Google CEO Schmidt: No Anonymity Is The Future Of Web

This truly is a bad sign, but come on we all knew this was coming. We have to stay ahead of these dbags, Is there away to create a peoples internet a secondary information superhighway built on top of the one we have.

and how would they enforce this new internet without anonymity. Would we have to use biometrics to log in to the net, will there be internet bot cops coming soon to webpages near you, I dont know , its just all together whack, they already can identify us with IP addresses

The tighter the noose gets the more the person struggles to be free, so bring it on you tyrannical bastards your only strengthening are unity and focusing are energy towards freedom.

There will be a climax. A tipping point where there be only two sides. The side of Freedom, truth and love or Fear, deception and control.

I know which side Im on.

[edit on 10-8-2010 by believeyoume]

[edit on 10-8-2010 by believeyoume]

Rather surprisingly, GOOGLE is financially the largest lobby for net neutrality in Washington. You'd think those principles would align with ensuring anonymity.

Doesn't the lack of anonymity significantly increase security vulnerability overall?

No anonymity kind of works for me.

I have nothing to hide.

What benefits does anonymity have over not, if you don't do anything illegal or act like a fool?

Originally posted by SupremeKnowledge

Originally posted by JackHerer4Prez
Personally, I could care less. I need a little motivation to use the library more, so no big loss. Have fun trying to collect information on my physical searches of card catalogues and the books that I don't check out.

If you would rather be using the public library instead of the internet;
Then why dont do it now?
Whats stopping you?

Let me guess...
The limited amount of information....

[edit on 10-8-2010 by SupremeKnowledge]

Wow, talk about misdirection. I never said I would rather use the library, nor did I say that I do not use the library now. I simply stated that I would go to the library MORE and unplugging from the Internet wouldn't be a big loss. In fact it may be a blessing, who knows? I have some very nice libraries around me that are pretty well funded and if they don't have what I'm looking for then I can order it from another library, so there is plenty of information.

reply to post by misinformational


Maybe Google knows something we dont know. Maybe lobbying for lack of anonymity on the web is their way of trying to prevent false flags like CIA planted "terrorists" that can then be used to propagandize other restrictions on the internet.

I dont know, Im just speculating. But making it hard to post anonymously could work in favor of the little people like us too. It might make it easier to spot disinfo, or other propagandists.

However like I said earlier, my support for losing anonymity really hinges on whether or not the PTB will do the same. I am sick of them hiding, making everything they do secret, and then arguing that we should live in glass cages. If the rule could be applied to all, fine. If it isnt to be applied to all, then I have an issue with it on principle.

This would be a good time to mention that:

1. Anonymous web searches can be done through startpage.com, one of the fastest growing websites there is (no coincidence there)

2. The Free State Project has sub-groups focused on anonymous trading networks. Now that will scare the government poop-less and when it takes off they'll probably start shooting people or something.

The group that really does have a lot to hide is the US Federal Government. They would have no problem literally murdering you if you gained access to any one of their millions upon millions of classified documents and were planning to bring transparency to government by making one or more of them public.

Personally I have a lot to hide too because whatever you say can and will be used against you but never for you, when it comes to the government. Therefore, the less they know, the better. If a cop is visiting your house they won't hesitate to use anything you say against you, but they'll never once use it for you. Thats why you don't talk to the police and thats why you don't give out your information to the government. Modern government is designed to extract money from people... not help any one. So the less they know, the better.

Originally posted by Snarf
No anonymity kind of works for me.

I have nothing to hide.

What benefits does anonymity have over not, if you don't do anything illegal or act like a fool?

Perhaps no free speech works for you too. For example, maybe you have nothing offensive to say to people. But then would you go a step further and say other people should be forced by law to express who they are. In America we have the freedom of expression. Telling who you are is an expression. Therefore it is my right to not express that. Agreed?

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


That's a nice thought. I'd wish that to be true, but I doubt it.

You see, even while Google has been the largest lobby FOR net neutrality, they just ended closed door meetings between Verizon and FCC - Apparently these meetings were negotiations for a tiered Internet (read: against net neutrality). Kinda defeats the purpose of all that lobbying huh?

So I'm a bit suspect of their intentions. It seems their intentions are more aligned with being able to identify anonymous whistleblowers that submit their information to Wikileaks, than protect the masses through publicity.

[edit for clarity]

[edit on 10-8-2010 by misinformational]

google thinks they're big stuff , but i block ALL google links with my routers.
next I will be adding one for youtube and everything else related with their company
if they continue to spew this crap.

time to start boycotting anything google or youtube related
and to find out which other companies they're affiliated with
so we can block those directly through our own routers and
show them that we're in control of what we want to see and
not see from now on.


Marshall

[EDIT] to fix the everthing typo to everything

[edit on 10-8-2010 by Marshall Twinie]

Originally posted by jtma508
Business is pushing hard to erase anonymity. The biggest challenge of marketing online is that you never really know who your potential customers and prospects are. You can target them using behavioral segments but unlike traditional marketing, they're largely unknown. To be able to identify us on the web and connect us to all the real-world behavioral and demographic data available would be a winfall for business. You can be sure they are pushing uber-hard for this.

With some of the stuff Google does its not suprising the CEO has this viewpoint. As far as marketing goes, I for one would be happy to be able to visit a website without 5 different windows popping up advertsiing stuff I could care less about in the first place.

As far as no anonymous, the Government and all its entities should be required to follow that now, as part of being transparent to the people they answer to, namely us.

I am sure they would come up with reasons they should be exempt, which goes against why they dont want people to be able to be anonymous in the first place.

