Ha ha ha
Pot, kettle, black?
Google's executive chairman Eric Schmidt has branded the NSA's alleged surveillance of web giants' data centers "outrageous". Speaking to The Wall Street Journal, Schmidt lashed out at American spooks after documents from whistleblower Edward Snowden suggested Google and Yahoo! data center links were being snooped on. "It's …
"Well, there is a small difference between Google serving you ads based on your data"
No problem if thats what people sign up to. In my opinion Google appears to act as if its beyond the law & on many occasions has shown absolutely no respect for individuals, not to mention their photo cars slurping wireless data. Unfortunately, the subject of law is not a fast moving one & the difference between unethical & illegal an increasingly grey area.
While I am not a fan of some of NSA's undertakings, I also am not aware of any instance of police turning up at someone's door because their web browsing activity was referred by the NSA. The story to that effect that turned up early in the current series of revelations turned out to have been referred by a former employer. Indeed, there was a noticeable amount of blathering after the Boston Marathon bombing to the general effect that the Tsarnaevs' activities ought to have been caught by network surveillance but were not.
>Why is that? Because people have short memories: today's hypocrisy is tomorrow's business as usual.
The wonders of the diffusion of responsibility. Then again most people are interested in appearing to do the socially right thing rather than actually doing the right thing.
This post has been deleted by its author
Google glass privacy line is bullshit, and needs to be dropped, why? Here is an example http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B008M1A7FW/ref=s9_hps_ft_g421_ir05?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-3&pf_rd_r=1730XYGJV01QXFG4EK6Q&pf_rd_t=1401&pf_rd_p=1638109322&pf_rd_i=1001015731
another example http://www.amazon.com/glasses-Eyewear-Hidden-Digital-Camcorder/dp/B00CY9TXQ2/ref=pd_sim_sbs_p_7
We could go on all day.
So people should just give up on it, as you look like morons. If someone wants to film your puny todger in the loo or perv at kids in a park for later viewing pleasure they already can. So get real, if you really think it's an issue there are several tens of thousands of different spying devices you should probably start with first, and lest face it you're boring nobody cares about you. I'm certainly boring and nobody cares about me, my todger, the last time I went to a porn shop, or that I skip work every now and again.
On the "hypocrisy" of it. Google are an ad company, they're not likely to mistakenly identify you as a terrorist, kick down your door and ship you to a black pit somewhere. The US government may.
You got that right...
The point of the outrage isn't the little, innocent things about *you*, its about the privacy of the activists doing things that the government, or one of its allies, doesn't like.
It doesn't matter if Google identify you as a terrorist, but whoever they hand the data over to might. The fact that they collect and store the data means that the government can give them a court order and take it.
> Google are an ad company, they're not likely to mistakenly identify you as a terrorist, kick down your door and ship you to a black pit somewhere. The US government may.
"Items which may interest you -
Ski Masks sale reductions!
Enriched uranium blowout!
From Google Maps -
Inside the Pentagon!"
Could be fun.
Methinks this is bull plop designed to shore up their stock price from losing business.
If any company could have fought off the US Gov it is Google, but they didn't. Instead of fighting against a clear and blatant violation of the first and fourth amendments, they bent to secret court orders (also illegal). If they had successfully brought this to peoples attention they would have emerged as heroes. Again, they didn't and Edward Snowden had to sacrifice his country and life to bring this to the world.
Stand up for your rights, while you still have them mister Schmidt. Or should we call you Janus?
"Again, they didn't and Edward Snowden had to sacrifice his country and life to bring this to the world"
Wow, someone has a crush on Edward...
He sacrificed his country, not his life. He got everything he wanted - fame, fortune (just wait for the book and movie deals), and eventually the girl. I just feel sorry for the company he's working for now, he'll have all of their company secrets in the newspapers in no time
"Wow, someone has a crush on Edward..."
In other times, I suppose you might be yelling "Crucify! Crucify!" Or ranting "Socrates is an evil-doer, and a curious person, who searches into things under the earth and in heaven, and he makes the worse appear the better cause; and he teaches the aforesaid doctrines to others".
