Don't Be Evil, Google!

[maflynn]

Originally Posted by The iGentleman

You are absolutely incorrect. "Don't be evil" has nothing to do with marketing, it is the mantra. It applies to everyone in the company, as it is essentially the code of conduct. Everyone at Google is expected to abide by it and not "be evil". Simply put, it's all a part of the culture at Google and the way things operate there.

It has everything to do with marketing, and while you may have an opinion that its a code of conduct, I see a company with a "do no evil yet" blurb yet decides that they want to own everything. That is they try to retain the rights to anything that lands on their server, pictures, emails, etc. They get caught from time to time and re-amend their privacy rules.

Simply put they are a company that has one purpose - to make money. They will attempt to do that within the confines of the law and at times they will push the limits like in the linked safari lawsuit.

[kevinof]

Same can be said for every for-profit company on the planet.

Originally Posted by maflynn

Simply put they are a company that has one purpose - to make money. They will attempt to do that within the confines of the law and at times they will push the limits ...

[maflynn]

Originally Posted by kevinof

Same can be said for every for-profit company on the planet.

That's my point and making money is not in of itself evil, though some people do consider it bad. I know google scans emails so they can sell the information and provide ad revenue. Is that evil when they state it up front, perhaps not and as a choice I decide not to use gmail. When they in their privacy statement that by posting images in googleplus or using google docs gives them Perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive license rights to that information, that might cross the line in my book (I believe they backed off on that however). Then there is their bookscanning attempt even if the author and publishers do not want their material scanned (its a lot more complex)

To summarize, making money is not bad, willingly bypassing security in safari to access data for their own gain well that's not really kosher is it.

[Lindsford]

Originally Posted by cynics

Lol everyone is sooo concerned about there precious privacy. Meanwhile they are checking into to a local restaurant on facebook and posting a picture of exactly what they bought.

I wish people would be more private so it would annoy me less.

I posted a picture of an extremely burnt piece of lasagne Carrabbas tried to let me eat with out checking the plate first, does that mean they will steal my information and market better restaurants for me?

[The iGentleman]

Originally Posted by Siyah

Because Apple is not accused of breaking European Data Protection Law and seems to show more of an effort to ensure compliance by appointing former deputy data protection commissioner Gary Davis as head of privacy in Europe.



link: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...329252816.html

While,



link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...phone-tracking

Apple is not as evil as Google

If that's the best you've got, then I'd beg to differ.

----------

Originally Posted by maflynn

It has everything to do with marketing, and while you may have an opinion that its a code of conduct, I see a company with a "do no evil yet" blurb yet decides that they want to own everything. That is they try to retain the rights to anything that lands on their server, pictures, emails, etc. They get caught from time to time and re-amend their privacy rules.

Simply put they are a company that has one purpose - to make money. They will attempt to do that within the confines of the law and at times they will push the limits like in the linked safari lawsuit.

WRONG. It is not my OPINION that "Don't be Evil" is essentially the code of conduct governing everyone at Google, it is a FACT. It isn't a marketing slogan or anything like that. It is the mantra and is an expectation that all employees are expected to adhere to. This isn't opinion, this is fact. The entire atmosphere there is based on "Don't be Evil".

[Awakener]

People are choosing convenience over privacy. Unfortunately because unintelligent people do not value their privacy, many companies have decided they can keep doing whatever they want.

[cynics]

Originally Posted by Lindsford

I posted a picture of an extremely burnt piece of lasagne Carrabbas tried to let me eat with out checking the plate first, does that mean they will steal my information and market better restaurants for me?

Is that what I said or is that what YOU are saying I said? The restaurant was obviously a generic reference about how little people care about privacy (like you broadcasting where you were, what time you were there, what you ordered and how it was cooked).

I'm sure if google took that information and referred you to a better place you'd be upset about it though.

[Lindsford]

Originally Posted by cynics

Is that what I said or is that what YOU are saying I said? The restaurant was obviously a generic reference about how little people care about privacy (like you broadcasting where you were, what time you were there, what you ordered and how it was cooked).

