If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(InformationWeek)   Six things you can do about Google's new privacy policy. You know you're in trouble when one item is "live in a cave"   (informationweek.com) divider line 51
    More: Unlikely, Google, webcasts, InformationWeek, Google products, address book, payment system, caves  
•       •       •

5312 clicks; posted to Geek » on 01 Mar 2012 at 2:12 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



51 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-01 02:20:51 PM
been using duckduckgo for a while. works fine for web searches, but not as good as gis. no good replacement for youtube that i know of either...
 
2012-03-01 02:23:18 PM
Do Not Track+ is not on the list, so the list fails.
 
2012-03-01 02:23:49 PM
Go to Google dashboard and disable history after you clear your history.
Set your browser to clear cookies when you close it.
Always close browser after you check gmail or log into a Google joint.
 
2012-03-01 02:24:55 PM
I don't know if there is a better option than TOR - but we really need wide-spread adoption of something like it before it's too late.
 
2012-03-01 02:26:08 PM
Of course, you can use SSL to keep your privacy encrypted; but the performance cost is pretty high.
 
2012-03-01 02:34:38 PM
i use pine for email and gopher for the internet. it works great
 
2012-03-01 02:39:47 PM
It's really not that hard. I use DuckDuckGo for search, Lavabit for email, and Firefox for my browser.

The only thing you can't really escape is YouTube, but if you're not logged in to a Google account and don't accept cookies from them, I doubt they can build a very comprehensive profile on you just from YT anyway.
 
2012-03-01 03:06:07 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: Go to Google dashboard and disable history after you clear your history.
Set your browser to clear cookies when you close it.
Always close browser after you check gmail or log into a Google joint.


Yes, in addition to using noscript, disconnect and do-not-track+. Also, use bing instead of goog, yahoo mail instead of gmail, and wash your hands after youtubing. The privacy apps listed above are more effective against them than against goog apps.
 
2012-03-01 03:15:01 PM
Maybe I'm just daft when it comes to this sort of stuff, but if I don't have a gmail account or google plus or I'm not logged in when I use the search engine, how would they "track" me? My Ip address?
 
2012-03-01 03:19:12 PM
just don't sign into your gmail account or youtube account while googling. TADA, or continue with fearmongering, whatever you want
 
2012-03-01 03:30:08 PM
#7: Don't worry about it. They already have more information on you than they could ever use. And people don't care about privacy anyway, which is why they post every bowel movement on Facebook.
 
2012-03-01 03:37:11 PM
How about :

Put EVERY goddamn google server and website in your hosts-file...
 
2012-03-01 03:38:42 PM
My random internet searches will test the ability of the system to figure out WTF I am up to or actually interested in.
 
2012-03-01 03:41:00 PM
Am I the only one who doesn't really care that much. I mean google servers see every search term you enter anyway (as do all other search engines), is it really that bad that a program/algorithm/whatever takes those search terms and replaces typical advertising with other advertising based on those search terms. I'm just honestly not seeing what the big deal is. Maybe someone can explain it to me better if I've got it all wrong, which I very well may.
 
2012-03-01 03:54:45 PM
It's funny. All these threads, tweets, and posts about "DISABLE YOUR WEB HISTORY, IT'S YOUR LAST CHANCE." So I go and look at my web history: wasn't even enabled to begin with. So either I have amazing foresight and disabled it ages ago or every single one of these people turned it on themselves at some point.

The Google Account Dashboard provides a single control panel for Google services, or most of them anyway.

Yes, the settings are consolidated because of the exact same changes being complained about.
 
2012-03-01 03:54:54 PM
#7: Get over it. Google doesn't care about you as much as you think they do.
 
2012-03-01 03:57:35 PM
neurotic much Farkers?
 
2012-03-01 04:13:27 PM

downstairs: #7: Get over it. Google doesn't care about you as much as you think they do.


I think the real fear is that the profile which is built will be a truer reflection of who the person is than they'd like to admit.

"But I only GISed those teen bestiality photos that one time, and only because I wanted to know what the reference was!... OK, maybe a couple... oh, wait, then there was that shopping query... and the 47 IMDB queries on the cast of "The Electric Company"... oh, fark, I'm a pervert, aren't I?"
 
2012-03-01 04:20:43 PM

Harvey Manfrenjensenjen: downstairs: #7: Get over it. Google doesn't care about you as much as you think they do.

I think the real fear is that the profile which is built will be a truer reflection of who the person is than they'd like to admit.

"But I only GISed those teen bestiality photos that one time, and only because I wanted to know what the reference was!... OK, maybe a couple... oh, wait, then there was that shopping query... and the 47 IMDB queries on the cast of "The Electric Company"... oh, fark, I'm a pervert, aren't I?"


