HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
Google, the number two collector of personal data on the planet is speaking out against the number one collector of personal data on the planet. 
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Google's Eric Schmidt Lambasts NSA Over Spying
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
There's a difference between the two.
Google collects data about people who use their software, i.e., people do it willingly.
NSA doesn't offer any such services and collects data about anyone, doesn't matter if you object or not.
BIG difference.
Google collects data about people who use their software, i.e., people do it willingly.
NSA doesn't offer any such services and collects data about anyone, doesn't matter if you object or not.
BIG difference.
Most people are unaware that Google is spying on them and recording every single thing they do. So no, it's not a BIG difference.
ServerKing
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2005
- Messages
- 1,730
He is just worried that they have been spying on his barge to see if they can find out anything about it lol
LeninGHOLA
Vladimir Hayt
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2009
- Messages
- 18,416
Google tells them up front in their terms of use. NSA tells them they aren't collecting data, but do anyway. It is a big difference.
Just because most people do not read a EULA etc does not make it the same.
1. AdSense does NOT require you to sign an EULA before it tracks you, and it tracks you regardless of you having a Google account or using Google software.
2. Google largely doesn't have restrictions on what it can do with the data outside of the EULA. Google employees can access unencrypted personal data on their customers and Google often gives personal and identifying data away to their partners and developers. They don't need a warrant to collect or act on data they obtain, there is no judicial oversight of their internal processes. This could make them more dangerous.
3. Google doesn't have armed forces (that I know of) this could make the less dangerous.
2. Google largely doesn't have restrictions on what it can do with the data outside of the EULA. Google employees can access unencrypted personal data on their customers and Google often gives personal and identifying data away to their partners and developers. They don't need a warrant to collect or act on data they obtain, there is no judicial oversight of their internal processes. This could make them more dangerous.
3. Google doesn't have armed forces (that I know of) this could make the less dangerous.
dgingeri
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2004
- Messages
- 2,830
Google, the number two collector of personal data on the planet is speaking out against the number one collector of personal data on the planet.
You forgot Lexis Nexis. They're probably #2, with Google at #3.
Quoted for Truth.
Nothing is free. If you are using a free product (Google, Facebook, etc.) YOU are the product.
There is no comparison between what Google does, and what the NSA has been doing. You granted the first permission (gave consent) to do so as a condition of using their software.
The later simply did it without a warrant or any legal grounds whatsoever, perhaps in violation of the US Constitution.
Some times they do but most of the time they don't. None of these alerts the end user that they're being spied on: Analytics, AdSense, Google DNS, jquery and other linked files/libraries, etc, etc. Many of their other services have links to TOS (which is obscured purposely with lengthy legalese) somewhere but it's not immediately obvious to the typical computer illiterate user and isn't presented before using their services. The web developer, website owner, and other people behind the scene obviously know but that's about it. So again, no there isn't a big difference and Google is not upfront about their spying.
No, no, and more no.
Google has a privacy policy that says what they can and can't do with the data, and pretty much every government organization is watching them like a hawk to verify they follow it. It's a pretty simple policy, go read it.
Google employees absolutely do *NOT* have any such access as you claim, that's absurd.
Google does not give away personal or identifying data to anyone - that'd be against the privacy policy, and they'd get rapped by the courts & FCCs of the world if they violated that. Not to mention that's just a stupid thing for them to do regardless.
Just because you didn't go read what Google said doesn't mean they aren't upfront.
It's all right here: http://www.google.com/policies/privacy/
It's your own damn fault if you don't read it. And you can opt-out of all the "ad spying" if you want - let's see you go opt out of the NSA spying.
dgz
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2010
- Messages
- 5,838
As other have pointed out, you have no idea how the modern web works. Most pages are crawling with all sorts of anal probing javascripts. They know you better than your wife. Believe it or, it's true.
GaryJohnson
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2010
- Messages
- 1,053
It does requires that you accept a cookie from them. If you accept their cookie then you're holding the thing for Google - a thing that serves no other purpose than tracking you - that let's them track you and you're presenting it to them every time they ask for it. How could that be construed as doing anything other than giving consent to be tracked?
![[Spectre]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/89/89728.jpg?1455675927){kind=avatar}
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2004
- Messages
- 22,678
Google hates competition
Show me the spying code in jquery.
What's absurd is that you think Google employees DON'T have such access. Especially after all the news stories about Google employees stalking Google users and obtaining such data.
Stories like this one:
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep/16/business/la-fi-google-firing-20100916
Where Google only found out about it from the stalkees.
Google also gives away enough information to every one of its android developers for a developer to track down the individual users of their App.
http://www.cultofandroid.com/22514/...oogle-gives-away-when-you-buy-an-android-app/
if they are willing to just hand that out to fart app creators, what do they give the big guys?