I'm sure if google took that information and referred you to a better place you'd be upset about it though.

I was in Colorado Springs, at a Carrabbas and had lasagne. I would not be upset if google took that information and emailed me coupons for places similar.

[Irishman]

Originally Posted by Lindsford

I was in Colorado Springs, at a Carrabbas and had lasagne. I would not be upset if google took that information and emailed me coupons for places similar.

Because that's not a sensitive thing for most of us. What if you were a young girl who was investigating terminating a pregnancy (no decision made yet, just looking into it), and started getting ads, emails, and banner ads for those services because of your inquiries?

Tactless.

[k995]

Originally Posted by Irishman

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/...cle1202558.ece

This is bad, but those of us who doubted the saintly stated motives of Google probably aren't surprised.

Collecting data as such is nit evil, even selling it on depending on how the data is given doesnt have tio be "evil" .

More fearmongering , your life is known period, wether google tracks you or not . If you dont want that, stop using most electronic devices.

----------

Originally Posted by Irishman

Because that's not a sensitive thing for most of us. What if you were a young girl who was investigating terminating a pregnancy (no decision made yet, just looking into it), and started getting ads, emails, and banner ads for those services because of your inquiries?

Tactless.

Yes because abortion clinics openly advertise all troughout the media. Non issue as you can give sch examples for any technology.

[Lindsford]

Originally Posted by Irishman

Because that's not a sensitive thing for most of us. What if you were a young girl who was investigating terminating a pregnancy (no decision made yet, just looking into it), and started getting ads, emails, and banner ads for those services because of your inquiries?

Tactless.

Lol Did you really just whip out such a ridiculous scenario?

Please, explain to me what kind of ads email and banner ads come with abortions?

2-for-1 special?



I know of an individual who has gone through that process. I've never heard them say Man, I keep getting these Abortion emails. I wish they would stop!

The only valid reason I could see you being upset about sharing data is if you keep posting on social media where you're at, while people know you're 1,500 miles away and no one is watching your stuff...that could be a problem. And a dead give away from thieves. Only valid argument imho. If google takes what I search and am interested in their adds more power to them. I still won't click them.

Also If you use noscript and firefox you often don't see these adds. If you're aware enough to care about how they use your information you should be aware enough to avoid it.

(Not using real info on facebook, use an alias or nickname...etc etc) very basic things.

[walie]

I take it none of you privacy freaks use Google Now then.


Is fantastic by the way.

[praktical]

Guys at the end of the day who cares who monitors who. The fact of it is we are constantly being monitored one way or the other. The key thing is to ensure we're on the right side of the fence as much as we can. Whether it be Google, the FBI, NSA, Apple etc the fact is we do not live in a society where we are truly free so we make the best of what we have and stay within the boundaries of the law.

[Irishman]

Originally Posted by Lindsford

Lol Did you really just whip out such a ridiculous scenario?

Please, explain to me what kind of ads email and banner ads come with abortions?

2-for-1 special?



I know of an individual who has gone through that process. I've never heard them say Man, I keep getting these Abortion emails. I wish they would stop!

The only valid reason I could see you being upset about sharing data is if you keep posting on social media where you're at, while people know you're 1,500 miles away and no one is watching your stuff...that could be a problem. And a dead give away from thieves. Only valid argument imho. If google takes what I search and am interested in their adds more power to them. I still won't click them.

Also If you use noscript and firefox you often don't see these adds. If you're aware enough to care about how they use your information you should be aware enough to avoid it.

(Not using real info on facebook, use an alias or nickname...etc etc) very basic things.

The fact that you can so easily come up with another valid reason to not so liberally have Google (et al) share quite so much of my data while trying to argue against my point, speaks volumes!

Thank you for the fortification, sir.

----------

Originally Posted by praktical

Guys at the end of the day who cares who monitors who. The fact of it is we are constantly being monitored one way or the other. The key thing is to ensure we're on the right side of the fence as much as we can. Whether it be Google, the FBI, NSA, Apple etc the fact is we do not live in a society where we are truly free so we make the best of what we have and stay within the boundaries of the law.

