Google confirms it aims to own your online identity

Discussion in 'privacy general' started by tsec, Aug 31, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. tsec

    tsec Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Posts:
    181
    Here.

    The saying, if you are not paying for it, then you're the product being sold is so very apt here.

    So-called social networking was never about bringing people together. Its about the generation of capital. Through advertising.

    Always.
     
  2. HAN

    HAN Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Posts:
    2,080
    Location:
    USA
    Thanks for the article! :)

    Not an issue for me. No social networks now or in the future for me!!
     
  3. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,853
    I'm so surprised!
     
  4. Trooper

    Trooper Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Posts:
    2,825
    I know right.

    I'm completely shocked!!
     
  5. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    In other news, the sky is blue. And yet people flock to Google+, and they still use other Google services. You've got Eric Schmidt, a guy that makes Mark Zuckerberg look like an EFF rep, in power at the biggest data miner in the world. You've also got Larry Page, a guy who, after you dig up enough on him, can only be described as a 4 year old in a 38 year old body as CEO, undoubtedly taking orders from Eric (It's well known Schmidt stayed on to "watch over" Page)...what exactly can be expected?

    Everything, and I mean absolutely everything they do is related to getting and keeping data. Google+ we should have already known about, but it's now confirmed. Google Search we know about. Google Chrome, even though there's a love affair with it (and in some ways it is a decent browser), is nothing more than a browser built around Google Search. And Google Earth and Street View, well, if you really need confirmation about what that is for, I suggest you try to have a greater attention span than Larry Page.
     
  6. tsec

    tsec Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Posts:
    181

    Thus is the power of e-opiates on 4 legged wooly things.

    Sigh

    The article was not focused on good products or data retention, but on another, more specific matter entirely.
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2011
  7. noone_particular

    noone_particular Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Posts:
    3,798
    They probably will with those who don't care about privacy. As for me, I own my identity. I will reveal what I choose. If Google thinks they can get more than that from me, good luck trying. About the only thing thing they're expressing this intent will do is cause me to double check my block lists and make certain that any contact between my PCs and Google goes through Tor. Other than their search engine, I have no use for any of their "services". As for being an "identity service", they're going to have to live with my having an "unlisted number" when it comes to them.

    Getting very tired of their games and double standards.
     
  8. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    That's cute, really. Now, I mentioned the things I did because if you're going to complain about Google gathering up data and using it for their profit, then you'll have to complain about Google itself, and not just one creation of theirs. Why is that? Elementary, my dear Watson, Google is a company that exists because of gathering and keeping the data of users. Why bother complaining about Google wanting to own data through its Google+, when Google wants to own data period, no matter the method?

    It's the policy of the company, not the specific product that matters. But maybe those 4 legged wooly things should lay off the e-opiates so they can understand that. P.S, learn to quote full statements and not edit them to your liking. Thanks.
     
  9. Nebulus

    Nebulus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2007
    Posts:
    1,582
    Location:
    European Union
    I'd highly recommend to follow Eric Schmidt's advice: "If people want to remain anonymous, he said, then they shouldn’t use Google+." :)
     
  10. tsec

    tsec Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2008
    Posts:
    181
    Oh, come on now.

    Owning data is one thing - this is not in dispute.

    The owning of ones identity that will eventally be utilised for all access, to all areas of the net for profit is the issue here.

    Data has been retained in one way or anither in various forms for a long time.

    One's personal existence has not - until now.

    If this were occurring for the betterment of humankind, then I think no-one would have an issue with it. But when it happens solely to make a handful of people (figuratively speaking) very rich, then it is an issue.

    Or it should be.
     
