| 2:52 pm on Aug 16, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|Protesters outside the famed Googleplex said this would create a "pay-to-play" service and urged Google to live up to its famous motto "don't be evil". |
were they protesting near the building with CIA operatives in it?
in the related news:
Google purchases flying drones for mapping experiments.
A German company called Microdrones has sold a surveillance drone fitted with cameras and are GPS controlled for precise landing and navigation to Google for mapping-related projects.
| 4:42 pm on Aug 16, 2010 (gmt 0)|
oh gosh, just what we need. Goog flying drones around everywhere keeping and eye on things.
Goog is letting itself be turned into an arm of the gov used for public survalance.
| 4:58 pm on Aug 16, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Adsense check = no moral outrage.
| 5:14 pm on Aug 16, 2010 (gmt 0)|
"Shorty after the protest ended, the 100+ Microsoft employees boarded their bus and drove back to Seattle."
[bad joke... I know... ;-)]
| 5:31 pm on Aug 16, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Na, this is just the begining for goog. The more they go down this road the more market share they are going to start losing, shooting themselves in the foot
| 5:40 pm on Aug 16, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Eric Schmidt: "I am not a crook!"
| 7:32 pm on Aug 16, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|Goog is letting itself be turned into an arm of the gov used for public survalance. |
More so than you think.
The feds love Google earth. [prnewswire.com]
|Federal contracting records reviewed by Consumer Watchdog show that the FBI has spent more than $600,000 on Google Earth since 2007. The Drug Enforcement Administration, meanwhile, has spent more than $67,000. |
I'll bet all those protesters have already been indexed, added to face recognition, and can now be easily identified using Google Goggles!
| 7:37 pm on Aug 16, 2010 (gmt 0)|
I dont understand why Microsoft is not using this situation, just "with us you have privacy" or just do more in that category so its a trust worthy company.
| 8:16 pm on Aug 16, 2010 (gmt 0)|
"Sorry stockholders, these 100 or so protesters have filled our hearts with love and, from now on, we shall do no evil. We don't care what happens to your money anymore!"
| 8:59 pm on Aug 16, 2010 (gmt 0)|
It's not always about what is seen on the surface that Google should take heed to (100 protesters). It's the relatively silent influential groups that should make them realize they are walking on a very slippery slope. By now, surely they must be aware they are adopting some very bad business practices. There are many good alternatives to Google, we just have to accept that we were branded like cattle, then wake up and try out some of the alternative choices.
Once influentially respected tech people begin speaking up such as we are now seeing it's only a matter of time before their voices sway the masses, beginning with family, friends, or business associates.
It's a matter of bringing people's awareness to what is going on below the surface of their daily activities as it relates to anything online. It's a sobering experience when we learn how much we are tracked and profiled by the mighty money loving corporations.
In fairness to the little people at Google though, I don't think the people who built it are the people who are now running it. I'm sure the decision making processes have moved away from the "little nerd hearts" (as zeus would say), to the ivory tower board room crowd who are not in touch with reality.
| 10:38 pm on Aug 16, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Eric Schmidt as quoted in Read/Write Web: "I actually think most people don't want Google to answer their questions. They want Google to tell them what they should be doing next."
| 3:29 am on Aug 17, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|zeus: I dont understand why Microsoft is not using this situation, just "with us you have privacy" or just do more in that category so its a trust worthy company. |
Microsoft, "the trustworthy"? :)
You mean THAT Microsoft, that was caught in bed with the law enforcement groups giving keys to their backdoors built into Windows? Oh, THAT Microsoft...
albo, if you can find where that quote is from and put a link here, it would be very interesting. because from the way you typed it it is a doublespeak for total information awareness (tech slavery if you will).
| 5:45 am on Aug 17, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|albo, if you can find where that quote is from and put a link here, it would be very interesting. |
He's quoted in the following article in the Wall Street Journal:
| 11:24 am on Aug 17, 2010 (gmt 0)|
aleksl - thats why I say they should use this situation to come with a clean SE without spying and other services, simple focus on user friendly service.
| 12:39 pm on Aug 17, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|Adsense check = no moral outrage. |
frontpage, you can have no idea how much you just brightened my day.
| 6:44 pm on Aug 17, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Smells like someone finally dumped in the sandbox.
| 8:13 pm on Aug 17, 2010 (gmt 0)|
|Google purchases flying drones for mapping experiments. |
yeah, right, Google would be more inclined to use them as part of their "24/7 watch everything regardless of privacy" craziness. They can't seem to help themselves. If their VW bug cameras were jacking private wifi data I suppose a drone plane camera will accidentally record all sound/conversation on earth... oops.
| 11:32 pm on Aug 17, 2010 (gmt 0)|
well, Google Street View is getting a lot of flak right now in Germany. Google announced to start the service with 20 German cities covered giving people four weeks time to have their properties removed.
"You have decided to blur your building and/or property prior to the launch of Street View in Germany."
The opt-out is heavily promoted by German Mainstreet Media - and according to polls, up to 40% of properties may end up being blured - rendering the service pretty much useless for anything.
| 3:56 am on Aug 18, 2010 (gmt 0)|
@bakerboy - The article is at: [readwriteweb.com...]
| 12:31 pm on Aug 18, 2010 (gmt 0)|
Or maybe they are worried that they will be caught out for having painted their door the wrong color.
Iroicaly in Germany a lot of people don't own their own home and rent instead. So in fact its only the landlord that could object the thier property being photographed maybe there are tax implications here?
[edited by: goodroi at 4:05 pm (utc) on Aug 18, 2010]
[edit reason] TOS [/edit]