Google is not some altruistic entity. They are out for themselves.
amddragonpc
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2012
- Messages
- 1,996
Schmidt has a point. Google doesn't have the same resources like the NSA, CIA, FBI, Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Congress, etc. The playing field is not level.
So if the NSA issues a disclaimer or got their lackies to issue disclaimers in their services, what they do would now be the same as google. k.
LeninGHOLA
Vladimir Hayt
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2009
- Messages
- 18,416
What services? The NSA provides no services. Can you AdBlock the NSA? Can you choose not to use gmail or pretty much any other Google product?
For example AT&T's services. NSA does what it does standing behind private carriers usually. I wouldn't be surprised if the recent NSA spying on Google didn't involve a 3rd party Google contracts for that particular communication channel.
They provide the service of stopping the terrorist attacks (and occasionally stalking your future (ex-)girlfriend)! I know because the NSA said so in front of congress and the NSA would never lie to congress.
A warrant is not required.
What they do is completely legal even if you don't like it, (the it being something you don't even know they are or are not doing).
And equally as likely, perhaps NOT.
You know, there have been like 9 cases in the last 10 years where a (usually contracted employee) misused NSA resources for personal gain. They all were disciplined or quit before they could be disciplined, most were refereed to the DoJ for charges.
And there has only been one case shown that is an example of the NSA as an organization wrongly targeting a US Person and that individual did so by mistake and was also punished for screwing up.
Now if you have a real, verifiable terrorist communicating with other known supporters, non of whom are US citizens, all of whom are valid targets, the NSA would use the exact same capabilities and procedures as what the media keep trying to convince you they are using on us. It's the equivalent of saying the NSA has these really awesome powerful binoculars that see through walls and see what bad guys are doing in their homes, and then the media says the NSA has the capability watch everything you are doing in your own home and they could be spying on millions of US citizens.
LeninGHOLA
Vladimir Hayt
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2009
- Messages
- 18,416
That's not what type of service I was referring to, obviously. There is no NSA search engine, no NSAmail. Now, back to your statist ranting.
No they don't. Where in the hell do you guys get these lame fucking ideas from? The NSA is NOT in the business of stopping terrorist attacks. The FBI does this, the NSA does not. The NSA is a SIGNALs Intelligence Agency that does intercept, analyze, and report on terrorist activities as revealed by their communications to other DoD Agencies that may or may not take action against said terrorists. But the NSA doesn't STOP anything.
LeninGHOLA
Vladimir Hayt
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2009
- Messages
- 18,416
That was intentionally obtuse.
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2000
- Messages
- 6,254
He didn't seem to care until it was found out that they were tapping into Google data outside of his backroom deal with the NSA. Same thing with the german Chancellor.. she didn't care until she found out she was tapped herself.
Shit, all Schmidt is doing is trying to cover his ass, the NSA didn't just sneak in their without his knowledge. He's just lying his ass off to fend off the masses cause his shareholders are scared.
As for the German Chancellor, she knows the game as well as anyone else in that businesses. What, you think Germany doesn't spy on everyone they can as well? That's just the nature of the game and she knows it. All she is looking for is a way to gain leverage in the G20 summit talks or whatever that's coming up soon.
As for the German Chancellor, she knows the game as well as anyone else in that businesses. What, you think Germany doesn't spy on everyone they can as well? That's just the nature of the game and she knows it. All she is looking for is a way to gain leverage in the G20 summit talks or whatever that's coming up soon.
So is not recognizing that everything digital and broadcast is potentially an NSA resource. Google isn't competing with the NSA, they are farmed by the NSA, they are a source. They are a source to be exploited for authorized purposes just like any other source.
That's like the absolutely clueless idea to create a new internetz from personal WiFi systems. The NSA was created to monitor signals. Radio, Teletype, Morse Code, RADAR, every form of electronic emission or transmission. These bozos thing open broadcast is the way to avoid NSA collection, shit they would be making it even easier and even less of a challenge to privacy.
You have to understand the nature of a thing.
That's like the absolutely clueless idea to create a new internetz from personal WiFi systems. The NSA was created to monitor signals. Radio, Teletype, Morse Code, RADAR, every form of electronic emission or transmission. These bozos thing open broadcast is the way to avoid NSA collection, shit they would be making it even easier and even less of a challenge to privacy.
You have to understand the nature of a thing.
All AT&T or Google or Microsoft need to do is mention in their EULAs that they 'may share you information and content with various federal law enforcement and security agencies'. And that makes what the NSA does, A.O.K.
chockomonkey
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2003
- Messages
- 8,328
As long as the data they collect is ONLY stored in a database and requires a manual search, then there's probably nothing wrong with it.
imo a problem arises when they have filters or signals built in to automatically scan for signals of 'wrong-doing' or whatnot. The feds should need probable cause to search someone vs just fishing.
That's why they stayed in China. There's no difference. They're pandering. At the end of the day they couldn't give two shits. They want money.