  11. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    Tsec, what I mean by data is a part of your identity. Maybe I didn't make that clear, I apologize. When they or any party collects data other than what browser/OS you use, and other non-identifying data, then it's a part of your identity. We don't have a choice but to allow our IP address out. No matter how many hoops we go through, someone knows it. That IP can be used to identify us, and it's data that is collected. Before I get too far off topic, my whole point is that Google is a company built from and lives on the collection of identifiable data. They would cease to exist without advertising dollars, and advertisers are only interested in data that can be used to identify people. After all, if they don't have a fairly accurate idea about you, they can't market anything to you, right?

    Everything Google creates is to provide a service in exchange for your data, data which can be used to identify you. Therefore, it is not just a Google+ issue, but a policy issue. All they have done with this "new" news, is tell us to our faces they intend to track and collect information about us and everything we do. The whole "Don't Be Evil" ideal was thrown out of their window when they began drowning in advertising dollars.

    However, this is not just a Google+ issue. As long as social media remains hot, many more people besides Schmidt will try to own your identity.

    Btw, I'm not arguing against you regarding Google+. They should know very well that forcing real names is extremely dangerous these days. But it shows you that Google, as a company does not care anymore. Again, the "Don't Be Evil" days are long gone. They should stop this immediately, but they won't. Any seeming backing down they do, you need to watch out. Facebook backed down multiple times when things got hot, and then very, very slowly they went right back to doing things the way they wanted. So it will be with Google.
     
    Last edited: Aug 31, 2011
  12. x942

    x942 Guest

    Google needs to shut up Schmit he is bad PR for them.

    Personally I don't have overly personal stuff on any google product or social network. The extent is my cell phone number. Which IMO is not a grave concern as it is my business number anyways so any who wants it has it on my site. That said I understand the concern here. I never post overly personal detail using any social product or gmail. That kind of stuff is dealt with offline or use RedPhone app (Encrypted VOIP for Andoid). I have an inherent distrust of all things social online :D
     
  13. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    Errr, this. Was there any doubt?

    Anyways, just as all companies they want money and their product is advertising through personal-info-based ads.

    Somehow people think this is the worst thing the world.
     
  14. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    There was never any doubt in my own mind. Google has done this for years. However, it doesn't make it right, simply because it's commonplace. See, doing what they do is bad enough, but, they've been caught with their hand in the cookie jar so many times, and gone overboard so often, that they can't be trusted. Not caring that 3rd parties have a lot of information about you is one thing, but, don't you at least care who is getting, storing, and sharing it?

    I personally think that's an even bigger issue than the data collection itself, that it's in the hands of a company that just does whatever it pleases until it gets busted.
     
  15. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    I wonder how well aliases work. Not that I'm interested.
     
  16. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,468
    Hmmm time to stalk J_L :rolleyes:
    Hahahaha anyways since the beginning i never had a social network account (Well to be honest i did create a profile on FB for 14 days then deactivated it, it was like 4 years ago :D luckily that profile was like a dummy account LOL)
    Since then i've never joined any other single thing related to social networks.
     
  17. Dude111

    Dude111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Posts:
    212
    Of course it is!!

    GOOGLE is just as bad as FB -- GET OFF AND STAY AWAY!!
     
  18. luciddream

    luciddream Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2007
    Posts:
    2,497
    The only thing I use is Youtube. I have friends that live abroad and it's a great way to keep in touch with a few of them. Some of them send me videos. And there are also some channels I follow that are very entertaining.

    I don't use any info. that can be used to identify me, and it's linked to a dummy GMail account. I opt out for cookies that can be used to track, provide relevant advertising, ect... and use the OptimizeGoogle add-on for further privacy. I don't like or dislike anything. Always use https, and a VPN. So you can certainly greatly minimize the potential for data/identity harvesting by taking certain measures. But even then I don't pretend that I'm completely immune to it. The only way to accomplish that is a physical disconnect from the internet altogether.
     
  19. cm1971

    cm1971 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Posts:
    727
    Me too. :p
     
  20. Noob

    Noob Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    6,468
    Oh well, about liking/disliking i do it a lot in YouTube :D
    Although all the information in the account is fake xD (Age, location etc)
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.