I really wish I could somehow get hold of a block of 10,000 downvotes. I'll never find a better use for it.
WIth a lot of these CEO types, I've noticed a complete disconnect between their own actions and those of other people. "It must be OK because it's me doing it"; but the second someone else steps up and does the same it's all squawking and feathers everywhere. I wonder if it's some kind of syndrome....
EDIT: If someone would like to pay me a cubic fucktonne of money; I'd be happy to do the research.
Thanks for the tip Moiety
Actually I asked Google, and they said you already did the research.
So I asked where I send the cubic fucktonne and they couldn't say where you lived ... that would be wrong.
Long story short, you can pick it up at their place. They will withhold taxes, naturally, but they assure me there will be a substantial portion of the fucktonne, perhaps as much as a suntan left for you to spend as you please.
"WIth a lot of these CEO types, I've noticed a complete disconnect between their own actions and those of other people..."
Nicely said, moiety. It strikes me forcefully that a small edit turns your remark into a valuable observation about geopolitics:
"WIth a lot of these national governments, I've noticed a complete disconnect between their own actions and those of other national governments..."
Have you invented the Broadly Generalisable Metaobservation? Think how much time it could save scientists, philosophers, and random intellectuals!
Now that GCHQ and the NSA have access to Google's data and infrastructure for free, the opportunities are limitless:
Oglemail--monitors what you are typing, helpfully feeding you ads for local defense attorneys if you start writing about jihad or setting off a bomb.
Oglesearch-- serves you ads for Soma and other sedatives if you start "Ogling" search terms like "government surveillance" or "civil liberties"
Oglemaps--Doesn't tell you anything about where you are or how to get where you are going, but feeds your location real-time to the Five Eyes population control center, where they can track your movements relative to local police stations, SWAT teams and black site detainment centers, just in case you ever need to be picked up by government "roadside assistance" for your own protection.
I'm assuming there may have been a little sarcasm there? I mean, the NSA has been doing whatever they want. I'd assume Google analyzes their own logs well enough they (and so Schmidt) would have known if the NSA was actively trolling through their systems. But, I would have been more surprised to find out the NSA *wasn't* tapped into Google's lines to the wider internet, given their zeal for taps.
The Schmidt problem for Google Inc. is in the abject corporate failure to globally lead with searched services and products which do no evil and, much more importantly in these considerably smarter connected times and spaces, do great good, for surely the problem is one which must be attributed to a leading individual, [although obviously malfunctioning or dysfunctional when failing to lead with great good] rather than be dodged and spun as a collective failure from which lessons will be learned. That be the tired old politically incorrect excuse which incompetents in parasitic governments use and abuse wilfully blindly/stupidly.
After all, they, like other big companies to share data with big NSA brother, are the (temporary) losers in this "Snowdan affair". It's the trust of their users who trust less than before (but this is minor issue, who gives a flying about what users think anyway). More importantly, it's the trust of the people with big buck, who buy and sell google stock and think: "users trust google less... fuck that, but what if they decide enough's enough and turn their back on google? I'm gonna lose my shitload of money if this happens, I'd better diversify my portfolio".
God damn doing no evil, balloon inflating, coloured-ball loving, 1950s style cafeteria frequenting, complimentary pony riding MOFOs
... Google doubts this is much to do with servers in the US and more to do with cables carrying data via/within Europe (and probably in Blighty) - But what's an IT Mega corporation to do about that? How's that our fault? We're outraged!
... Google is a friendly company; which believes no one - anywhere - does any evil. Ever.
... So when we offered you and your data a bit of protection with that "Golden Key" symbol in your browser; well obviously we weren't going to keep that protection once the data arrived with us. Come on! Who is ever going to want to intercept it after you've transmitted it? And hacking the world's leading
Advertising Network Content Aggregator Pony Riding Club - For shame. Don't you worry, users, we've got your back.
... Happily, Google knows that the IT Press won't be critising us ... Like us, the IT press is a friendly place (and they won't want to be losing their place in our Search Rankings, by being unfriendly ... will they?)
... Oh, hello El-Reg! ;-) *waves*
This post has been deleted by its author
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020