Re: got gmai?

> Yeah, I was being a bit facetious, but truth be told, I'm a bit wary of
> Google's sudden commercial turn.  They've got the resources
> (information) to become a serious threat to personal privacy (McCarthy
> would have killed for the type of data-mining Orkut gets people to
> volunteer for: "Are you or have you ever been... oh never mind, I'll
> just check Orkut").  They've got your networks of friends and now
> they've got your correspondence with those friends.  No doubt benign
> (just another company trying to turn a profit), but the *potential* for
> abuse is simply too huge too ignore.  While I doubt the *current* regime
> at Google is really interested in abusing that information, all it takes
> is a subpoena or a merger (or even a hacker - I wonder how much
> corporate spies would like to get their hands on Google's data) to
> change everything.  Given the nature of Google, I suspect that email
> archives will live for quite some time after deletion by gmail users
> (days, months, years?  Their privacy policy doesn't really say) and in
> fact might possibly outlive the current state of affairs.  I'm not
> comfortable with that.
> 
> I guess to sum it up, I'm concerned that Google's information resources
> could easily be turned from indexing the web to indexing individuals.
> Their termination of accounts on Orkut of individuals who preferred to
> remain anonymous certainly doesn't allay my concerns much.
> 

hehe, I don't see what is so 'farcical' about all this concern.  At 
least one top-level person at Google do has ties to the NSA.  They evade 
answers about everything, etc, etc, regarding privacy.

http://www.google-watch.org/
http://www.lindqvist.com/index.php?ID=404

I am weary at the thought of explaining the way I think about this. 
Suffice it to say: Cliff's concerns are 100% correct.  I think that he 
softens the concern too much.  Safeway gives you a discount for letting 
them keep your info - so do Albertsons, and a couple other stores.   In 
1984 it was Big Brother, in 2004, it is greedy consumerism.

Cliff's views are correct, it is specifically the what-if abuse 
question.  The Hollywood "Dossier" is about to become a reality.  They 
know the shit you eat for breakfast.  Who is they?  Anyone who is 
motivated.   A little cracking and they could know everything about you. 
   Where you gas up, what you eat, and who your friends are.

So, gmail, orkut, safeway, albertsons, NSA, etc.   I think it is all 
innocuous enough, but pass a law like TIA, or similar and suddenly those 
companies could be legally forced to divulge that info.   Those 
companies do not have the ability to do the "right" thing.  They are 
compelled, by laws and shareholders to comply.

Why did Adobe turn over the Russian hacker who cr4x0r3d thier software? 
  Because they have to follow certain rules, etc, etc.  Once they did 
it, the FBI was the one doing all the dirty work.   So, you can't really 
blame Adobe.  They are not a single entity, they are a bunch of people, 
representing the financial interest of a bunch of stockholders, who are 
in turn, demanding 20% growth....

1984 and the like are happening, J. Edgar Hoover would love the 21 
Century - because everything he wanted would have been at his finger 
tips.  He wouldn't need force to get it, we would hand it too him.


js