4 ms·

> changing the substance of the rest of the message It most definitely changes the substance. From Google being the perpetuator of the said privacy problem, it

> changing the substance of the rest of the message It most definitely changes the substance. From Google being the perpetuator of the said privacy problem, it becomes a participant that is legally bound to participate by YOUR legal system. Disclaimer: Googler.

ianstormtaylor 13y ago
And what about the quote two paragraphs down where in 2012, after knowing about how the previous sentence was interpreted, he again said, "if you don’t have anything to hide, you have nothing to fear"?
- DannyBee 13y ago
  My recollection of this is that he was clearly joking at the time, but you are talking about a guy who gives the same speeches and talks hundreds of times a year, and it only takes one time for someone to take stuff out of context and present it badly. I think if you met Eric you'd realize he's just another hacker who ended up becoming a CEO. If he was posting here, he would be indistinguishable from most people in terms of his views, concerns, etc.
  - pseut 13y ago
    That's fine, and it may very well be the case. But I don't think that the rest of the quotation is so profoundly different that just posting the first sentence misrepresents the quote. It sounds like you're saying that the first part of the quotation doesn't accurately describe Schmidt's views on privacy. I don't know him, but, sure, most people have more than one sentence's worth of opinion on most issues. :)
- magicalist 13y ago
  Did he say that? The only reference I can find to that comes from a PC World story[1], which appears to not only be a paraphrase (presumably of the original quote), but it links to an article about keeping your facebook profile cleaned up for people searching for dirt on you and doesn't quote Schmidt or even mention him. [1] http://www.pcworld.com/article/252514/hey_employers_my_facebook_password_is_none_of_your_business.html http://www.pcworld.com/article/252514/hey_employers_my_faceb...
zipfle 13y ago
Are you required to keep search logs? Are you required to correlate searches with users? It seems like it's the choice to retain and analyze those that puts you in the position of having to turn them over. DDG doesn't do that. It's a participant in the same legal system.
pseut 13y ago
You misread me. I said the first sentence doesn't add to or change the meaning of the second. You're saying the second does change the first. If he wanted to make your point unambiguously, he could/should have left off the first sentence.

ianstormtaylor 13y ago

And what about the quote two paragraphs down where in 2012, after knowing about how the previous sentence was interpreted, he again said, "if you don’t have anything to hide, you have nothing to fear"?

DannyBee 13y ago
My recollection of this is that he was clearly joking at the time, but you are talking about a guy who gives the same speeches and talks hundreds of times a year, and it only takes one time for someone to take stuff out of context and present it badly. I think if you met Eric you'd realize he's just another hacker who ended up becoming a CEO. If he was posting here, he would be indistinguishable from most people in terms of his views, concerns, etc.
- pseut 13y ago
  That's fine, and it may very well be the case. But I don't think that the rest of the quotation is so profoundly different that just posting the first sentence misrepresents the quote. It sounds like you're saying that the first part of the quotation doesn't accurately describe Schmidt's views on privacy. I don't know him, but, sure, most people have more than one sentence's worth of opinion on most issues. :)
magicalist 13y ago
Did he say that? The only reference I can find to that comes from a PC World story[1], which appears to not only be a paraphrase (presumably of the original quote), but it links to an article about keeping your facebook profile cleaned up for people searching for dirt on you and doesn't quote Schmidt or even mention him. [1] http://www.pcworld.com/article/252514/hey_employers_my_facebook_password_is_none_of_your_business.html http://www.pcworld.com/article/252514/hey_employers_my_faceb...

zipfle 13y ago

Are you required to keep search logs? Are you required to correlate searches with users? It seems like it's the choice to retain and analyze those that puts you in the position of having to turn them over. DDG doesn't do that. It's a participant in the same legal system.

pseut 13y ago

You misread me. I said the first sentence doesn't add to or change the meaning of the second. You're saying the second does change the first. If he wanted to make your point unambiguously, he could/should have left off the first sentence.