4 ms·

White House Concerned about User’s Privacy, Calls in Facebook and Google

11 points by websagir 15y ago

Giving due importance to the right to privacy of the users, the White House has called various internet firms to come up with stronger provisions for protecting the privacy of the consumers.

mike-cardwell 15y ago
Hopefully they're giving as much weight to the opinions of organisations like the EFF as they are to Google and Facebook.
droithomme 15y ago
The English language used in this article could use some editing.
- websagir 15y ago
  "could use some editing" what is your mean about this ?
  - droithomme 15y ago
    You know, I assumed your question there was a joke and upvoted you for being humorous, but then I checked your posting record and I now see that you are the author of various articles on that site and are posting them here. OK, the problem is your English is really horrible. You need to seriously improve it before you attempt to write any more articles in English. Let's look at the second sentence you wrote in the referenced article: > This moves in response to the growing insecurities amongst the users, where their browsing history is being tracked and provided to the online marketers and advertisers to exploit the same. Do you see any problems with this sentence or does it seem like standard english use to you? It's not. It seems to be following the grammatical sentence structure of some other language, which was then mechanically translated into English. No doubt your native tongue. You need to spend time living in an english dominant area to pick up the right way to speak, or perhaps read considerably more english. You need to think in english and talk the way native english speakers do if you want to be an english language journalist. I don't know your native language since you've anonymized your domain info and have no legitimate contact information on your site, which is not something legitimate businesses do.
uuilly 15y ago
The government octopus is on the loose. Its tentacles pluck a software company for questioning once every few months. Last time Google had to defend its search algorithms before Congress. Apple's address book is a subject of interest on the hill. And now Facebook's privacy. The healthiest, most innovative sector on planet earth should not be summoned by a government capable of creating SOPA and incapable of paying its own bills. If our guys had any stones at all they would reply, "Sorry I can't make it, I'm busy working. Maybe you should consider doing the same thing."
casca 15y ago
Internet privacy is one perfectly valid area for government to get involved. The average person has no idea about cookies, Facebook or Google tracking or how online ads are profiling them. The sop offered from the supply side has been to offer "opt-outs" which still track you. The more technical might use adblock, noscript or requestpolicy, but by doing this, we're just shifting the cost on our fellow internet users. This is not fair. When the people's ignorance or reasonable lack of ability is being abused by corporations, that's exactly the time for the government to step in. Not the misguided EU cookie directive that just gives more power to the incumbents, but a genuine ability to protect their privacy by default. Opt out you say? Such arrogance. Your responsibility as the priests of the electronic age* is to help your flock, not take advantage of them. * as in you're holding exotic knowledge and power that is beyond the understanding of the average mortal
- newman314 15y ago
  The problem is one arm appears to offer the branch of privacy whilst another chips away at it using clauses in bills under the guise of protection for copyright etc. Unfortunately, it appears that continued vigilance is needed to defend against bad laws.
- HistoryInAction 15y ago
  Yep, that's the exact position the gov't is taking, with the added position of, "hey, tech companies, we're gonna sit you down with privacy advocates and anti-regulation people to hash this out." Also nice: the gov't is applying this to information sharing internally first, so we have a chance to sandbox for the while it'll take for Congress to take any action.

11 points by websagir 15y ago

Giving due importance to the right to privacy of the users, the White House has called various internet firms to come up with stronger provisions for protecting the privacy of the consumers.

mike-cardwell 15y ago

Hopefully they're giving as much weight to the opinions of organisations like the EFF as they are to Google and Facebook.

droithomme 15y ago

The English language used in this article could use some editing.

websagir 15y ago
"could use some editing" what is your mean about this ?
- droithomme 15y ago
  You know, I assumed your question there was a joke and upvoted you for being humorous, but then I checked your posting record and I now see that you are the author of various articles on that site and are posting them here. OK, the problem is your English is really horrible. You need to seriously improve it before you attempt to write any more articles in English. Let's look at the second sentence you wrote in the referenced article: > This moves in response to the growing insecurities amongst the users, where their browsing history is being tracked and provided to the online marketers and advertisers to exploit the same. Do you see any problems with this sentence or does it seem like standard english use to you? It's not. It seems to be following the grammatical sentence structure of some other language, which was then mechanically translated into English. No doubt your native tongue. You need to spend time living in an english dominant area to pick up the right way to speak, or perhaps read considerably more english. You need to think in english and talk the way native english speakers do if you want to be an english language journalist. I don't know your native language since you've anonymized your domain info and have no legitimate contact information on your site, which is not something legitimate businesses do.

uuilly 15y ago

The government octopus is on the loose. Its tentacles pluck a software company for questioning once every few months. Last time Google had to defend its search algorithms before Congress. Apple's address book is a subject of interest on the hill. And now Facebook's privacy. The healthiest, most innovative sector on planet earth should not be summoned by a government capable of creating SOPA and incapable of paying its own bills. If our guys had any stones at all they would reply, "Sorry I can't make it, I'm busy working. Maybe you should consider doing the same thing."

casca 15y ago

Internet privacy is one perfectly valid area for government to get involved. The average person has no idea about cookies, Facebook or Google tracking or how online ads are profiling them. The sop offered from the supply side has been to offer "opt-outs" which still track you. The more technical might use adblock, noscript or requestpolicy, but by doing this, we're just shifting the cost on our fellow internet users. This is not fair. When the people's ignorance or reasonable lack of ability is being abused by corporations, that's exactly the time for the government to step in. Not the misguided EU cookie directive that just gives more power to the incumbents, but a genuine ability to protect their privacy by default. Opt out you say? Such arrogance. Your responsibility as the priests of the electronic age* is to help your flock, not take advantage of them. * as in you're holding exotic knowledge and power that is beyond the understanding of the average mortal

newman314 15y ago
The problem is one arm appears to offer the branch of privacy whilst another chips away at it using clauses in bills under the guise of protection for copyright etc. Unfortunately, it appears that continued vigilance is needed to defend against bad laws.
HistoryInAction 15y ago
Yep, that's the exact position the gov't is taking, with the added position of, "hey, tech companies, we're gonna sit you down with privacy advocates and anti-regulation people to hash this out." Also nice: the gov't is applying this to information sharing internally first, so we have a chance to sandbox for the while it'll take for Congress to take any action.