3 ms·

You've interpreted the data in the most positive way possible. Yes, that is one of many ways in which things could have unfolded. But as the article says, this

by azakai 12y ago

You've interpreted the data in the most positive way possible. Yes, that is one of many ways in which things could have unfolded. But as the article says, this is all secret. We don't know what exactly Google and the NSA built together in that first agreement shortly after the Chinese hacking scandal. And we don't know what else has happened since then. Maybe it's all innocuous stuff, as you said. Maybe it isn't. To just assume it is all good or all bad seems unjustified by the amount of actual facts that are public.

TeMPOraL 12y ago
The problem is, of course, most people will assume "all bad" because of the ongoing narrative.
- adventured 12y ago
  It's a really bad narrative. Given the extreme, illegal erosion in privacy at the hands of the State, it sure seems a lot safer to bet on "all bad" or "pretty bad" when it comes to these tech giants doing deals with the NSA.
etha 12y ago
It does happen to be a positive interpretation, but there's no reason to think that's why it was chosen, since it's also the simplest explanation.
- meowface 12y ago
  I also think it's the most likely explanation. It is not advantageous for Google's executives to collaborate in the tracking of US citizens; it adds a lot more work and it makes for absolutely awful PR. I'd also like to think that they possess some moral compass (even if it's a bit slanted) which lets them understand the difference between wide scale "anonymized" tracking for the purpose of advertising and giving all that data to a bunch of humans to scrutinize and judge for the purpose of spying.
  - whyever 12y ago
    It only makes for awful PR if the public knows about it. What do you mean by anonymized tracking? Isn't building a profile on every user necessary for targeted advertising?
    - meowface 12y ago
      >What do you mean by anonymized tracking? Isn't building a profile on every user necessary for targeted advertising? Yes. Anonymized wasn't the right word, perhaps "behind the curtains"? Google employees aren't actually making, looking at, or (not 100% sure of this last one) "splitting" and filtering the data to learn things about you. The process, beginning to end, is automated. This is in stark contrast to the NSA, where when they get a "hit" they will carefully and personally inspect you, your interests, and your activities.

by azakai 12y ago

TeMPOraL 12y ago

The problem is, of course, most people will assume "all bad" because of the ongoing narrative.

adventured 12y ago
It's a really bad narrative. Given the extreme, illegal erosion in privacy at the hands of the State, it sure seems a lot safer to bet on "all bad" or "pretty bad" when it comes to these tech giants doing deals with the NSA.

etha 12y ago

It does happen to be a positive interpretation, but there's no reason to think that's why it was chosen, since it's also the simplest explanation.

meowface 12y ago
I also think it's the most likely explanation. It is not advantageous for Google's executives to collaborate in the tracking of US citizens; it adds a lot more work and it makes for absolutely awful PR. I'd also like to think that they possess some moral compass (even if it's a bit slanted) which lets them understand the difference between wide scale "anonymized" tracking for the purpose of advertising and giving all that data to a bunch of humans to scrutinize and judge for the purpose of spying.
- whyever 12y ago
  It only makes for awful PR if the public knows about it. What do you mean by anonymized tracking? Isn't building a profile on every user necessary for targeted advertising?
  - meowface 12y ago
    >What do you mean by anonymized tracking? Isn't building a profile on every user necessary for targeted advertising? Yes. Anonymized wasn't the right word, perhaps "behind the curtains"? Google employees aren't actually making, looking at, or (not 100% sure of this last one) "splitting" and filtering the data to learn things about you. The process, beginning to end, is automated. This is in stark contrast to the NSA, where when they get a "hit" they will carefully and personally inspect you, your interests, and your activities.