My point being even if Google can build a accurate profile of you, you're still 1 of 200 million people they have profiles on. Nothing is going to happen, other than you'll see ads that are somewhat more relevant to you.

I equate paranoia like this as really being the fear that you're NOT being watched, and that no one really cares about you beyond your circle of friends and family.

People want to think that just because they're a person, great and powerful people/companies actually care about them as an individual- positively or negatively, it doesn't matter.
 
2012-03-01 04:25:12 PM
Semi-serious question, are they collecting more data on me now than they were yesterday?

My guess is no. They're just blobbing it all together from different places is the way I understand it.
 
2012-03-01 04:25:33 PM

ajt167: Am I the only one who doesn't really care that much


No, you are not.
 
2012-03-01 04:27:18 PM

ColSanders: #7: Don't worry about it. They already have more information on you than they could ever use. And people don't care about privacy anyway, which is why they post every bowel movement on Facebook.


Speak for yourself and your retarded peers. I value my privacy, even if I have been in what amounts to a self-induced coma for the last 15 years.
 
2012-03-01 04:28:54 PM

Fark_Guy_Rob: Of course, you can use SSL to keep your privacy encrypted; but the performance cost is pretty high.


No it farking isn't. Jesus farking christ. This myth needs to die.

You're inconvenienced maybe -- maybe -- half a second on each request. In exchange for all of that request to be encrypted and only decryptable by the server on the other end. Pretty high cost, my ass. farking use SSL. Everywhere. No excuses.
 
2012-03-01 04:31:09 PM
I don't really care, but that doesn't mean I waive my right to privacy forever.
 
2012-03-01 04:34:52 PM

downstairs: downstairs: #7: Get over it. Google doesn't care about you as much as you think they do.

People want to think that just because they're a person, great and powerful people/companies actually care about them as an individual- positively or negatively, it doesn't matter.


You're better than the usual breed of corporate whiteknight/shill that cuts his teeth at Fark. Subtle, reasonable and likeable. I would expect no less than the best from Google, though, so give you a 9.5/10.

You see, the problem with your approach is that we all know exactly where that road leads...perfectly compliant consumers and an easily manipulated citizenry. Well, I choose not to play. Fark Google and all the rest who would reduce me to a mere cipher.
 
2012-03-01 04:40:29 PM

bittermang: Fark_Guy_Rob: Of course, you can use SSL to keep your privacy encrypted; but the performance cost is pretty high.

No it farking isn't. Jesus farking christ. This myth needs to die.

You're inconvenienced maybe -- maybe -- half a second on each request. In exchange for all of that request to be encrypted and only decryptable by the server on the other end. Pretty high cost, my ass. farking use SSL. Everywhere. No excuses.


You wouldn't happen to work for VeriSign would you? Most sites don't really need to shell out 300+/yr to avoid their user's funny cat videos being intercepted. Not that it matters when it's the end point recipient selling your info.

/obv sensitive/payment info is a different matter
 
2012-03-01 04:45:58 PM

ajt167: Am I the only one who doesn't really care that much. I mean google servers see every search term you enter anyway (as do all other search engines), is it really that bad that a program/algorithm/whatever takes those search terms and replaces typical advertising with other advertising based on those search terms. I'm just honestly not seeing what the big deal is. Maybe someone can explain it to me better if I've got it all wrong, which I very well may.


Nope, I'm with you. I couldn't care less what Google knows about me. Hell, if it means better targeted ads, I'm all for it. My search history is not the freaking Pentagon Papers...
 
2012-03-01 04:55:31 PM
Not using Google services (other than search) isn't on the list either. I'm not sure what all the hubbub is about. There are alternatives to Google's services. I use GMail for my personal mail through a mail client, and I delete the messages off the server so they don't get indexed. I rarely use GMail through the web browser anymore.

I loathe Google Docs. DropBox is a much better solution for online collaboration anyway. I don't use Google Calendar because my work provides a calendar program that I'm required to use (Groupwise). It's a sucky program but it's better than nothing and our corporate IT department takes care of any synching problems between computers and mobile devices, which are rare. I don't visit YouTube much. The only movies and TV programs I care to watch are on Hulu or Crackle. When I do use Google services, I don't log in. I never log in to search, use maps, or watch YouTube videos. Those are the only services I use. I used Chrome for a little while but dumped it when all this privacy stuff starting brewing.

What's the problem? So if you're use of Google's services is pretty slim, and when you do use them without logging in, you're relatively anonymous, except at the IP level. If Google starts actively tracking my IP then I'm cutting the cord for good.
 
