

Yeah, I agree, it has to be watched.

And folks need to be careful about what they put online, because no matter how much you might wish for something called "internet privacy," well...

"If you wouldn't put it on the front page of the local newspaper, don't put it online" is still a good rule of thumb.