So, it sounds like what you're arguing for is for us to just not do anything that we'd be embarrassed to have come out on the evening news, and everything will be okay??

I hope I'm wrong.

[matttye]

Originally Posted by Irishman

Because that's not a sensitive thing for most of us. What if you were a young girl who was investigating terminating a pregnancy (no decision made yet, just looking into it), and started getting ads, emails, and banner ads for those services because of your inquiries?

Tactless.

Pretty sure you can turn off targeted advertising.

[TheHateMachine]

Originally Posted by matttye

Pretty sure you can turn off targeted advertising.

You can also view your "advertisement" profile for your google account and edit it freely.

Also can someone post a credible source that says Google actually sells your information? From what I gather they retain your information and just direct ads at you based on what they think they know about you. In a sense it is the same thing but your information never leaves Google. Why would they give away your information for a one time fee when they can charge advertising companies over and over to target newer ads.

[walie]

Originally Posted by TheHateMachine

You can also view your "advertisement" profile for your google account and edit it freely.

Also can someone post a credible source that says Google actually sells your information? From what I gather they retain your information and just direct ads at you based on what they think they know about you. In a sense it is the same thing but your information never leaves Google. Why would they give away your information for a one time fee when they can charge advertising companies over and over to target newer ads.

Who needs a source, since all the apple fanboys/tin foil wearers say it, it must be true!!

[SeanR1]

Interesting read
http://t.co/hXjo9DcQWS

[sentinelsx]

Everyone tracks me anyways. Some less, some more, so meh.

I disabled google now, NOT because it tracks what i do on the phone, but because i found it useless and would rather gain an extra few minutes of battery life by turning it off than simply having it there sucking power for no reason.

[daveathall]

I would rather have no adverts, that won't happen so I would prefer adverts that are aimed at my interest rather than random. If you want to know where I've been, in this day of electronic surveillance cameras it's not that difficult.

[Siyah]

The issue is more complicated than simple ad targeting.

Android application developer Dan Nolan claims that the Google Play store sends software developers the names, approximated locations, and email addresses of every individual that downloads one of their applications.

Nolan created a “Paul Keating Insult Generator” application that is apparently quite popular in Australia. Nolan claims he recently logged into his Google Play account to update his payment options. When he visited the merchant account section, he noticed that Google Play was sending him the email address, approximate location, and, in some cases, full names of every person that downloaded his application.

Google Play orders, Nolan explains, are being treated like Google Wallet transactions, meaning that software developers are receiving all the same information about application orders – with the exception of exact addresses - that merchants would receive about people ordering actual merchandise.

link: http://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/go...pp-devs-021413


On iOS you can deny permission requests and still use the app. See below:

Data Privacy

In addition to location data, the system now asks the user’s permission before allowing third-party apps to access certain user data, including:

Contacts

Calendars

Reminders

Photo Library

For contact, calendar, and reminder data, your app needs to be prepared to be denied access to these items and to adjust its behavior accordingly. If the user has not yet been prompted to allow access, the returned structure is valid but contains no records. If the user has denied access, the app receives a NULL value or no data. If the user grants permission to the app, the system subsequently notifies the app that it needs to reload or revert the data.

For the photo library, the existing interface supports the app being denied access.

[SlCKB0Y]

Originally Posted by Awakener

People are choosing convenience over privacy. Unfortunately because unintelligent people do not value their privacy, many companies have decided they can keep doing whatever they want.

Do you know what else unintelligent people do? Rather than actually researching about exactly what Google will and won't do with their data, they pass on rubbish obtained from third parties as fact and get reactionary.

[Tinmania]

Originally Posted by daveathall

I would rather have no adverts, that won't happen so I would prefer adverts that are aimed at my interest rather than random. If you want to know where I've been, in this day of electronic surveillance cameras it's not that difficult.

I agree. I wish television worked similar. I can't even watch TV anymore the ads are just ridiculous. From the drug-of-the-month in one ad to the lawsuit for last month's drug-of-the-month in the next. Ugh.




Michael