3 ms·

>Rather, it's that the data you gave to Google is now being given to other sites without your knowledge That is a completely unsubstantiated claim. Given to wh

>Rather, it's that the data you gave to Google is now being given to other sites without your knowledge That is a completely unsubstantiated claim. Given to who? >Maybe you didn't hear about the case about the school district spying on students by accessing their web cams in their laptops? I did hear about that. It was a huge controversy and when people found out about what the school district was doing people got in trouble. That wasn't ok and people were up in arms about it. That still isn't even an example of what you were stating because it was a one-off thing that people weren't aware of and when they became aware of it the problem was fixed. >You think people are aware that they are sending the resulting site specific data about their searches? Perhaps not, but I did clarify in the following sentence my exact meaning of "opt-in" in this case, which you seem to be ignoring. So what if sites get the search queries? I have sites too and my Google Analytics shows what people are searching for to reach my site. Do I know who those people are? Not at all, not in any way shape or form. >But being tracked by businesses you never knew existed without every visiting their site isn't a far leap. Yes it is. Some Website knowing that some browser searched for some keyword is still an incredibly far leap from being tracked in your home by video cameras. >Finally, stop being antagonistic. Your insults are childish. You can disagree, but you can do so being less rude. I have not insulted you once. Telling you to get real is not an insult, not under any stretch of the imagination. Especially given the context of the remark. Perhaps I am being a little harsh, but only because your argument went from worthy of a response to completely off-the-wall.

jasonlotito 16y ago
> That is a completely unsubstantiated claim. Given to who? Google allows the forwarding of your search information to other sites. It's not unsubstantiated, and well established. It's the point of all of this. Yes, it's being done in your browser. But it can be fixed on the search engine end. > That still isn't even an example of what you were stating because it was a one-off thing that people weren't aware of and when they became aware of it the problem was fixed. Yes, when people are made aware of it, they fixed it. Like in this case, educating people on the problems pushes for fixes. The problem here is people aren't aware that the information they are sharing with specific sites are being shared with other sites. Basically, the issue at hand isn't you sharing your data with specific sites; it's that you are sharing it with sites you aren't aware of. > Perhaps not, but I did clarify in the following sentence my exact meaning of "opt-in" in this case, which you seem to be ignoring. So what if sites get the search queries? I have sites too and my Google Analytics shows what people are searching for to reach my site. Do I know who those people are? Not at all, not in any way shape or form. I'm aware of your 'opt-in' remark, and I didn't ignore it. However, no one is 'opting-in' to sending their search queries to your site. Oh, I'm sure their are people who don't care. And for your site, it's not a problem. You don't know who these people are. But these people aren't saying "Yes, send my search data to coderdude's website." They are searching in Google, and the net result is coderdude get's this information. The next step is what you can do with that information when coupled with other tracking information. We've already seen how specific Facebook ads can get in the past when you have a lot of specific information about a user, and we already know RapLeaf and others store a lot of information. > Yes it is. Some Website knowing that some browser searched for some keyword is still an incredibly far leap from being tracked in your home by video cameras. Sorry, I really didn't mean to tie the two so closely together. My intent in asking the question was really just to gauge how important privacy is to you. I know people who are quite fine with the whole "tracking everyone if it fights terrorism." Anyways, the point of the last statement was merely to say that to some, spying on your activity at home is essentially spying on your personal internet traffic. Indeed, for many, the later is more revealing then the former. Even still, a poor direct comparison, and one I really hadn't intended to make in the first place. > Especially given the context of the remark. It was a question, not an assertion. You inferred more from the question than intended. I'll blame myself for not being more clear to distance the question from being more than it was, but it was just a question. > I have not insulted you once. Telling you to get real is not an insult, not under any stretch of the imagination. > Perhaps I am being a little harsh Let me just say your attitude was insulting then. Relax. I'm not crazy. =) I probably just failed at being specific enough, though I hate constantly hedging and making assumptions about how people will read things.
- coderdude 16y ago
  >Google allows the forwarding of your search information to other sites. It's not unsubstantiated, and well established. It's the point of all of this. Yes, it's being done in your browser. But it can be fixed on the search engine end. They forward along the keywords. Useless for identification purposes. There isn't a point to arguing this any further with each other, as I think we've both made our points clear. Good Game.
  - jasonlotito 16y ago
    > They forward along the keywords. Useless for identification purposes. Identification isn't the point. If you think identification is at issue, you don't understand. > as I think we've both made our points clear. I can't help but think I failed.

jasonlotito 16y ago

> That is a completely unsubstantiated claim. Given to who? Google allows the forwarding of your search information to other sites. It's not unsubstantiated, and well established. It's the point of all of this. Yes, it's being done in your browser. But it can be fixed on the search engine end. > That still isn't even an example of what you were stating because it was a one-off thing that people weren't aware of and when they became aware of it the problem was fixed. Yes, when people are made aware of it, they fixed it. Like in this case, educating people on the problems pushes for fixes. The problem here is people aren't aware that the information they are sharing with specific sites are being shared with other sites. Basically, the issue at hand isn't you sharing your data with specific sites; it's that you are sharing it with sites you aren't aware of. > Perhaps not, but I did clarify in the following sentence my exact meaning of "opt-in" in this case, which you seem to be ignoring. So what if sites get the search queries? I have sites too and my Google Analytics shows what people are searching for to reach my site. Do I know who those people are? Not at all, not in any way shape or form. I'm aware of your 'opt-in' remark, and I didn't ignore it. However, no one is 'opting-in' to sending their search queries to your site. Oh, I'm sure their are people who don't care. And for your site, it's not a problem. You don't know who these people are. But these people aren't saying "Yes, send my search data to coderdude's website." They are searching in Google, and the net result is coderdude get's this information. The next step is what you can do with that information when coupled with other tracking information. We've already seen how specific Facebook ads can get in the past when you have a lot of specific information about a user, and we already know RapLeaf and others store a lot of information. > Yes it is. Some Website knowing that some browser searched for some keyword is still an incredibly far leap from being tracked in your home by video cameras. Sorry, I really didn't mean to tie the two so closely together. My intent in asking the question was really just to gauge how important privacy is to you. I know people who are quite fine with the whole "tracking everyone if it fights terrorism." Anyways, the point of the last statement was merely to say that to some, spying on your activity at home is essentially spying on your personal internet traffic. Indeed, for many, the later is more revealing then the former. Even still, a poor direct comparison, and one I really hadn't intended to make in the first place. > Especially given the context of the remark. It was a question, not an assertion. You inferred more from the question than intended. I'll blame myself for not being more clear to distance the question from being more than it was, but it was just a question. > I have not insulted you once. Telling you to get real is not an insult, not under any stretch of the imagination. > Perhaps I am being a little harsh Let me just say your attitude was insulting then. Relax. I'm not crazy. =) I probably just failed at being specific enough, though I hate constantly hedging and making assumptions about how people will read things.

coderdude 16y ago
>Google allows the forwarding of your search information to other sites. It's not unsubstantiated, and well established. It's the point of all of this. Yes, it's being done in your browser. But it can be fixed on the search engine end. They forward along the keywords. Useless for identification purposes. There isn't a point to arguing this any further with each other, as I think we've both made our points clear. Good Game.
- jasonlotito 16y ago
  > They forward along the keywords. Useless for identification purposes. Identification isn't the point. If you think identification is at issue, you don't understand. > as I think we've both made our points clear. I can't help but think I failed.