I haven't seen evidence they're lying to AI. Perhaps you have more information on it showing Google's statement was false? I've also plainly missed the section where the illegal part happened. ...
1. Google has demonstrated themselves to be so dishonest and deceptive, time after time, that there is, rightfully, a presumption that they are lying. With no credibility, because they have no history of honesty or straight dealing, It's up to them to offer proof that they are telling the truth.
2. Not being illegal doesn't make it ethical or "right". Google clearly went Black hat on this one and clearly and intentionally circumvented user expectations of privacy. That, even by their own twisted definition, is being evil.
Correction: It is extremely hard for even senior employees there to access user information
I expect it is most difficult for senior employees, and not so difficult for juniors.
Quote:
With your Google dashboard you can see a copy of all the data they have about you all in one place.
Access to the raw data doesn't indicate how the data are used, abused or leaked. The identity verification of Google+ makes it that much easier to cause privacy problems.
Quote:
Facebook pays a lot of money to PR firms to try to make your opinion about Google the negative one it has fabricated, sometimes Google do make mistakes, about as many as most IT companies, but sometimes it is worth finding out for yourself. After all, we live in a world where if you want free services you give over information. It is basic capitalism.
Surely you don't think I give Facebook a pass. If anything you're aiding Facebook by saying loss of privacy is a fact of life.
Good of you to admit Google and the rest make mistakes. That's all the more reason to worry. (btw: Facebook didn't have to pay for the current Google PR problem.)
Free services do notper se require giving up personal information. Basic capitalism says companies will do whatever they can get away with to make money--laws against it be damned. For example, consider Google's flouting of copyright laws. That doesn't mean regulations aren't helpful or that most companies aren't mindful of the laws. Google kind of stands out there on its own in that regard.
It's not so difficult to maintain your own e-mail server (and calendar server and contacts server). I believe there's a market for super-easy solutions.
Incomprehensible! A veteran AI poster hates Google. Whodathunkit
If Apple did this, you guys would be talking about how awesome they are for quickly addressing the concern.
What's this? There's bias toward the company for which the website exists and bias against the company known for lying to customers, stealing their data, and who stole their mobile OS from the company for which this website exists?
NO. REALLY.
If this had happened with Apple (even though it couldn't) and they released a similar statement, I would have been equally skeptical that anything had been actually done about it.
Vibrant Media, another web advertiser using similar tactics to Google's, called the circumvention a "workaround" intended to "make Safari work like all the other browsers,"
If people wanted the features of other browsers they could just, you know, use them.
FWIW Google's Chrome browser does offer an "Incognito" mode, which means "pages that you open and files that you download while in incognito mode aren?t recorded in Chrome?s browsing or download history. We also make sure all new cookies are deleted when you close your incognito windows."
Just an FYI for those using Chrome but afraid of your browsing history and searches being recorded for posterity.
Google created an operating system for mobiles called Android that is now the number one in the world, a realm which was originally dominated by Apple.
Google is also the number one competitor to Apple's iTV project.
They are also the market leader in cloud applications, an area that Apple is desperate to gain traction in.
So to not consider that competition is to be either mildly dyslexic or something so far worse I dare not insult you with it. But I do hope you take a moment to learn about capitalism and how the world works, it really is a rich and interesting history.
1) Apple has no interest in the mobile operating system market, you're thinking of Microsoft.
2) Competitors to the current Apple TV box include: TiVO, cable companies, XBox to a certain extent, whilst a revised full Apple Television would compete with Samsung, Sony & other TV manufacturers, not Google.
3) Apple is not trying to compete with Google's webapps, that's Microsoft with Windows Live & Office, Dropbox, Analytics & Advertising companies. Apple wants good-quality, reasonably priced services for its existing customers, that they can include in their ecosystem and control the future of. Trust, Google is not worried about me.com killing gmail.com.
They might of course have similar areas of interest, but it's the motivation & reasoning underlying these interests that determines whether they are competing for the same customers. Google's customers are, on the whole, other companies, whereas Apple's are consumers. There's no need to be condescending to someone you believe doesn't understand a concept like "competition".
FWIW Google's Chrome browser does offer an "Incognito" mode, which means "pages that you open and files that you download while in incognito mode aren?t recorded in Chrome?s browsing or download history. We also make sure all new cookies are deleted when you close your incognito windows."
