If you remove the scary factor, Google is great

[IronWing]

I find it funny that some people seem to think only Google is mining information.

Just wait until Anand starts selling our posting histories!

 

[darkewaffle]

The "nothing to hide" argument is bullshit, and I'd expect better from someone who frequents a tech forum.

The only way your insurance rates rise or you get denied employment due to "more information" is if you're concealing something negative which should have been disclosed to them in the first place. I think it's well within that businesses right (and their best interest) to perform due diligence to make sure they're not putting themselves at risk.

I think it'd be a win win practically. The people with "nothing to hide" are not negatively affected, except for the lunatics who feel violated when they think their "e-self" is some sort of secret identity.

All that aside, this is all about aggregate data not individual data. Businesses don't care about you (s), but they want to know as much as possible about you (pl).

 

[lxskllr]

The only way your insurance rates rise or you get denied employment due to "more information" is if you're concealing something negative which should have been disclosed to them in the first place.

Nonsense. It's none of their business. "Negative" could be religious, political, or social affiliations; none of which have anything to do with ones ability to do a job. For insurance, being statistically profiled will lead to erroneous results, and give a pseudo-science veneer of legitimacy to an inaccurate practice.

 

[shortylickens]

The only way your insurance rates rise or you get denied employment due to "more information" is if you're concealing something negative which should have been disclosed to them in the first place.

That is absolutely atrocious logic, and if you ever lived in a police state you'd understand why.

Maybe you will some day if this sort of thinking keeps up.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

I'm so glad my life is not chaotic enough that I don't have a need for that.

To many people ignore the useful upsides to the data mining. Yesterday there was worse traffic on my morning commute then normal so while I was getting ready to leave Google Now popped up with a notification telling me I would need to leave home 9 minutes earlier than usual to make it to work at the same time. IMO Google Now being able to provide me with useful information without me having to directly request it is one of the most significant advancements in mobile devices in the last several years.

 

[Fritzo]

What's even more scary is that Google can and WILL put up your private data at some point in the future (for your family to access).

And Government can request ANY of your data at ANY time and WILL get access to it pretty quickly.

The government is free to look at my data. Maybe they'll target me on their "most boring Americans" list.

 

[Fritzo]

I find it funny that some people seem to think only Google is mining information.

Exactly. I have relatives that will go on hour long tirades about how evil Google is and thinks they're peeking in their windows at night. They refused to use anything associated with Google.

Then I walk into their garage and see Amazon boxes everywhere...

 

[dr150]

Every wannbe President has his balls in a vice.

If Google doesn't want him as Prez, they'll threaten to release all your humiliating searches to the New York Times. :whiste:

 

[Farang]

Every wannbe President has his balls in a vice.

If Google doesn't want him as Prez, they'll threaten to release all your humiliating searches to the New York Times. :whiste:

Man... Can you imagine.. You can't tell me Obama hasn't googled 'ebony teen compilation' once in his life

 

[lxskllr]

The government is free to look at my data. Maybe they'll target me on their "most boring Americans" list.

Far too often, discussions of the NSA surveillance and data mining
define the problem solely in terms of surveillance. To return to my
discussion of metaphor, the problems are not just Orwellian, but
Kafkaesque. The NSA programs are problematic even if no information
people want to hide is uncovered. In The Trial, the problem is not inhibited
behavior, but rather a suffocating powerlessness and vulnerability created
by the court system’s use of personal data and its exclusion of the
protagonist from having any knowledge or participation in the process.
The harms consist of those created by bureaucracies—indifference, errors,
abuses, frustration, and lack of transparency and accountability. One
such harm, for example, which I call aggregation, emerges from the
combination of small bits of seemingly innocuous data.84 When combined,
the information becomes much more telling about a person. For the
person who truly has nothing to hide, aggregation is not much of a
problem. But in the stronger, less absolutist form of the nothing to hide
argument, people argue that certain pieces of information are not something
they would hide. Aggregation, however, means that by combining
pieces of information we might not care to conceal, the government can
glean information about us that we might really want to conceal. Part of
the allure of data mining for the government is its ability to reveal a lot
about our personalities and activities by sophisticated means of
analyzing data. Therefore, without greater transparency in data mining,
it is hard to claim that programs like the NSA data mining program will
not reveal information people might want to hide, as we do not know
precisely what is revealed. Moreover, data mining aims to be predictive
of behavior, striving to prognosticate about our future actions. People
who match certain profiles are deemed likely to engage in a similar
pattern of behavior. It is quite difficult to refute actions that one has not
yet done. Having nothing to hide will not always dispel predictions of
future activity

