3 ms·

> Then things like the NSA leaks happen So I don't think that's the cause here, because: https://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/what.html https://googleblo

> Then things like the NSA leaks happen So I don't think that's the cause here, because: https://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/what.html https://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/what.html "Press reports that suggest that Google is providing open-ended access to our users’ data are false, period." "Any suggestion that Google is disclosing information about our users’ Internet activity on such a scale is completely false." And you have chosen not to believe a statement made in the strongest possible terms. If you won't believe this, then I do not think there are any words that you would believe, so there's no point in trying to get more published. > What can you offer me other than root access to your servers? Indeed, and we can't do that because it would invalidate the very security that you want. > If up until today, Google was a good company and wasn't abusing anything in any way, and suddenly tomorrow they turned evil, why would they erase my data first? They still have it, and I have no control over whether or not Tomorrow-Google will keep it. The easy solution here is to not keep any of that data in de-anonymised form for longer than is necessary, but then people don't want to believe the privacy policies which say this is happening...

CaptSpify 11y ago
I'm not saying Google deliberately handed data over to the NSA. I'm saying the NSA (and others) are try getting to it one way other other. It's not necessarily that Google is untrustworthy, but that if the data does get out, however that happens, it will be quite devastating. > And you have chosen not to believe a statement made in the strongest possible terms. A) It's not in the "strongest possible term". Quite a bit of weasel-wording there IMO. B) How does a statement's strength validate it? I can strongly say any lie I want. > Indeed, and we can't do that because it would invalidate the very security that you want. I agree. And I would like a solution to this. There's just not a good way for me to trust cloud providers. > The easy solution here is to not keep any of that data in de-anonymised form for longer than is necessary, but then people don't want to believe the privacy policies which say this is happening... > The easy solution here is to not keep any of that data in de-anonymised form for longer than is necessary, but then people don't want to believe the privacy policies which say this is happening... I don't see how that's at all relevant. A) Just because one asshole on the internet doesn't believe the policy doesn't mean Google should just give up on it. B) That doesn't address my point. Tomorrow-Google will still get access to my data, unknown to me. I can't verify the "trustworthiness" of a company every day.

CaptSpify 11y ago

I'm not saying Google deliberately handed data over to the NSA. I'm saying the NSA (and others) are try getting to it one way other other. It's not necessarily that Google is untrustworthy, but that if the data does get out, however that happens, it will be quite devastating. > And you have chosen not to believe a statement made in the strongest possible terms. A) It's not in the "strongest possible term". Quite a bit of weasel-wording there IMO. B) How does a statement's strength validate it? I can strongly say any lie I want. > Indeed, and we can't do that because it would invalidate the very security that you want. I agree. And I would like a solution to this. There's just not a good way for me to trust cloud providers. > The easy solution here is to not keep any of that data in de-anonymised form for longer than is necessary, but then people don't want to believe the privacy policies which say this is happening... > The easy solution here is to not keep any of that data in de-anonymised form for longer than is necessary, but then people don't want to believe the privacy policies which say this is happening... I don't see how that's at all relevant. A) Just because one asshole on the internet doesn't believe the policy doesn't mean Google should just give up on it. B) That doesn't address my point. Tomorrow-Google will still get access to my data, unknown to me. I can't verify the "trustworthiness" of a company every day.