2012-03-01 05:11:24 PM

ProfessorOhki: Most sites don't really need to shell out 300+/yr to avoid their user's funny cat videos being intercepted. Not that it matters when it's the end point recipient selling your info.


This

/lulz.
//Not really...
 
2012-03-01 05:17:46 PM
Im not really concerned. Cmon people, do you honestly think google has the manpower to spy on people effectively? I often times look at nasty sick porn, but I am sure there are people out the who look at more nasty stuff than me, Im not concerned.
 
2012-03-01 05:42:50 PM
DARPA gave you this internet, biatches, and DARPA will take it away if you get all uppity up in here.
 
2012-03-01 05:44:10 PM

frozenhotchocolate: Im not really concerned. Cmon people, do you honestly think google has the manpower to spy on people effectively? I often times look at nasty sick porn, but I am sure there are people out the who look at more nasty stuff than me, Im not concerned.


Exactly. Does someone who searched for "Mexican Tranny Porn" really think Google is going to target that, and email their wife?

I mean, seriously... even if you Googled something that would catch the eye of the Secret Service, I bet Google would not release said info to the Secret Service.
 
2012-03-01 06:00:33 PM
Can someone suggest the proper way to use SSL
 
2012-03-01 06:41:33 PM

kahnzo: Can someone suggest the proper way to use SSL


Sure.
 
2012-03-01 06:42:46 PM

kahnzo: Can someone suggest the proper way to use SSL


If you use firefox there's an extension called "https everywhere". Chrome has an extension called "https enforcer". Both extensions will try to use ssl on any websites that support it.
 
2012-03-01 06:54:45 PM

Niveras: Speak for yourself and your retarded peers. I value my privacy, even if I have been in what amounts to a self-induced coma for the last 15 years.


Um, notice how I said "they"?

/doesn't used FB
//values privacy
 
2012-03-01 07:14:01 PM
Is Google's privacy policy anything like my "fark all the Hollywood starlets, do all the blow, and haul ass all over town in my Lambhorghini" policy?
 
2012-03-01 07:37:26 PM
I don't know much about all this stuff, but can't I just log out of gmail when I'm done? Is there any real threat to using GIS or Youtube otherwise?
 
2012-03-01 07:39:19 PM

frozenhotchocolate: Im not really concerned. Cmon people, do you honestly think google has the manpower to spy on people effectively? I often times look at nasty sick porn, but I am sure there are people out the who look at more nasty stuff than me, Im not concerned.


Your future employers would like that info. Your bank too.
 
2012-03-01 08:34:19 PM
abloo hoo hoo im a farking idiot who can't figure out that if i give google fake information about me this entire thing becomes pointless
 
2012-03-01 09:14:05 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: DARPA Al Gore gave you this internet, biatches, and DARPA Al Gore will take it away if you get all uppity up in here.


Fixed.
 
2012-03-01 09:42:28 PM
Well, since I'm usually registered as 84 year old woman from Sri Lanka I'm not sure what value I've added to their bottom line if they can track me.

Also I never log into Google. Don't use GoogleMail
I use TOR a lot for browsing
 
2012-03-01 10:57:17 PM

kahnzo: Can someone suggest the proper way to use SSL


https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere (new window)
 
2012-03-02 06:22:38 AM

ProfessorOhki: You wouldn't happen to work for VeriSign would you? Most sites don't really need to shell out 300+/yr to avoid their user's funny cat videos being intercepted. Not that it matters when it's the end point recipient selling your info.


Er, wot?

I can get Thawte SSL123 domain-validated certs for $39/year from NameCheap. GoDaddy DV certs are about $13/year with a coupon code. Comodo certs are less than $10 with NameCheap. StartSSL certs are free and just as widely trusted.

Even Extended Validation certs are only $99/year from GoDaddy ($75/year if you buy one with a two-year validity).

SSL certs are not expensive in the slightest.

One of the major issues is legacy SSL/TLS implementations like Windows XP that don't support SNI and so require that each SSL-enabled site is on a separate IP address. This is a waste of IP addresses, and most site owners don't care enough to deal with the extra cost.

That, and setting up SSL is slightly more involved than just opening a shared hosting account at some web host. Heck, most people who run a website have no idea how to configure DNS correctly.

Also, Google isn't selling personal information to anyone. They use the data internally, but the user information isn't sold to anyone. Advertisers say "Hey, we want to advertise people that fit $CRITERIA." Google says "Ok, we'll display ads to people who meet that criteria, according to our profiles." and they do. They don't sell the user information to the advertiser.

