3 ms·

> Any proof to back up the idea they might abuse data? There's no need for proof, and it would be really difficult to find even if they were already doing unsp

> Any proof to back up the idea they might abuse data? There's no need for proof, and it would be really difficult to find even if they were already doing unspeakable things with the world's data. The problem is that the data is there, ready to be abused when a Google executive happens to make that decision. Imagine sitting next to a conveyor belt shifting an endless stream of cheese cakes past you. You know they're not your cheese cakes, and that it would be inappropriate to take one. Now suppose you also knew that even if you did stuff your face with the cheese cakes whizzing past, there's no way you could get caught. Now suppose that you knew a guy who'd pay you truckloads of money for a few cheese cakes. And finally, suppose that the government stepped in and insisted that you leave the room and let them watch over the cheese cakes.

ErrantX 17y ago
There is need for proof - or even some kind of suggestion. Otherwise it's just a scare story :) YES consider what data Google stores about you and if you feel comfortable with it. But to suggest they are or plan to do something evil with it you need to actually come up with something more cohesive than, say, a feeling. Example: I can suggest your bank could be doing all SORTS of things with your data - potentially supremely damaging stuff.... but you trust them, right? ;) Capacity to do something and trust are different things. So I say again: if you dont trust them. Dont use them. :)
- encoderer 17y ago
  "Example: I can suggest your bank could be doing all SORTS of things with your data - potentially supremely damaging stuff.... but you trust them, right? ;)" No. Of course I don't. Unless you're banking at "Wee Lil Credite Unione" you'd be foolish to trust your bank. But I have no choice. I do use a Credit Union for some of my financial needs but when it comes to IRAs, Brokerage Accounts, ETFs, etc, I have only the choice between a large corporate bank and a boutique brokerage with much higher fees.And business banking brings a whole different set of requirements. Reckless profit-seeking bank, fueled by bonus-hungry execs, levied vast damage to the US economy. I don't trust them. That idea is almost humorous. But i need them. And like it or not, I need Google. We all do. I dare say that the banking sector might not have been best choice of analogy.
  - ErrantX 17y ago
    what makes you trust creidt unions? I think banking is the perfect example because they are a very similar model. Obviously your distrustful of them all. Why are you more trustful of another search engine than Google? And if your not then you have to use some search engine otherwise web browsing is a complete pain - and which one do you use? the one you distrust the least (I assume). Sounding similar to the banks in your model? At some point you have to extend a level of trust to some entity - be it a bank or a search engine (though I would argue the level of trust for a bank has to be much higher, surely!!). If you cant do that then you have to keep your money under a mattress, or indeed not surf the internet... (Edit: In case my point is a bit confusing - why are you suggesting that Google are any more or less trustworthy than any other site you visit. How can you trust pg not to be selling our data to people? I'm personally 100% sure he isn't but the suggestion is there - and I bet if it was made seriously people would demand evidence)
    - encoderer 17y ago
      I don't trust credit unions per se, I trust small companies far more than I trust large ones. Small companies are more transparent. They are built more on personal relationships than global branding campaigns. When you're small, most employees share the vision of the founders, because they work with them every day, and because the founders wouldn't have hired them otherwise. And because small companies simply cannot afford to seek short-term profits the way large companies can. There's no reward for that. I'm sorry in advance for sounding like a prick, but isn't that obvious?
- stcredzero 17y ago
  There is need for proof - or even some kind of suggestion. Otherwise it's just a scare story :) The question is, what sort of market forces are at work, both within and outside of the company, which motivate bad behavior? What are the forces that dissuade it?
- shiranaihito 17y ago
  Can you prove that God exists? Otherwise it's just a fairy tale :) How would you prove that Google is not doing anything evil? You assume they're not, but that's just as (in)valid as my assumption that they might be. You could argue that proof is needed either way. > Capacity to do something and trust are different things. Google has the capacity to "do something", and I don't really trust them. But I can't really "not use Google" either. The problem is that my chances of affecting what data Google has on me are very, very limited. They have their hands on most of what happens on the Internet. I can reduce my "footprint" for example by disabling referrer information from my browser, but coincidentally, GMail won't let me in anymore if I do that. Choosing "not to use Google" is difficult when every site I visit causes my browser to say hi to them. Of course, there are other reasons too. They're still the most efficient search engine, for example. You're right, my bank could be doing nasty things too, but switching banks would be easy. Assuming it would help, of course :p