Just an FYI for those using Chrome but afraid of your browsing history and searches being recorded for posterity.
Private browsing options only keep the local app from recording your history, it won't keep Google, Facebook, AI or whomever from being able to record and track you.
Private browsing options only keep the local app from recording your history, it won't keep Google, Facebook, AI or whomever from being able to record and track you.
Notice that Google Chrome even allows for persistent "Opt-out" settings across other browsers and sites. Try "Keep My Opt-Outs" extension for Chrome as a good start.
Notice that Google Chrome even allows for persistent "Opt-out" settings across other browsers and sites. Try "Keep My Opt-Outs" extension for Chrome as a good start.
Does he really expect us to believe that Google stops tracking you because you stop storing local history or click on an "opt-out" link? We aren't that naive. With Google, assume there is no opt-out until they prove there is, continually, each day.
What's that? They can't prove there is? True. But, then, we have absolutely no reason to believe them just because they say there is, and every reason to disbelieve them.
Notice that Google Chrome even allows for persistent "Opt-out" settings across other browsers and sites. Try "Keep My Opt-Outs" extension for Chrome as a good start.
I suppose you're going to tell us next that the Safari extension that Google made to let us opt-out of Google Analytics actually opts us out of Google Analytics, then.
FWIW Google's Chrome browser does offer an "Incognito" mode, which means "pages that you open and files that you download while in incognito mode aren?t recorded in Chrome?s browsing or download history. We also make sure all new cookies are deleted when you close your incognito windows."
Just an FYI for those using Chrome but afraid of your browsing history and searches being recorded for posterity.
Just because Chrome or any other browser does not display your footprints does not mean that Google are not tracking your movements and recording them on their servers.
Comments
Google is a spyware company that does search. Why is this story a surprise to anyone?
I'm switching off gmail (which is hard) to mobile me email (iCloud) . Also thinking of blocking all Google IP addresses from my network.
Tell me how to shut off my gmail address please. Also, how do I find the range of IP numbers for google so I can block them from my network? TIA
We didn?t anticipate that this would happen
read: we have shitloads of money but didn't want to spend it, or the time, to test things. sorry we got caught.
remember, we do no evil.
or something.
I haven't seen evidence they're lying to AI. Perhaps you have more information on it showing Google's statement was false? I've also plainly missed the section where the illegal part happened. ...
1. Google has demonstrated themselves to be so dishonest and deceptive, time after time, that there is, rightfully, a presumption that they are lying. With no credibility, because they have no history of honesty or straight dealing, It's up to them to offer proof that they are telling the truth.
2. Not being illegal doesn't make it ethical or "right". Google clearly went Black hat on this one and clearly and intentionally circumvented user expectations of privacy. That, even by their own twisted definition, is being evil.
Correction: It is extremely hard for even senior employees there to access user information
I expect it is most difficult for senior employees, and not so difficult for juniors.
With your Google dashboard you can see a copy of all the data they have about you all in one place.
Access to the raw data doesn't indicate how the data are used, abused or leaked. The identity verification of Google+ makes it that much easier to cause privacy problems.
Facebook pays a lot of money to PR firms to try to make your opinion about Google the negative one it has fabricated, sometimes Google do make mistakes, about as many as most IT companies, but sometimes it is worth finding out for yourself. After all, we live in a world where if you want free services you give over information. It is basic capitalism.
Surely you don't think I give Facebook a pass. If anything you're aiding Facebook by saying loss of privacy is a fact of life.
Good of you to admit Google and the rest make mistakes. That's all the more reason to worry. (btw: Facebook didn't have to pay for the current Google PR problem.
Free services do not per se require giving up personal information. Basic capitalism says companies will do whatever they can get away with to make money--laws against it be damned. For example, consider Google's flouting of copyright laws. That doesn't mean regulations aren't helpful or that most companies aren't mindful of the laws. Google kind of stands out there on its own in that regard.
I hate Google.
Incomprehensible! A veteran AI poster hates Google. Whodathunkit
If Apple did this, you guys would be talking about how awesome they are for quickly addressing the concern.
Incomprehensible! A veteran AI poster hates Google. Whodathunkit
If Apple did this, you guys would be talking about how awesome they are for quickly addressing the concern.
