Google and it’s encroachment into privacy violations resulting from its various services.
Google has excelled themselves in Internet search and online advertising. In the January 1996, Google began as a research project by Larry Page and Sergey Brin. After making the relevant search and web pages and on making completing testing they successfully registered Google.com. Google was first incorporated as privately held company on September 7, 1998. Over the period of time, the company was able to develop new products and expand its business from initial searching and advertising business to other areas. These included electronic mails, online mapping, video sharing, blogging and much more.
Do you its simplicity in design and usability, Google was able to attract the attention of almost all the internet users. Recently users have been objecting to Google’s encroachment into privacy violations resulting from its various services. The attractive features like RSS (Really Simple Syndication), Google Reader with “share function”, share button, etc., have raised various questions on Google’s intrusion on privacy. The various sharing features have enabled everyone on the G-talk/ mail to read the stories, information that you want to share with your group of friends. People are of the view that Google Reader fails to realize the distinction between information that is shared, published or public information, assertively promoted details and much more. These factors have raised serious criticism over Google automatically sharing data through blog reading application.
With this the debate over privacy became more prominent. The critics and users were able to make out that Google search engine maintained a record of searches made them for a time frame of 18 to 24 months. Even if the user wanted to delete any personal searches made by them they were not able do so. This happened because Google’s servers were easily able to retrieve the deleted information.
Google has the record of all the personal information about exiting user profiles on Orkut. At times, it also had the record of information about deleted accounts and certain selected information removed by the user. This shook the trust of many Google users.
Thirdly, its failure to provide users access to log in information created through the their interface with Google Reader, Google Video, Google Talk, Google Maps and other services provided by Google led to the criticism by people. When Google recently started sending and automatically adding email ids of contacts to which you have sent e-mails. As the result, the personal information of an individual is shared by all, irrespective of the factor that with whom you want to share the important documents.
Last but not the least; people are not willing on “Content extraction”. Google keeps a detailed eye on the non subscriber’s profile that are sending e-mails or making communication on their services. This hinders the interest of all.
In short, Google and it’s encroachment into privacy violations resulting from its various services has cautioned the users and given them warning to be more alert. They should transfer the files and information with caution, so that they don’t have to repent in the near future.
Published by admin on January 8th, 2008 tagged Essays | Comment now »
Google StreetViews raises concerns
Google recently announced the launch of its Street Views. While this service looks cool, and speaks volumes about how far we have come technologically as a society, there are some serious concerns that should be addressed in light of this so called “advancement”. Here is what others are saying:
“Street View, the last functionality added to Google Maps, obviously caused a wave of protest in the United States. One reproaches it attacks to the private life. Beyond this so foreseeable polemic, some “notable” pictures start to come up here and there. Here is a small completely subjective selection.” (source)
“I think they’ve gone too far. Sure you get more details of some places but it sounds more useful for the stalkers than for us normal people.” (source)
Asked in a poll on a popular forum whether or not Google is leading the way to a big brother society, users all voted in the affirmative. Now, I understand that Google probably thinks this is an innocuous “service” that is simply benefiting its users, but they have got to realize the long term consequences of their “new inventions”. That is, they should be mindful of how people can use their technology for negative purposes.
I just want to remind everyone here about the this websites sole purpose: To inform the public about the dangers of a completely real-time televised existence in panoramic detail.
Published by admin on June 7th, 2007 tagged News | Comment now »
The Value of Privacy
In the wake of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 there has been a very vocal and to some alarming re-examination of the value of Privacy in America. The Patriot Act, which was passed into law in 2001 following the attacks of September eleventh has greatly shifted the balance of expectation between privacy and the state’s ability to examine the live’s of it’s citizens. While some supporters of this legislation say “What do you have to hide?” I reply to them, “Many things”.
The right of privacy, of an individual from other individuals or from the state, is sacrosanct in many societies around the world. These rights are not given (or rather demanded and taken, as all rights are) out of a sympathy for lawbreakers but rather as a layer of protection to isolate the citizen from a government figure misusing his power. The problem with a government that can freely invade your privacy at will is not that they can use that power to stop the enemies of the state, for that it something everyone salutes, but rather what else that power can and will be used for.
Ultimately, there are always abuses from people in a position of authority; this has been shown in every country across the world where authority exists. Rather than wish for an idealistic society where this doesn’t happen we must face the reality that it is inevitable and deal with it by keeping our politicians under close scrutiny to ensure they do not violate our rights; not hand them a blank cheque to do whatever they want.
What dangers come from this invasion of privacy? When everything is filmed it is much easier to silence someone who opposes you. Since ultimately nearly everyone does something terrible at some point in your life, the government will have the ability to completely discredit you based on that one moment. This means that if you oppose the government on point A, rather than debating point A the government can bring up incident G that they videotaped, where you were perhaps caught off guard in a heated moment and destroy your credibility.
Secondly, when everything is recorded it will be much easier to censor and eliminate dissenting voices. So called “dissidents’ can be identified early and silenced through the many means those in power have of silencing those who speak the truth (like the church did to Copernicus). Unfortunately, the progress of most of the great nations in the world and such developments as capitalism and democracy are ultimately the product of the dissenting voices of the past and by silencing these individuals we risk stagnation and decline.
Benjamin Franklin is quoted as saying “Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither” and this is never more evident than today. It is irresponsible and ultimately bad for society to choose the easy path, that of security over liberty. It is the mark of a brave and heroic society that strives for both.
Published by admin on May 10th, 2007 tagged Essays | Comment now »
The cultural acceptance of a bigbrotherlike society.
I work as an English teacher in Korea. Recently, our principal has decided to install cameras in the classroom. This disturbing action lead me question whether or not this lack of privacy is good for society. I immediately told the boss that I thought this to be an “invasion of privacy.” His limited English lacks knowledge of the phrase. He must have conjured up images of North Korean soldiers preparing to invade the South’s “privacy.” I explained that this was just a figure of speech. However, after much contemplation, I have come to the conclusion that the incremental development of public cameras, and their acceptance, could lead to a miserable kind of existence such as that portrayed in George Orwell’s dystopia “1984″. In other words, the use of the word “invasion”, may not be that far off. But there is no one person or group to man a defensive against. Of course, the year 1984 has long come and gone and nothing like what Orwell envisioned manifested in Europe or elsewhere.
The danger does not lie in the cameras or technology per se. Right now the scariest event occurring regarding this topic is the mass acceptance of a completely televised world. While no one will admit that this is a good thing, aside from government organizations such as the police and security agencies, it is rarely considered as an imminent threat to our way of life. Perhaps that is because it is not an imminent threat. It is an insidiously growing cultural shift.
Working as a tool for security, and now for marketing (as my principal states), the public camera is slowly creeping to critical mass. In London the problem is most apparent. But worldwide this trend is growing in terms of usage and public acceptance. Why is it that no one is screaming out for a stop to this madness? The answer is simple. Osama bin Laden.
The terrorist threat has galvanized the world to accept a growing number of measures that would have been considered unthinkable pre-911, London, and Madrid. The Patriot Act in the United States is a consistently a hotly contested debate. But the freedoms infringed upon due to the Patriot Act are left for other bloggers to consider. The purpose of this blog is limited to the privacy invasion that will lead to an inevitably uncomfortable planet for us and our progeny. I will leave this post for now, but please post your comments and links to resources to further the discussion.