4 ms·

Speculative what-if without any substantive reporting is the entire crux of the argument concerning Google as a steward of student information, including the or

Speculative what-if without any substantive reporting is the entire crux of the argument concerning Google as a steward of student information, including the original EFF complaint [https://www.eff.org/document/ftc-complaint-google-education https://www.eff.org/document/ftc-complaint-google-education]. The entire argument is one giant "what-if" scenario; Google is not the first major company to offer both private and commercial services (Microsoft and Oracle, for example, have both made decades of business on providing services to third-parties with competing interests and acting as a trusted steward of those parties' data). Fortunately, the FTC is empowered to do the "old-fashion sleuthing" if they find the accusation has merit on its face.

rubyfan 11y ago
That's fine but I'd expect if the issue is to be treated with any urgency we would have some sense of the problem. If parties are acting sensibly with data and self regulating then the urgency is quite less than top priority. Does it need to be addressed, yes but perhaps parties would spend some time to get it right before rushing to create privacy disclosures that will only add to the confusion. Disclosing partner and vendor data usage to parents is likely a tricky issue for schools. My guess is the current loophole is more about laziness and lack of mature regulation than any insidious plan by Google to capture data about our kids so they can show more relevant ads.