What's this? There's bias toward the company for which the website exists and bias against the company known for lying to customers, stealing their data, and who stole their mobile OS from the company for which this website exists?
NO. REALLY.
If this had happened with Apple (even though it couldn't) and they released a similar statement, I would have been equally skeptical that anything had been actually done about it.
Little Snitch told me the computer wanted connect to google as I visited every site this month.
I canceled my gmail account. End of story.
This is just one reason Safari sucks arse as a browser, and Google has shown how evil it really is.
How is this in any way Safari's problem?
Vibrant Media, another web advertiser using similar tactics to Google's, called the circumvention a "workaround" intended to "make Safari work like all the other browsers,"
If people wanted the features of other browsers they could just, you know, use them.
Just an FYI for those using Chrome but afraid of your browsing history and searches being recorded for posterity.
Google created an operating system for mobiles called Android that is now the number one in the world, a realm which was originally dominated by Apple.
Google is also the number one competitor to Apple's iTV project.
They are also the market leader in cloud applications, an area that Apple is desperate to gain traction in.
So to not consider that competition is to be either mildly dyslexic or something so far worse I dare not insult you with it. But I do hope you take a moment to learn about capitalism and how the world works, it really is a rich and interesting history.
1) Apple has no interest in the mobile operating system market, you're thinking of Microsoft.
2) Competitors to the current Apple TV box include: TiVO, cable companies, XBox to a certain extent, whilst a revised full Apple Television would compete with Samsung, Sony & other TV manufacturers, not Google.
3) Apple is not trying to compete with Google's webapps, that's Microsoft with Windows Live & Office, Dropbox, Analytics & Advertising companies. Apple wants good-quality, reasonably priced services for its existing customers, that they can include in their ecosystem and control the future of. Trust, Google is not worried about me.com killing gmail.com.
They might of course have similar areas of interest, but it's the motivation & reasoning underlying these interests that determines whether they are competing for the same customers. Google's customers are, on the whole, other companies, whereas Apple's are consumers. There's no need to be condescending to someone you believe doesn't understand a concept like "competition".
Oh? wait.
?
FWIW Google's Chrome browser does offer an "Incognito" mode, which means "pages that you open and files that you download while in incognito mode aren?t recorded in Chrome?s browsing or download history. We also make sure all new cookies are deleted when you close your incognito windows."
Just an FYI for those using Chrome but afraid of your browsing history and searches being recorded for posterity.
Private browsing options only keep the local app from recording your history, it won't keep Google, Facebook, AI or whomever from being able to record and track you.
Private browsing options only keep the local app from recording your history, it won't keep Google, Facebook, AI or whomever from being able to record and track you.
Then you might want to visit this site:
http://www.google.com/goodtoknow/manage-data/ads/
Notice that Google Chrome even allows for persistent "Opt-out" settings across other browsers and sites. Try "Keep My Opt-Outs" extension for Chrome as a good start.
Then you might want to visit this site:
http://www.google.com/goodtoknow/manage-data/ads/
Notice that Google Chrome even allows for persistent "Opt-out" settings across other browsers and sites. Try "Keep My Opt-Outs" extension for Chrome as a good start.
Does he really expect us to believe that Google stops tracking you because you stop storing local history or click on an "opt-out" link? We aren't that naive. With Google, assume there is no opt-out until they prove there is, continually, each day.
What's that? They can't prove there is? True. But, then, we have absolutely no reason to believe them just because they say there is, and every reason to disbelieve them.
Then you might want to visit this site:
http://www.google.com/goodtoknow/manage-data/ads/
Notice that Google Chrome even allows for persistent "Opt-out" settings across other browsers and sites. Try "Keep My Opt-Outs" extension for Chrome as a good start.
I suppose you're going to tell us next that the Safari extension that Google made to let us opt-out of Google Analytics actually opts us out of Google Analytics, then.
FWIW Google's Chrome browser does offer an "Incognito" mode, which means "pages that you open and files that you download while in incognito mode aren?t recorded in Chrome?s browsing or download history. We also make sure all new cookies are deleted when you close your incognito windows."
Just an FYI for those using Chrome but afraid of your browsing history and searches being recorded for posterity.
Just because Chrome or any other browser does not display your footprints does not mean that Google are not tracking your movements and recording them on their servers.