/uses StartSSL certs on some of his sites. Otherwise I'm not affiliated with any of the companies mentioned above.
//doesn't buy from GoDaddy personally, but they do have good prices on SSL.
///one of the more boring people alive. If Google's algorithms tell them that I'm boring, so be it.
////If people want to be more private, that's fine. I appluad it (and generally try to be reasonably private online). But being overly paranoid is a bit of a stretch, as is using Tor for day-to-day browsing. I don't think it's worth the effort, but some do and that's fine.
//slashy
 
2012-03-02 06:23:48 AM
As always, there's an obligatory xkcd for this issue.
 
2012-03-02 09:42:59 AM

Niveras: ColSanders: #7: Don't worry about it. They already have more information on you than they could ever use. And people don't care about privacy anyway, which is why they post every bowel movement on Facebook.

Speak for yourself and your retarded peers. I value my privacy, even if I have been in what amounts to a self-induced coma for the last 15 years.


Would you like some more tin foil for your hat?

/sure you've enslaved half of the human race, but you are still one hell of a search engine
 
rpl
2012-03-02 10:30:25 AM

Ivo Shandor: kahnzo: Can someone suggest the proper way to use SSL

https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere (new window)


img542.imageshack.us

All I could think about when I saw the URL. farking internet has ruined my life.
 
2012-03-02 01:47:03 PM

heypete: ProfessorOhki: You wouldn't happen to work for VeriSign would you? Most sites don't really need to shell out 300+/yr to avoid their user's funny cat videos being intercepted. Not that it matters when it's the end point recipient selling your info.

Er, wot?

I can get Thawte SSL123 domain-validated certs for $39/year from NameCheap. GoDaddy DV certs are about $13/year with a coupon code. Comodo certs are less than $10 with NameCheap. StartSSL certs are free and just as widely trusted.

Even Extended Validation certs are only $99/year from GoDaddy ($75/year if you buy one with a two-year validity).

SSL certs are not expensive in the slightest.


Maybe I'm just really behind the times. I thought I remembered there being like 2-3 trusted cert authorities and them charging an amount that would prevent using it if you weren't turning a profit.

I know that Google's not selling it. I just meant that, in the general case, the most secure tunnel in the world isn't going to do you any good if it's the end-point that's bad. I meant that as a response to the "use SSL everywhere" bit. I'd hate for people to go "oh, https! Alright, I'll just type in my SSN here then; it's safe."
 
2012-03-02 01:57:32 PM

ProfessorOhki: Maybe I'm just really behind the times. I thought I remembered there being like 2-3 trusted cert authorities and them charging an amount that would prevent using it if you weren't turning a profit.


That was way back in the 1990s, and there was still more than 3. Still, the prices were outrageous then and certainly still the case for Verisign certs today.

Still, when people think "SSL certificate", "Verisign" is the name that everyone thinks of so that's why businesses and whatnot look there. Much like the old saying, "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM" businesses are willing to buy Verisign certs at outrageous prices because they're a known entity.

Even though I'm not really a fan of GoDaddy, their SSL certs are some of the cheapest and most accepted today: the GoDaddy (and Starfield Tech, which is a different name they sell certs under for those who don't want to associate with GoDaddy) root is in every major browser but is also signed by the ancient ValiCert root (who they bought) that was created back in 1999 and is supported by just about everyone. If your browser doesn't have the GoDaddy root, it's almost certain to have the ValiCert one.

I rather like StartSSL. It's a relatively small business, they have good customer support, and they only charge for what costs them money: domain or email-validated certs are free, but revocation costs money. Getting your identity validated is about $50/year (plus another $50 for organizational validation if you want it), but you can issue an infinite number of identity-validated certificates -- they only charge for the identity checks, not the certs.

I know that Google's not selling it. I just meant that, in the general case, the most secure tunnel in the world isn't going to do you any good if it's the end-point that's bad. I meant that as a response to the "use SSL everywhere" bit. I'd hate for people to go "oh, https! Alright, I'll just type in my SSN here then; it's safe."

Understood. Protecting data on the wire is important, but it won't do you a lick of good if the system on the other end is dishonest.
 
2012-03-02 02:02:29 PM

heypete: ProfessorOhki: Maybe I'm just really behind the times. I thought I remembered there being like 2-3 trusted cert authorities and them charging an amount that would prevent using it if you weren't turning a profit.

That was way back in the 1990s, and there was still more than 3. Still, the prices were outrageous then and certainly still the case for Verisign certs today.


Yeah, that sounds about right... my domains literally still have the little underconstruction.gif guy on them. Apparently, I'm really bad at following through with website ideas. Anyway, thanks for the quick primer.
 
Displayed 50 of 51 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report