5 ms·

It seems more reasonable solutions already exist, like not logging in to Google when doing searches you want to keep anonymous. Google probably still logs stuff

It seems more reasonable solutions already exist, like not logging in to Google when doing searches you want to keep anonymous. Google probably still logs stuff (IP, user agent, and search term) but it gives you plausible deniability and you have the option of using a public WiFi or VPN if you don't want your IP address logged. Or more simply, just use DuckDuckGo instead.

hiptobecubic 4y ago
How is that "more reasonable" ?
- olalonde 4y ago
  Saving the search history by default is probably a better UX for most users. You get autocompletion, it helps Google deliver better results, helps show more relevant advertisements, etc. Defaults are usually chosen to satisfy the most common use case. The use case described in the article (hiding searches from law enforcement) is relatively rare and shouldn't serve as the basis for a default, in my opinion. For users who value their privacy more, there are alternatives like DuckDuckGo.
- marssaxman 4y ago
  What would be unreasonable about it? This is a genuine question. I never did log into google for any searches, and I switched to DuckDuckGo some years ago with no fuss. It seems to me like a practical thing anyone might do if they don't want Google to track them.
harry8 4y ago
How well do you think that's going to go if you are charged with murder? It doesn't matter a damn what /you/ (or me, or anyone) think about the ethics of the situation. Plausible deniability is going to be a very weak crutch to be relying on when charged with something with an equivalent consequences to a charge murder. Defence of google policy on that basis is really a non-starter, imho. I imagine google won't actually do that themselves they'll just remain silent with PR drafted press releases talking about just how important something or other is to them with the usual total lack of substance. Are google's socially progressive positions purely marketing and they'll drop and and all of them like a hot brick if it might cost them some money or market share? Are we the baddies?
- Schroedingersat 4y ago
  > Are we the baddies? Always have been.
- olalonde 4y ago
  I don't organize my life around the unlikely event that I might one day be falsely accused of murder. I don't estimate that it is worth the cost and I suspect most people share that view, as evidenced by Google's massive user base. I understand that some people do and I respect their decision. > Plausible deniability is going to be a very weak crutch to be relying on when charged with something with an equivalent consequences to a charge murder I wasn't aware that abortion was prosecuted so harshly. If that's the case, then you should indeed not rely on plausible deniability and instead, use Tor and/or DuckDuckGo. I am still defending Google's policy though. Google shouldn't cater to a minority of users (e.g. users that plan to commit murder-level crimes) to the detriment of the majority.
  - ModernMech 4y ago
    > I don't organize my life around the unlikely event that I might one day be falsely accused of murder. Do you routinely provide or receive a procedure that's considered by fundamentalist Christian politicians to be tantamount to murdering infants? If so, you should probably consider the possibility that one of those politicians will come for you and claim you've committed murder. They have the power to do so, and now the law is finally on their side. It's no longer an unlikely prospect.
    - olalonde 4y ago
      Do you mean that anyone who had an abortion while it was legal could now be prosecuted for "murder"? That seems insane.
      - ModernMech 4y ago
        No, what I'm saying is that it's easy to pretend this isn't a problem that affects you if you aren't regularly engaging in the kind of routine activity that is now being labeled "murder". What was routine lifesaving medical care for you yesterday is now being described by political religious fanatics as infanticide. This was background noise in the past because their point of view was not supported by the law. Now it is and I fully expect them to use their newfound power to oppress women seeking lifesaving medical care. Maybe you think that is insane, but a lot of people thought a 10 year old living in a state that would force her to give birth was so insane it must be fake news. Or that it's insane a doctor would be investigated for helping a 10 year old receive lifesaving medical care she required. But here we are. Your threat assessment is outmoded by recent events. I can think of no group more dangerous than religious fanatics bent on protecting "innocents" in the name of God.
MomoXenosaga 4y ago
America is becoming more like China lol.
- dang 4y ago
  Please don't post unsubstantive or flamebait comments. We've had to ask you this before. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
titzer 4y ago
> like not logging in to Google GLS is built into Android (via Google Play Services). The data collected is "anonymous". Just like the anonymous person that is in my house motionless from 12-8am every night.