ErrantX 17y ago

There is need for proof - or even some kind of suggestion. Otherwise it's just a scare story :) YES consider what data Google stores about you and if you feel comfortable with it. But to suggest they are or plan to do something evil with it you need to actually come up with something more cohesive than, say, a feeling. Example: I can suggest your bank could be doing all SORTS of things with your data - potentially supremely damaging stuff.... but you trust them, right? ;) Capacity to do something and trust are different things. So I say again: if you dont trust them. Dont use them. :)

encoderer 17y ago
"Example: I can suggest your bank could be doing all SORTS of things with your data - potentially supremely damaging stuff.... but you trust them, right? ;)" No. Of course I don't. Unless you're banking at "Wee Lil Credite Unione" you'd be foolish to trust your bank. But I have no choice. I do use a Credit Union for some of my financial needs but when it comes to IRAs, Brokerage Accounts, ETFs, etc, I have only the choice between a large corporate bank and a boutique brokerage with much higher fees.And business banking brings a whole different set of requirements. Reckless profit-seeking bank, fueled by bonus-hungry execs, levied vast damage to the US economy. I don't trust them. That idea is almost humorous. But i need them. And like it or not, I need Google. We all do. I dare say that the banking sector might not have been best choice of analogy.
- ErrantX 17y ago
  what makes you trust creidt unions? I think banking is the perfect example because they are a very similar model. Obviously your distrustful of them all. Why are you more trustful of another search engine than Google? And if your not then you have to use some search engine otherwise web browsing is a complete pain - and which one do you use? the one you distrust the least (I assume). Sounding similar to the banks in your model? At some point you have to extend a level of trust to some entity - be it a bank or a search engine (though I would argue the level of trust for a bank has to be much higher, surely!!). If you cant do that then you have to keep your money under a mattress, or indeed not surf the internet... (Edit: In case my point is a bit confusing - why are you suggesting that Google are any more or less trustworthy than any other site you visit. How can you trust pg not to be selling our data to people? I'm personally 100% sure he isn't but the suggestion is there - and I bet if it was made seriously people would demand evidence)
  - encoderer 17y ago
    I don't trust credit unions per se, I trust small companies far more than I trust large ones. Small companies are more transparent. They are built more on personal relationships than global branding campaigns. When you're small, most employees share the vision of the founders, because they work with them every day, and because the founders wouldn't have hired them otherwise. And because small companies simply cannot afford to seek short-term profits the way large companies can. There's no reward for that. I'm sorry in advance for sounding like a prick, but isn't that obvious?
stcredzero 17y ago
There is need for proof - or even some kind of suggestion. Otherwise it's just a scare story :) The question is, what sort of market forces are at work, both within and outside of the company, which motivate bad behavior? What are the forces that dissuade it?
shiranaihito 17y ago
Can you prove that God exists? Otherwise it's just a fairy tale :) How would you prove that Google is not doing anything evil? You assume they're not, but that's just as (in)valid as my assumption that they might be. You could argue that proof is needed either way. > Capacity to do something and trust are different things. Google has the capacity to "do something", and I don't really trust them. But I can't really "not use Google" either. The problem is that my chances of affecting what data Google has on me are very, very limited. They have their hands on most of what happens on the Internet. I can reduce my "footprint" for example by disabling referrer information from my browser, but coincidentally, GMail won't let me in anymore if I do that. Choosing "not to use Google" is difficult when every site I visit causes my browser to say hi to them. Of course, there are other reasons too. They're still the most efficient search engine, for example. You're right, my bank could be doing nasty things too, but switching banks would be easy. Assuming it would help, of course :p