Another problem in the taxonomy, which is implicated by the NSA
program, is the problem I refer to as exclusion.85 Exclusion is the
problem caused when people are prevented from having knowledge
about how their information is being used, as well as barred from being able to access and correct errors in that data. The NSA program involves a
massive database of information that individuals cannot access. Indeed,
the very existence of the program was kept secret for years.86 This kind
of information processing, which forbids people’s knowledge or
involvement, resembles in some ways a kind of due process problem. It
is a structural problem involving the way people are treated by government
institutions. Moreover, it creates a power imbalance between individuals
and the government. To what extent should the Executive Branch and
an agency such as the NSA, which is relatively insulated from the
political process and public accountability, have a significant power over
citizens? This issue is not about whether the information gathered is
something people want to hide, but rather about the power and the
structure of government.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1098449_code249137.pdf?abstractid=998565&mirid=1

 

[IronWing]

I went and googled Google Now. That's just creepy. Not that Google has all that info but that people might want a net nanny to hold their hand throughout the day.

 

[Skel]

Everything is great when you remove property x. Being data mined out the ass, and having it handed to the government is a pretty big x though.

The "nothing to hide" argument is bullshit, and I'd expect better from someone who frequents a tech forum.

I don't always agree with your posts.. but with posts like these it's hard to do anything but agree

 

[darkewaffle]

Nonsense. It's none of their business. "Negative" could be religious, political, or social affiliations; none of which have anything to do with ones ability to do a job. For insurance, being statistically profiled will lead to erroneous results, and give a pseudo-science veneer of legitimacy to an inaccurate practice.

It doesn't have anything to do with performing the job, absolutely. But not being hired for those reasons is a different problem altogether. I think there's nothing wrong with having access to that information, but that's not to say it can't be misused; the same as any other tool. If you're not hired because of your religion, the problem lies in you not being hired, not the fact your employer has knowledge of it.

 

[Saint Nick]

The "nothing to hide" argument is bullshit, and I'd expect better from someone who frequents a tech forum.

Pretty much. Has nothing to do with "hiding" anything. It has to do with a right to privacy. Once they cross one line, they'll just keep crossing others until we no longer have any sort of freedom.

 

[Red Storm]

I went and googled Google Now. That's just creepy. Not that Google has all that info but that people might want a net nanny to hold their hand throughout the day.

If Google Now is a net nanny, then any technology that consolidates information you want/need is hand holding.

 

[IronWing]

If Google Now is a net nanny, then any technology that consolidates information you want/need is hand holding.

How many of these systems offer to predict just what information you'll need and deliver it to you just in time?

Maybe net minder would have been a better choice of phrasing as net nanny implies that it filters out naughty stuff.

 

[Kev]

Again, NO INDIVIDUAL DATA IS COLLECTED.

This is not an accurate statement.

 

[KeithTalent]

I use some of their stuff and like it enough for what it does and I don't find anything scary about them. I'm not really that loyal to any one company, but I am anti a few of them, so that sort of helps to dictate what I use/purchase.

KT

 

[Dominato3r]

I just got a new android phone and it is stupid how much shit there is that is left on by default like automatic picture uploads to Google+ and location logging

 

[Fritzo]

I went and googled Google Now. That's just creepy. Not that Google has all that info but that people might want a net nanny to hold their hand throughout the day.

Yet when you see computer assistants in science fiction movies, you're all "Cooooooooollllll!"

 

[BladeVenom]

so pretending that google isnt data mining and doesnt want to own your soul

But you can get your soul back if you can beat them in a fiddle contest. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDm_ZHyYTrg

 

[drebo]

I love it how the people complaining about Google datamining your searches and emails (through a service they provide you for free, btw) have no problem plugging in all that info and more into Facebook or LinkedIn.

Isn't hypocrisy great?

 

[Skel]

I love it how the people complaining about Google datamining your searches and emails (through a service they provide you for free, btw) have no problem plugging in all that info and more into Facebook or LinkedIn.

Isn't hypocrisy great?

It's a bit different as one (FB, LinkedIn, whatever) tells me upfront it's going to use whatever I give it, and it's designed for that. Google does it mostly in the background. Depending on what I'm using it may even be doing it without me having a clue. I'm not opposed to Google datamining, they just need to be upfront on what they're collecting and what they're doing with it.

 

[MonKENy]

NO INDIVIDUAL DATA IS COLLECTED.

yeah thats not true, even Google CEOs themselves say that they track your individual usage. They say that for 6 months they keep your specific IP on log associated with everything you search, use, and how its used. Then after 6 months they scramble the last 2 digits of the address, then after another 6 months scramble again and sometime after that delete all association completely or something along those lines

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/inside-the-mind-of-google/

is a good doc about them.

 

[lxskllr]

But you can get your soul back if you can beat them in a fiddle contest. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDm_ZHyYTrg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3nthADmA7o