GOOGLE new privacy policy

Just got this in an email and was hoping some experienced veterans would look it over and tell us if there is anything "more" fishy than the norm with all of this SOPA stuff going on. Thanks guys let us know please!

www.google.com...

reply to post by punisher2012


Full thread about announcement of policy changes:

Google announces privacy settings change across products; users can't opt out,

reply to post by punisher2012


Go bye droid, youtube ect ect. I'm leaving you for Apple, it's because I hate you now.

reply to post by punisher2012

Says it's for our own good and to make us all happy. What could be better than that? Whatsmatter--you got a problem with being happy?

But seriously: This is just the new paradigm. It's not per se related to SOPA; it's just so that they can continue to grow exceedingly rich by having every possible piece of information that they can reach. You'd be surprised how well people can be profiled in aggregate, without even using any personal information. It helps Google target ads, and the better they can target you the more money they can rake in for doing so. It's just business.

On the other hand, when you collect as much data and the type of data that Google collects--and the price of using a Google service or device IS the tracking and mining of your personal habits--it would be impossible that a personal profile would not spontaneously reveal itself. If a government or law-enforcement agency says, "Hey, Google, give us the data on so-and-so in order that we can comb their data for patterns!"... well, Google's just letting you know in advance that they'll lube up and smile. They've no intention of fighting the release of your information on your behalf.

But, hey: It's just business....

reply to post by Ex_CT2


Lol yeah it has become second nature to stay paranoid these days, I guess the question is am I paranoid enough?
Eh, I will just continue to hope for an eventfull year!

My Thoughts -



Video Links -

This Is A Video Response To -

DrippCast By NibiruMagick2012
www.youtube.com...

Links -

Passing The Torch By Resistance4Liberty
www.youtube.com...

YouTube Site Statistics
www.youtube.com...

YouTube Protest Every Sunday In March 2012 By SurvivalWithBushcraf
www.youtube.com...

MaKaElectric Zippcast Channel
www.zippcast.com...

Google Steps Too Far In March (Fox News)
www.youtube.com...

Google Steps Too Far In March (CNN-IBN Live)
ibnlive.in.com...

EXTRA LINK -

Don't Forget By StarrJaded
www.youtube.com...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My Links

Backup YouTube Channel
Subscribe To Keep In Touch
youtube.com...

Follow Me On Twitter
For BlogTV And Breaking Alerts
twitter.com...

Follow Me On Facebook
Page Repeats Twitter Feed Above
www.facebook.com...

As far as the policy goes, I have no issues with it. Google as company owns those services and provides them to us at no cash cost. I cant think of any corporation that has differing privacy policy's for their products, so I do not expect Goog to do so either. Google does use us as a form to make money, and for the benefits I get from using google, I am ok with that. Sure, google knows everything about me; they serve me better ads because of it.

Now, with the part that I disagree with. I disagree with the NSA, or other alphabet agency's having its hands in this data for the sake of prevention. I would be 100% ok with google's data mineing (for better ad presentation), if it couldn't be accessed by the government unless you were officially being investigated for a crime, warrant from a judge and all.

If you think about it, Google and facebook have the power to ruin your life, and save it. Say you commit no crime but you match a description. You will be brought in for questioning. If you have proof you were somewhere else during the time of the crime, you have been vindicated. However, if you are doing something illegal you will most definitely get caught.

Basically, the question is the government for me, not google. I have seen google deny government requests for records, and I have seen google deny the government when it asked to censor public unrest (police brutality) videos at Occupy, ect.

This new privacy policy does not talk about the government, its all about Google's use for the information. For now, I trust google still, to an extent. Hopefully they do not give in to the governments every wish and desire.

Originally posted by derst1988
As far as the policy goes, I have no issues with it. Google as company owns those services and provides them to us at no cash cost. I cant think of any corporation that has differing privacy policy's for their products, so I do not expect Goog to do so either. Google does use us as a form to make money, and for the benefits I get from using google, I am ok with that. Sure, google knows everything about me; they serve me better ads because of it.

Now, with the part that I disagree with. I disagree with the NSA, or other alphabet agency's having its hands in this data for the sake of prevention. I would be 100% ok with google's data mineing (for better ad presentation), if it couldn't be accessed by the government unless you were officially being investigated for a crime, warrant from a judge and all.

If you think about it, Google and facebook have the power to ruin your life, and save it. Say you commit no crime but you match a description. You will be brought in for questioning. If you have proof you were somewhere else during the time of the crime, you have been vindicated. However, if you are doing something illegal you will most
definitely get caught.

Basically, the question is the government for me, not google. I have seen google deny government requests for records, and I have seen google deny the government when it asked to censor public unrest (police brutality) videos at Occupy, ect.

This new privacy policy does not talk about the government, its all about Google's use for the information. For now, I trust google still, to an extent. Hopefully they do not give in to the governments every wish and desire.

I guess the problem is what is defined as "illegal"

reply to post by punisher2012


That has always been the problem. If we dont keep a check on what is considered illegal tyrannical regimes have won.