Google Plus-One coming to ATS on a trial basis...

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


Personally I want nothing to do with Google, they are not trustworthy and they lie and decieve, also reportedly have close links with the NSA, hell, maybe I shouldn't even be on here.

Originally posted by purplemer
Is that for real. I am amazed you give any trust to google... They have a terrible privacy record and known for censorship...

Google was recently touted as 'worst on privacy' out of a sample of online organisations, according to a study by Privacy International.

www.frankahearn.com...
These are the peeps that will also hand over your search history with bread and butter to the government if requested.. No contention or questions asked. For those of you that use firefox there is a little download you can get that allows you to anon search...

These are also the people that allowed BP to buy key phrase about the oil spill in the gulf to stop people have access to the correct information about the environmental degradation in the area. You trust these peeps to offer you a service. You want to do business with them...?

These are the peeps that have decided what topics are news worthy and what topics need not be seen by the general public. Anonymous have recently been banned from google plus.... without warning and without viloation of there terms and conditions. Google are a political tool and have put their flag clearly in the sand...
For peeps that have enough of this social networking censorship and control Dispora is nearly ready.....

No offense ATS you guys offer a great service.. but I would not use google to pee in if it was the last toilet on planet earth...!

Did you even read the link you posted? If you got past the first sentence, it clearly states they use the analytics for targetting ads. They are an advertising company, that's kind of what they do.

Also the didn't 'allow' BP to buy any keywords. Any keywords are open to the highest bidder. If they would have monitored all the keywords and stopped BP buying ads, everyone would have cried censorship. If you want to put the money down, you can buy those same keywords and run a smear campaign.

Further in the article, it also stated the government subpoenaed all the search engines to release sensitive user data. They all complied, with the exception of Google.

Yes, Google tracks a lot of data. They are in the business of selling targeted ads. But as soon as they start selling your personal information, that multibillion dollar ad market is gone. So it is in their best interest to take your privacy seriously.

If you do any research for yourself (look at the many times Google has stood up to the government, the causes it has supported, read through its privacy policies) instead of quoting articles out of context, you would realize they are very adamant about protecting your data, and only using it internally for AdWords. Tracking data for analytics purposes is completely different from harvesting personal information to sell.

The posts in this topic make are making my head hurt. Just trying to figure out some of the logic used here...

If anyone was really concerned about what you were doing on the Internet, they wouldn't go after Google (who has refused government requests before) they would simply ask your ISP, who is legally obligated to store all that information, and they would politely hand it over. They do this every day. So despite how hard you may try, every request you make is tracked and tracable back to your name and billing information.

As I've said, it's in Google's best interest to keep your personal information secure. Their billion dollar ad industry relies on that trust. Your ISP on the other hand, couldn't care less.

I guess some people are just too deep down the rabbit hole, they can't see the real world anymore. ATS gets millions of page views a day. Even IF Google was tracking these through the +1 widget (which to me it's pretty clear they are not) what do you expect to happen? Maybe you would see ads for some tin foil hats, but that's about it.

Are we all so self-centered we think anyone would care what conspiracy theories we are looking at? I would be more fearful of that information getting out due to embarrassment and being stigmatized as crazy than for fear of government retaliation. Really, every member on here would be viewed as so paranoid, the government wouldn't have to do a thing to discredit you.

But it seems that because of members lack of understanding of technology, and constant distrust and paranoia, ATS will forever be stuck in the dark ages of the Internet. If a big truth really was uncovered here, no one would ever be able to find out about it anyways.

Originally posted by nyk537
You guys just don't get it.

If you and others are really that concerned with what's going on then just opt out and stay away. Nobody is forcing you to use ATS or participate in anything that goes on here.

Wow.