I really dont see how they are going to get around the right to privacy, especially when that is occuring on a private network in the privacy of your own home. The only way around this would be to augment the defined court rulings for the 1st and 4th amendment.

If that even comes up as a thought, we need to immidiately vote out (although I think we should now anyways) everyone in federally elected offices and start over, sending a clear reminder that we the people are in charge, and not some corporate entity.

Remember when Google Buzz came out and "accidentally" leaked everyone's contact info to the world public?

How much do you want to bet that the CEO of Google's contact list wasn't accidentally made public to the internet.

Since the CEO of Google believes that privacy isn't needed and only criminals want it we should all mass petition him to release his personal e-mail and phone contacts for 24 hours on the front page of google to give us an illustration of how privacy isn't something law abiding citizens should be interested in.

I'm sure he'd volunteer since he's got nothing to worry about by making who his friends are and how to contact them public, right? Unless they are law breakers why would they want to hide their contact lists and phone contacts from the public? What non law breaking reason could you have for wanting privacy after all.

oh is it me or always people who have "vegeta" on theyr picture always ridicule and troll? man since when pedophiles are hackers? since when pedophiles can disguise theyr ip? google leaves my annonymity alone - ill catch all the pedophiles for them okey?
if they think they can do this,theyr WAY OVER THEYR HEAD.
-stopping using google,there are search engines who arent evil
-i can always be annonymous,the free hackers are always better.
-i dont remember doing anything bad,freedom is my right as a human,i dont like being locked and monitored all the time like a sheep!
if google wants to loose stocks,good good,thank god i didnt bought from them.

reply to post by SupremeKnowledge


yeah, I would hate to have my own name made public especially on debates like the moon landing or 9/11. My god, my name would be defermated and people will know where I live to cause harassment. I know how humans work. Just look at Jarrah white and how he gets harrassed daily from his detractors. All they would do is just make a proxy of sorts and a fake user name. this is why I do very little on facebook when it comes to controversial debates.

reply to post by Marshall Twinie


good luck with that. If you plan on getting a cell phone, then you better not get anything with the android software 'cause google owns that as well. I hate google and the only thing I try to use is youtube and my android phone. I got pissed though when they forced me to use a gmail account for my youtube. One of my buds is a google freak and anything that comes out via google he automatically loves. This is why people are sheep and just follow.

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by ModernAcademia

 

me too, I hate hearing people say "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear" Anyone who mutters those words should be forced to have cctv set up in every room of their house.

It's classic Goebels propaganda.

Lol that's the exact argument i made in a thread a while back

Nothing to Hide Nothing to Fear? CCTV In Your Home Then!

It's a stupid argument used by stupid people who think it's an end to all debate. They think it will paint those opposing their views as being secret criminals or something like that.

I don't think your argument is any more valid. Calling something stupid without validation is just as bad as referring to historic propaganda to prove your point. Validate your arguments as to WHY it's stupid and prove your point. Otherwise, you're just another "me too".

I'm intrigued though. What if EVERYONE wasn't anonymous. Even the government? You would know who was posting whatever publicly. I think it would lend to a new era of openness. Similar to the argument of what if everyone could read everyone else's minds?

If you REALLY want to stay anonymous and private, don't put anything on the web that you don't want known. If one person has access to it, potentially EVERYONE has access to it.

Originally posted by SupremeKnowledge
You guys know what non-anonymity will cause in the real world?
Yes, Child Molesters preying on innocent children who are using the internet.....
There is also ID Theft, Credit Fraud, Blackmail, Extortion, Robberies, Murder!!!
[edit on 10-8-2010 by SupremeKnowledge]

Because none of that happens with the current anonymity and privacy?

Care to explain how lack of anonymity will cause that?

Originally posted by grahag
I don't think your argument is any more valid. Calling something stupid without validation is just as bad as referring to historic propaganda to prove your point. Validate your arguments as to WHY it's stupid and prove your point. Otherwise, you're just another "me too".

I validated it quite early on and made the argument clear, if you clicked and read the thread you would find i didn't just call it stupid, i gave clear reasons why it is. Being anonymous gives people more freedom to discuss things they usually wouldn't. If you can't understand why that is then there isn't much i can do to convince you other than to say review my thread history and ask yourself, would you discuss some of the topics i have posted with your identity in the open? Having nothing to hide doesn't stop people reading into what you have put and assuming things and those assumptions could have all sorts of consequences.

Originally posted by grahag
I'm intrigued though. What if EVERYONE wasn't anonymous. Even the government? You would know who was posting whatever publicly. I think it would lend to a new era of openness. Similar to the argument of what if everyone could read everyone else's minds?

If you REALLY want to stay anonymous and private, don't put anything on the web that you don't want known. If one person has access to it, potentially EVERYONE has access to it.

If everyone was not anonymous then wikileaks and other forms of whistleblowing couldn't exist and it would actually give government more control and make companies completely unaccountable. Because if your identity is tied to you finding gross abuses of power and you expose those abuses then you make yourself a very clear target. In only a short time all idea of releasing evidence of coverups and crimes would be utterly destroyed because people would fear for their safety.

These are very important reasons to keep the web anonymous.

[edit on 10-8-2010 by ImaginaryReality1984]

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
These are very important reasons to keep the web anonymous.

.....and there are equally amount of reasons why not to keep it anonymous, it all depends on which side of the fence you view it from.

reply to post by EFGuy


So anonymity is a bad thing, but private meetings between Verizon and Google is ok?? It's hypocrisy.