hiptobecubic 4y ago

How is that "more reasonable" ?

olalonde 4y ago
Saving the search history by default is probably a better UX for most users. You get autocompletion, it helps Google deliver better results, helps show more relevant advertisements, etc. Defaults are usually chosen to satisfy the most common use case. The use case described in the article (hiding searches from law enforcement) is relatively rare and shouldn't serve as the basis for a default, in my opinion. For users who value their privacy more, there are alternatives like DuckDuckGo.
marssaxman 4y ago
What would be unreasonable about it? This is a genuine question. I never did log into google for any searches, and I switched to DuckDuckGo some years ago with no fuss. It seems to me like a practical thing anyone might do if they don't want Google to track them.

harry8 4y ago

How well do you think that's going to go if you are charged with murder? It doesn't matter a damn what /you/ (or me, or anyone) think about the ethics of the situation. Plausible deniability is going to be a very weak crutch to be relying on when charged with something with an equivalent consequences to a charge murder. Defence of google policy on that basis is really a non-starter, imho. I imagine google won't actually do that themselves they'll just remain silent with PR drafted press releases talking about just how important something or other is to them with the usual total lack of substance. Are google's socially progressive positions purely marketing and they'll drop and and all of them like a hot brick if it might cost them some money or market share? Are we the baddies?

Schroedingersat 4y ago
> Are we the baddies? Always have been.
olalonde 4y ago
I don't organize my life around the unlikely event that I might one day be falsely accused of murder. I don't estimate that it is worth the cost and I suspect most people share that view, as evidenced by Google's massive user base. I understand that some people do and I respect their decision. > Plausible deniability is going to be a very weak crutch to be relying on when charged with something with an equivalent consequences to a charge murder I wasn't aware that abortion was prosecuted so harshly. If that's the case, then you should indeed not rely on plausible deniability and instead, use Tor and/or DuckDuckGo. I am still defending Google's policy though. Google shouldn't cater to a minority of users (e.g. users that plan to commit murder-level crimes) to the detriment of the majority.
- ModernMech 4y ago
  > I don't organize my life around the unlikely event that I might one day be falsely accused of murder. Do you routinely provide or receive a procedure that's considered by fundamentalist Christian politicians to be tantamount to murdering infants? If so, you should probably consider the possibility that one of those politicians will come for you and claim you've committed murder. They have the power to do so, and now the law is finally on their side. It's no longer an unlikely prospect.
  - olalonde 4y ago
    Do you mean that anyone who had an abortion while it was legal could now be prosecuted for "murder"? That seems insane.
    - ModernMech 4y ago
      No, what I'm saying is that it's easy to pretend this isn't a problem that affects you if you aren't regularly engaging in the kind of routine activity that is now being labeled "murder". What was routine lifesaving medical care for you yesterday is now being described by political religious fanatics as infanticide. This was background noise in the past because their point of view was not supported by the law. Now it is and I fully expect them to use their newfound power to oppress women seeking lifesaving medical care. Maybe you think that is insane, but a lot of people thought a 10 year old living in a state that would force her to give birth was so insane it must be fake news. Or that it's insane a doctor would be investigated for helping a 10 year old receive lifesaving medical care she required. But here we are. Your threat assessment is outmoded by recent events. I can think of no group more dangerous than religious fanatics bent on protecting "innocents" in the name of God.

MomoXenosaga 4y ago

America is becoming more like China lol.

dang 4y ago
Please don't post unsubstantive or flamebait comments. We've had to ask you this before. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

titzer 4y ago

> like not logging in to Google GLS is built into Android (via Google Play Services). The data collected is "anonymous". Just like the anonymous person that is in my house motionless from 12-8am every night.