Well, there it is. Anytime we the members/contributors have concerns over something ATS decides to involve itself with, there's always that final answer isn't there?
What a disgusting attitude to hand to the people who create the content that drives this site. ATS wouldn't exsist if it wasn't for google? Ok Sure, I get that, but ATS wouldn't exsist if it wasn't for the people who contribute our time and information here either. We sure don't do this for the money, we do it for the passion of the genre and out of a genuine desire to discuss and debate conspiracy related information here. Obviously some of the members have some valid concerns about Google.
I don't really have an opinion about google plus simply because I've never seen the need to involve myself with social networking sites, considering the traffic and the search rankings you already get, I'm not sure why ATS would feel such a need either, but to see that same old "If you don't like it, then leave" crap from nyk537 when your members have some real and from what I've read about Google plus, very valid privacy concerns about involving their beloved ATS with social networking is kinda sickening. I really don't care either way about google features here, but that's no way to talk to your bread unless you just like butter.

Originally posted by twitchy
I get that, but ATS wouldn't exsist if it wasn't for the people who contribute our time and information here either.

That's part of the magic formula that has resulted in what ATS is today, an important part, but only part still. That statement can be said for any user-generated site, discussion board, forum, etc. But precious few of those types of sites rise from 100,000 visits a month to more than 4 million in six years... so there's more to it, and I think you know that.

We sure don't do this for the money, we do it for the passion of the genre and out of a genuine desire to discuss and debate conspiracy related information here.

Without the other factors that comprise the "magic formula," the diversity of membership and ability to broadcast your passion to (potentially) millions would not exist.

Obviously some of the members have some valid concerns about Google.

Which is why I thoroughly researched the widget using every HTTP tracing tool available. As I did with the Facebook "like," Twitter "tweet," StumbleUpon "link," and other social sharing widgets. This is the first that did not send data back to the source unless the user took some type of action. And also the first to use HTTPS (secure) protocol when data was sent back.

considering the traffic and the search rankings you already get, I'm not sure why ATS would feel such a need either...

There comes a time when existing strategies can get you only so far. Thus far, our efforts to ensure "the world" is aware of what our members post have been successful -- but we're also seeing a bit of a plateau as there's only so much that can be done through smart search optimization. This is but another potential tool in a "war chest" of tools to further our efforts of increasing awareness.

...but to see that same old "If you don't like it, then leave" crap from nyk537 when your members have some real and from what I've read about Google plus, very valid privacy concerns about involving their beloved ATS with social networking is kinda sickening.

To speak frankly, it does come down to that... you're free to leave, though we'd rather you not.

Recently, we've received some rather startling attention from serious "players" in the Internet industry because of the quality of our member posts. While here in our "private Idaho" of ATS, we see complaints of various types over the behavior of some members, others don't see that -- they see an extraordinary example of how "anonymous" online users can behave, be civil, while discussing provocative and compelling topics. In fact, just today we received a comment from one such "player" that we (ATS) are proof that Randi Zuckerberg of Facebook is wrong in that anonymous online users behave badly. (a big part of that magic formula)

Everything I and the "company" do has the single-minded goal of exposing as many people as possible to the discussions of our members. Sure you can postulate that we're doing so for monetary reasons, but really, if that was our driving-force, with how our efforts have grown ATS in a few short years, we could have been banking so much more if we put our attention to porn. We didn't. We put our attention on the members of ATS.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Recently, we've received some rather startling attention from serious "players" in the Internet industry because of the quality of our member posts. While here in our "private Idaho" of ATS, we see complaints of various types over the behavior of some members, others don't see that -- they see an extraordinary example of how "anonymous" online users can behave, be civil, while discussing provocative and compelling topics. In fact, just today we received a comment from one such "player" that we (ATS) are proof that Randi Zuckerberg of Facebook is wrong in that anonymous online users behave badly. (a big part of that magic formula)

That's a debatable but valid point, I read an FBI report a while back that discussed Internet or Online Behavior that suggested people's personalities and behavoiral patterns were amplified exponentially as a result of their perceived anonimnity. Assertive people tend to be much more assertive, criminals tend to be more criminal for lack of a better word, etc. There's alot of material even I've psoted over the years that I would not have posted if it were possible to connect my real identity to it, and Big Brother knows that all too well. I don't live under any illusions that my internet activity is anonymous, but there is a growing and powerful push to eliminate anonimnity from the internet entirely, and site like ATS may eventually become the Cause Du jour for it's implementation. Once that happens, Conspiracy Theorists will dry up pretty quickly. The day I become "so and so from such and such town" instead of "Twitchy", is the day I will no longer see the Cost/Benefit of posting here, and I dont' think I would be alone in that sentiment. I don't like seeing ATS fall into a dangerous precept of Social Networking, and the push to rid the internet of that precious anonimnity should be paramount in the decision making process of a site that caters to the counter-culture. It's what drives and empowers us to speak up from a podium on level ground IMO.

