8 ms·

Now that Motorola is owned by Google, I wonder what Google has to say about this?

by ajays 13y ago

lostlogin 13y ago
"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place," Schmidt. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/07/schmidt_on_privacy/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/07/schmidt_on_privacy/
- moondowner 13y ago
  Every time I read that claim I feel like sharing this article: "Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide’" https://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/ https://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/12...
  - lostlogin 13y ago
    Thanks. Just for the record, don't be thinking I agree with that statement. I consider it among the creepier quotes Schmidt has produced, and he has a great selection to choose from. http://www.stateofsearch.com/top-15-of-eric-schmidts-remarkable-quotes/ http://www.stateofsearch.com/top-15-of-eric-schmidts-remarka...
    - josephlord 13y ago
      Hmmm scary and it doesn't even get the best one: "Google policy is to get right up to the creepy line and not cross it," he said. Google implants, he added, probably crosses that line.[1] [1] http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/10/googles-ceo-the-laws-are-written-by-lobbyists/63908/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/10/google...
- eliasmacpherson 13y ago
  Apply that logic to passwords, which are being sent in plain text here. By his logic, you should have no password protected data, lest anyone know about it. Strictly he's correct: it's stupid to assume anything will remain secret, particularly if you don't keep it to yourself. Schmidt, motorola, google, public wifi, can they keep secrets? It's also funny how upset he feels when the shoe is on the other foot, as lampooned by this slashdot poster: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3645419&cid=43441757 http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3645419&cid=4344175...
- fossuser 13y ago
  Yes he said that, but it was immediately followed by his actual point which was that in the United States your communications are not secure. "But if you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines, including Google, do retain this information for some time. And [...] we're all subject, in the US, to the Patriot Act, and it is possible that that information could be made available to the authorities." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/07/google-ceo-on-privacy-if_n_383105.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/07/google-ceo-on-priva...

Now that Motorola is owned by Google, I wonder what Google has to say about this?

by ajays 13y ago

Now that Motorola is owned by Google, I wonder what Google has to say about this?

"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place," Schmidt. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/07/schmidt_on_privacy/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/12/07/schmidt_on_privacy/

moondowner 13y ago
Every time I read that claim I feel like sharing this article: "Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide’" https://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/ https://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/12...
- lostlogin 13y ago
  Thanks. Just for the record, don't be thinking I agree with that statement. I consider it among the creepier quotes Schmidt has produced, and he has a great selection to choose from. http://www.stateofsearch.com/top-15-of-eric-schmidts-remarkable-quotes/ http://www.stateofsearch.com/top-15-of-eric-schmidts-remarka...
  - josephlord 13y ago
    Hmmm scary and it doesn't even get the best one: "Google policy is to get right up to the creepy line and not cross it," he said. Google implants, he added, probably crosses that line.[1] [1] http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/10/googles-ceo-the-laws-are-written-by-lobbyists/63908/ http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/10/google...
eliasmacpherson 13y ago
Apply that logic to passwords, which are being sent in plain text here. By his logic, you should have no password protected data, lest anyone know about it. Strictly he's correct: it's stupid to assume anything will remain secret, particularly if you don't keep it to yourself. Schmidt, motorola, google, public wifi, can they keep secrets? It's also funny how upset he feels when the shoe is on the other foot, as lampooned by this slashdot poster: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3645419&cid=43441757 http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3645419&cid=4344175...
fossuser 13y ago
Yes he said that, but it was immediately followed by his actual point which was that in the United States your communications are not secure. "But if you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines, including Google, do retain this information for some time. And [...] we're all subject, in the US, to the Patriot Act, and it is possible that that information could be made available to the authorities." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/07/google-ceo-on-privacy-if_n_383105.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/07/google-ceo-on-priva...