6 ms·

I agree with you. I get the impression that data aggregation&analysis is so deeply ingrained in Google company culture that it's entirely possible the responsib

by dvdplm 11y ago

I agree with you. I get the impression that data aggregation&analysis is so deeply ingrained in Google company culture that it's entirely possible the responsible people truly believes nothing went wrong here.

pdkl95 11y ago
From PBS Frontline's "United States Of Secrets" (part 2): LIZ FIGUEROA, (D) State Senator, CA, 1998-06: We walk into this room, and it’s myself and two of my staff— my chief of staff and one of my attorneys. And across from us was Larry, Sergey, and their attorney. All of a sudden, Sergey started talking to me. He said, “Senator, how would you feel if a robot went into your home and read your diary and read your financial records, read your love letters, read everything, but before leaving the house, it imploded?” And he said, “That’s not violating privacy.” I immediately said, “Of course it is. Yes, it is.” And he said, “No, it isn’t. Nothing’s kept. Nobody knows about it.” I said, “That robot has read everything. Does that robot know if I’m sad or if I’m feeling fear, or what’s happening?” And he looked at me and he said, “Oh, no. That robot knows a lot more than that.” Of course, what that ridiculous robot analogy leaves out is that to be useful, something has to be reported back to Google; if the "implosion" prevented all of the data from returning to Google, there would be no point in sending the robot. > Nobody knows about it. This idea that no person knows about it is suspiciously similar to the word games the NSA plays with their claims of only needing a warrant once a human searches for something they already captured and stored.
- fuck_google 11y ago
  Google makes NSA look good.
- profeta 11y ago
  Senator, if i was spending billions on robots to go to people homes and read their diaries and then explode before leaving, would you think there was some ulterior motive on me building those robots?
  - ethbro 11y ago
    Or even more reasonably, if I were spending billions on such robots and they became a pervasive part of society, such that every family had such a robot regularly visiting their house and their daily routine was dependant on such robots... Coupled with the fact that the function of said robots could be changed with a code push... Doesn't that create an incredible opportunity for monetization and therefore risk for future abuse? Just because we could provide a perfect search result to any query if we knew everything about a person (including their current thoughts) doesn't make enacting that a reasonable or good idea.
ocdtrekkie 11y ago
From everything I understand about Google culture from current and former Googlers I talk to, Google employees categorically believe data aggregation has no bearing on privacy concerns at all, and that there's fundamentally nothing even bordering on questionable in anything they do with it. At the very least, Googlers :believe: they're 'doing the right thing', so they :believe: their marketing and their mottos, at least. It's up to us to convince Google that it's wrong.

by dvdplm 11y ago

pdkl95 11y ago

From PBS Frontline's "United States Of Secrets" (part 2): LIZ FIGUEROA, (D) State Senator, CA, 1998-06: We walk into this room, and it’s myself and two of my staff— my chief of staff and one of my attorneys. And across from us was Larry, Sergey, and their attorney. All of a sudden, Sergey started talking to me. He said, “Senator, how would you feel if a robot went into your home and read your diary and read your financial records, read your love letters, read everything, but before leaving the house, it imploded?” And he said, “That’s not violating privacy.” I immediately said, “Of course it is. Yes, it is.” And he said, “No, it isn’t. Nothing’s kept. Nobody knows about it.” I said, “That robot has read everything. Does that robot know if I’m sad or if I’m feeling fear, or what’s happening?” And he looked at me and he said, “Oh, no. That robot knows a lot more than that.” Of course, what that ridiculous robot analogy leaves out is that to be useful, something has to be reported back to Google; if the "implosion" prevented all of the data from returning to Google, there would be no point in sending the robot. > Nobody knows about it. This idea that no person knows about it is suspiciously similar to the word games the NSA plays with their claims of only needing a warrant once a human searches for something they already captured and stored.

fuck_google 11y ago
Google makes NSA look good.
profeta 11y ago
Senator, if i was spending billions on robots to go to people homes and read their diaries and then explode before leaving, would you think there was some ulterior motive on me building those robots?
- ethbro 11y ago
  Or even more reasonably, if I were spending billions on such robots and they became a pervasive part of society, such that every family had such a robot regularly visiting their house and their daily routine was dependant on such robots... Coupled with the fact that the function of said robots could be changed with a code push... Doesn't that create an incredible opportunity for monetization and therefore risk for future abuse? Just because we could provide a perfect search result to any query if we knew everything about a person (including their current thoughts) doesn't make enacting that a reasonable or good idea.

ocdtrekkie 11y ago

From everything I understand about Google culture from current and former Googlers I talk to, Google employees categorically believe data aggregation has no bearing on privacy concerns at all, and that there's fundamentally nothing even bordering on questionable in anything they do with it. At the very least, Googlers :believe: they're 'doing the right thing', so they :believe: their marketing and their mottos, at least. It's up to us to convince Google that it's wrong.