I think in order for this particular genre to flourish, anonimnity must be protected and nurtured at all costs, and from my limited understanding of Google Plus, that raises some real concerns that could ultimately be a detriment to the Conspiracy Community in particular. It's late, I'm tired and have been fighting with my wife all week (ironically in part due to her activities on a Social Networking Site) so perhaps I'm a little jaded at the moment, but it seems to me that anonimnity is absolutely critical here. I'm not in anyway mitigating your efforts to bring ATS into mass fruition or trying to personify some vaguely defined concerns on behalf of the community, but I do think their concerns are valid and Google is... well you know, Google after all. I don't have an opinion really as I don't subscribe to google, facebook, or any of them, just concerns.

reply to post by Akasirus

If you do any research for yourself (look at the many times Google has stood up to the government, the causes it has supported, read through its privacy policies) instead of quoting articles out of context, you would realize they are very adamant about protecting your data

yep ofc then why were they caught in germany illegally recording wifi networks and mac addresses.. That does not seem to be protecting peoples privacy to me.. If you want to trust them go ahead... I am not following!
If google are not an arm of the government then mickey mouse is my uncle..

you have got to be kidding me..We should take a vote to see where the majority falls...cause im pretty sure half of the users here don't want anything to with GOOGLE...

SO,

Found this article;

New social network will force Google+ users to identify themselves.. or leave the site; August 14, 2011
Source: Daily Mail
Web users who go by bogus names will be booted off the new Google+ social network. The company has recently launched the network as a rival to Facebook. But If Google learns the name you're using on the network is not your real name, you have just four days to clean up your act. If you don't your profile will be removed. Saurabh Sharma, product manager on the Google+ team, announced the new rule in a video shared on YouTube and on Google+.
The company said it tried to make connecting with people on the web more like connecting with people in the real world, so those signing up for the service are required to use the name they commonly go by in the real world.
Social buzz: Google+ is billed as the next generation social network The new regulations were billed as an 'update to how we handle potential violations of our common name policy.' In the past, when the company suspended the profile of those it judged were not using their real identity, and then let the user appeal.

Source Article
How does this affect the Google+1 that is on ATS? This looks to me to be a direct invasion of ATS member privacy? I am wondering how this will affect us here at ATS.

Thank You.

Originally posted by barkingdogamato
How does this affect the Google+1 that is on ATS?

Google+ (the social network) and Google +1 (the content tagging system) are two different things.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord

Thanks.

-snip- I just read it above. my bad

Originally posted by Advantage
**pokes head out from under rock**

Mah priiiiivacy!!!! Mah PRIVACY!!!!

. you are not as "private" as you think you are. From TOR to etc.. you are NOT a shadowy private conspiracy superhero. There is no skirting it.. if you are online in any capacity you are not enjoying anonymity or true privacy.

Wanna bet!
i spent the last decade doing just that.
believe me when i say "i am truly anonymous"

i was more interested into the social end of the platform rather than simply making content appear as the dominant aspect.

Originally posted by cerebralassassins
i was more interested into the social end of the platform rather than simply making content appear as the dominant aspect.

I use it to get important topics that are discussed on here out.
I have my circles also.

Originally posted by Cyanhide
reply to post by Common Good

 

I'm loving the irony, After all the threads here on ATS about Google,and what they represent,

How evil Bill Gates is , and everything it gets his hands on.

You now have two posts that seem to indicate some sort of connection between Google and Bill Gates. Pray tell us what that connection is, please.

Originally posted by kdog1982

Originally posted by cerebralassassins
i was more interested into the social end of the platform rather than simply making content appear as the dominant aspect.

I use it to get important topics that are discussed on here out.
I have my circles also.

would that be something like the circle of trust that Mr. Robert De Niro talked about in one of his movies.

Oh i was only kidding, sure i see your point.