Is Google just another name for Big Brother?

The Horses Mouth ^ | 05.06.05 | Gordon

[Dr. Marten]

 

I sure hope not, but it sure looks that way. Especially when you read reports like this.

---

 A new California law, the Online Privacy Protection Act, went into effect on July 1, 2004. Google changed their main privacy policy that same day because the previous version sidestepped important issues and might have been illegal. For the first time in Google's history, the language in their new policy makes it clear that they will be pooling all the information they collect on you from all of their various services. Moreover, they may keep this information indefinitely, and give this information to whomever they wish. All that's required is for Google to "have a good faith belief that access, preservation or disclosure of such information is reasonably necessary to protect the rights, property or safety of Google, its users or the public." Google, you may recall, already believes that as a corporation they are utterly incapable of bad faith. Their corporate motto is "Don't be evil," and they even made sure that the Securities and Exchange Commission got this message in Google's IPO filing.

---

I would encourage you to read the full version of this "report", do a little further research and decide for yourself. If anything, I wouldn't use your Gmail account for any sensitive communications.

Google also released their new Google Accelerator on Wednesday and though some have hailed it as a means of bypassing China's internet censorship, there are many other voices warning against using the newly released program.

What's your take on Google?

 

[Dr. Marten]

From The Horses Mouth

 

[Dr. Marten]

Do you Google?

[Terpfen]

Tips and tools for enhancing your privacy. Includes tools to remove the ID tags from Google's cookies, making your searches anonymous.

[Dr. Marten]

Thanks,

I just added that tip to my blog.

[soccer_linux_mozilla]

Check this out:

http://www.googlesightseeing.com/

[JesseJane]

!!fyi!!

[Alia]

Thanks for the ping, JJ! :) Davos. And more I dug, the more I grokked. And you were right there grokking with me. Amazing to see it coming out, no?

[JesseJane]

Yes! Alia, you were waaaaaaaay ahead on this one by a far far stretch. Inch by inch, the plans from Davos are moving from shape to implementation. One leeetle thorn though, is the future of the UN. It was a foregone conclutsion that Kofi would survive this teensy little blip of the OilForFood scandal. I don't think he will, but who shall be the next SG??

Grokking! :)

[JesseJane]

ehhhhhhh...

conclutsion = conclusion (this just in, there is no T in conclusion; what's that joke about strawberries again?? :)

[Alia]

In re the SG: I have a hunch whatever remains of the UN will have to.. transmogrify itself, therefore there may not be such a title/position as SG. SG position is too much power concentrated. I think I perceive, however, Bill Clinton moving into siderunning position with his anti-obesity crusade. (grokking, :) ;> )

[JesseJane]

Hmmm... now there you go making go and think again!! :) I can't imagine a UN *able* to do anything legitimately and regain trust from us anyway. The rest of the world was fine, save Israel, was fine with the utter rot. I could foam on and on, but you already know what I mean..

If Bill Cliton is involved in any way with the UN, or whatever new world body is demanded, we'll all know, the whole thing is a joke.

okay......off to my thinkin' rock.. :)

[batter]

Thanks for the post and link!