This is why everybody should do all their browsing with Tor, excepting maybe banking and shopping.
Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users
81–90 of 198 posts
Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users
#82Don't want to be swept up in a dragnet? Don't want to be a suspect based on normal everyday activities? Then you better not use Google, try DuckDuckGo or another private search engine. Edit: downvote all you want. dealing with google is like talking to the police, whatever you say/do will be used against you. in googles case for advertising/influencing you or by the government using the google gold mine. you can spar…
Eric Schmidt, as Google CEO, had a habit of saying unpopular but true things. When he responded to a question about how people interact with Google with "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place," he wasn't so much offering self-criticism as a warning regarding the overall societal trend, of which Google was merely a part. The context is often left o…
Unpopular but true? No. Popular and false.
Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You say that as if DuckDuckGo is completely immune to the same sorts of warrants. If you don't collect data, you can't share it in a warrant.
But they do though. How else are they going to serve you ads based on your search terms? (which they plainly say on their website that they do) There isn't a single search engine anywhere that isn't collecting some data. Not even DDG.
> How else are they going to serve you ads based on your search terms
They obviously have the search term your searching! They don't need to track you, they send the ads back with the search results!
Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users
#84Time to stop using Google Search or any of their services. Realistically the only one that's not replaceable ATM is YouTube but hopefully soon will be with other platforms gaining speed.
Personally I use Brave Search for 99% of my searches. They are definitely privacy based, unlike some other alternatives.
Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
You say that as if DuckDuckGo is completely immune to the same sorts of warrants. They're all the same, serving you ads based on your search terms.
Yes. I think people forget that personalization is not used for ads in Google Search - it's always ads for what you're searching for. Your data is only used for things like YT Ads and banner ads via Adsense-enabled sites.
That's half true. Personalisation informs the search which informs the ads. If I search for a restaurant I get ads for local restaurants.
Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users
#86From my perspective, this ability was generally assumed to be true but confirmation is interesting. Heck, it’s even a running stand-up joke. “Ask your wife if you can look up something on her phone. Google “How to kill your husband” and hand it back to her. Congrats, you’re safe for another month!
> safe for the another month Not so fast there buddy. Best check what autocompletes for "how to dispose of a b..." and "best place to b...".
I get "how to dispose of a broken tv", and "best place to buy a used car". And your point was...?
Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Courts in the US are generally quite independent of the political process. Abuse of the court system is prosecuted fairly heavily. This is "rule of law". On the other hand, courts in China do whatever the CCP tells them. These are not equivalent.
Where is this judicial fantasyland you live in with apolitical judges and independent laws? They're written, passed, judged, and enforced by heavily partisan actors, now more than ever. You're kidding yourself, and no one else, if you think the US judicial system is politically independent.
Given that judiciary being subservient to the Party is an intentional feature in China, no competent western system would do "worse" in judicial independence than China.
The GP is literally always correct in relativistic terms. If that makes people in the West feel more comfortable with the government, I guess I could say good for them? :)
Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users
#88Don't want to be swept up in a dragnet? Don't want to be a suspect based on normal everyday activities? Then you better not use Google, try DuckDuckGo or another private search engine. Edit: downvote all you want. dealing with google is like talking to the police, whatever you say/do will be used against you. in googles case for advertising/influencing you or by the government using the google gold mine. you can spar…
Eric Schmidt, as Google CEO, had a habit of saying unpopular but true things. When he responded to a question about how people interact with Google with "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place," he wasn't so much offering self-criticism as a warning regarding the overall societal trend, of which Google was merely a part. The context is often left o…
Privacy is generally agreed to be a human right. And privacy means that you can do or say something and have a right to have it not be known or made public. If someone with access to you data exposes it, it's a violation of privacy.
So no, the old argument of "if you don't want it known, don't do it" is fallacious and dangerous.
Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users
#89As a person neither leaning East nor West who is an avid HN reader it's always interesting to read the comments under such topics where the collusion between US private companies come up. Comparing it to the reactions when tenous connections between Chinese companies and the CCP are characterised as a threat to freedom and human rights. It reminds me to be wary of my own biases. Because from where I stand they are al…
One can be against heavy-handed authoritarianism both at home and abroad, while still seeing the (quite distinct) shades of gray between the US security apparatus and the CCP, or between the CCP and North Korea, or between the US and the EU. Different governments and processes give different weights to due process and human rights vs bureaucratic efficiency and national security. It should not be controversial to say…
> It should not be controversial to say that the CCP is more heavy-handed when it comes to government reach into private lives
I'm not so sure that is true. If anything the US agencies seem to be quite a bit more technologically advanced, and I'd bet they sit on more undisclosed zero days than the CCP.
You're definitely correct in the difference in ideological values, and this difference might make up for the technological gap between the surveillance capabilities of the two governments, but I honestly would say it's still a 50-50 to me which one comes out on "top".
Re: Google keyword warrants give U.S. government data on search users
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You say that as if DuckDuckGo is completely immune to the same sorts of warrants. If you don't collect data, you can't share it in a warrant.
protonmail used to say this on their website and removed it after some people were arrested because they did provide logs to the french authorities. the catch is that they didn't log by default but they had to log specific users due to a warrant. the same will happen any service hosted by legal businesses.
> the catch is that they didn't log by default but they had to log specific users due to a warrant.
that is a usable quantum bump up in privacy. requiring the authorities to specifically be investigating you, rather than you just being caught in a dragnet looking for someone to investigate.