8 ms·
> If Google wants to take small free from the encryption, I would be OK with that. You shouldn't have to pay a company to make sure they don't share your data.
by Kapura 13y ago
> If Google wants to take small free from the encryption, I would be OK with that.
You shouldn't have to pay a company to make sure they don't share your data. That is, in essence, what you're suggesting: you pay google, they encrypt your data and when the government comes a-knocking, it's safe. It's like a hack in a broken system
- kyzyl 13y agoThat may be true, but the broken system is the government, not Google. Google appears (being the operative word...) to simply be doing what they can in the current system. However, I think you somewhat sidestepped hannibal's point. My impression was that he was saying that just by putting your files in drive for google to mine, you are effectively paying google. If they encrypt your files, it's akin to them discontinuing their monthly fee (or whatever) for the service. So sure, if you're already paying a fee for a service then maybe you shouldn't need to pay extra for the luxury of privacy (make no mistake, privacy is a luxury these days), but Google encrypting their revenue stream means you are substituting the ad fee for the encryption fee. Seems fair to me.
- hannibal5 13y agoAs long as I use Gmail and Google drive for free (and I'm using Adblock), they have to monetize the service they provide to me somehow. I would like to have clear option of being fed advertisements and being profiled for profits and paying for service.