24220940
submission
pcause writes:
According to this article and apparently confirmed by a Facebook engineer, even when you are logged out of facebook they are still tracking you. The quoted engineer explains that this tracking is only for security related purposes. Maybe, but the bigger question is does this need to be disclosed and does it violate an implied contract with web users as to what logging out means?
23769776
submission
pcause writes:
Most of the consumer web tracking is done by third party cookies. An ad network or ad targetting service puts cookies on your system to watch where you go and uses this ti figure out what to give you for ads and to build a profile. All of the major browsers have the ability to block third party cookies. The question is why they do't make this the default behavior, as doing so would immediately reduce unwanted tracking, especially if Flash respected this setting.
23405536
submission
pcause writes:
The WSJ reports that Larry Page knew Google was running illegal ads, but went for the money over what was legal and right. From the article — "Larry Page knew what was going on," Peter Neronha, the Rhode Island U.S. Attorney who led the probe, said in an interview. "We know it from the investigation. We simply know it from the documents we reviewed, witnesses that we interviewed, that Larry Page knew what was going on."
Google is as greedy and corrupt as anyone other big company.
23246008
submission
pcause writes:
Gizmodo reports that a 13 year old has come up with a desin to collect solar energy thyat is simple, yet delivers 20-50% better results at no additional cost.
20027078
submission
pcause writes:
So much ofr open, according to Engadget Google is seeking tight control over how vendors deliver Android. This sounds more like Microsoft's approach than what Google told us all when it started Android.
19911746
submission
pcause writes:
Google says that they aren't making Honeycomb available to outside devs. Guess they are committed to being open as they define open at any given moment.
18530248
submission
pcause writes:
It seems the Obama administration thinks we need a unique ID for the Internet. Do we need this so the advertisers can better track us and invade our privacy? Or does the government want to be able to track everything we do? Of course they say it is secure and more private and not a national ID. They also say they're fixing the economy, reducing the deficit and.....
17407904
submission
pcause writes:
Google recently stopped Facebook from importing contacts from Gmail, as this article from Wired discusses. All very interesting, but isn't the real issue that the list of my friends doesn't and shouldn't belong to Google, Facebook or anyone else. Isn't this mine and shouldn't I have control of who can have access? After all, by this logic Google could claim to own my email messages.
17188944
submission
pcause writes:
Here is yet more proof of the arrogance of the leadership of Google. Eric Schmidt says that if you don't like Street View taking your picture, move! Wow, this guy really doesn't have any clue about civility, privacy and just how to keep his mouth shut when his brain has something dumb to say.
12342694
submission
pcause writes:
Google seems to have rushed to Adobe's defense and has added Flash to Chrome and is adding it to Android. The question is: why" Flash is a big security issue Web browsers,seems to need more patching that IE6, and is proprietary. Google has usually been a champion of standards and openness and has created a lot of great Web UIs with JavaScript. Given JavaScript and HTML5 there aren't many things we'll need Flash for and from a security point of view, we're better off without it.
Why is Google so eager to champion Flash as opposed to a set of standards they, Apple and Microsoft *all* agree on?
11571514
submission
pcause writes:
This article in Ars Technica discussed a proposal by a Virginia Congressman to give you back control of your privacy and make use of your personal and behavioral information opt-in. This scares the pants off of Google and they are trying to scare us with stories of how horrible the Internet will be if we have privacy. It will be terrible for Google's business, as they make more money the more they abuse your privacy, and they make a LOT of money!
11493352
submission
pcause writes:
The latest documents released by Viacom show that Google knew that Youtube was "completely sustained by pirated content" before Google bought it. Of course, the docs that say this were labeled "highly confidential". I am sure that Google will say this is all old stuff, taken out of context and that they didn't have sex with that woman, Ms, Lewinsky. Sure.
10985150
submission
pcause writes:
Google and a coalition of tech companies want to create legal protections against the government accessing you content in the cloud. Of course, they aren't proposing any restrictions on how *THEY* can use you content, location information and the like to make more $$ and further violate your privacy. Unregulated, nontransparent and unaccountable corporate entities saying they are to be trusted. Ken Lay of Enron would love these guys.
10629420
submission
pcause writes:
Silicon Alley Insider has the most damning evidence released in the Viacom/YouTube suit. It seems clear from these snippets that YouTube knew it was pirating content and did it to grow fast and sell for a lot of $$. It also seems clear that Google knew the site was pirated content and bought it and continued the pirating.
9700718
submission
pcause writes:
Seems that Eric Schmidt thinks that there was nothing wrong with Buzz and that it was just "confused" users that were the problem. Just when they begin to dig out of the mess, the CEO blames the users for being clueless instead of taking responsibility for a mistake that has forever shown that Google's "do no evil" was, to quote Steve Jobs, "bulls**t". Users understood that Google was violating our privacy to advance its business. He is right that we didn't udnerstand one thing at all — why these privacy violations for Google's profits were good for us.