Go to Scroogle and click HTTPS...
Problem solved!
Eric Schmidt: "If you have something [to hide], maybe you shouldn't be doing it"
121–130 of 172 posts
Re: Eric Schmidt: "If you have something [to hide], maybe you shouldn't be doing it"
#122the real problem is not google or schmidt, but things like the patriot act and the ridiculous habit of our government of using "matter of national security" as a catchall for abuse.
the more people who realize how little privacy they have left the better. it's the only way the trend will be reversed.
Re: Eric Schmidt: "If you have something [to hide], maybe you shouldn't be doing it"
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if his statement was not intended as a moral imperative, but as practical advice? Perhaps he is saying, "The fact of the matter is that we're required to retain and release lots of information. If you don't want that information being passed around, you probably shouldn't give it to us. Sorry, we do the best we can under the circumstances." "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you sho…
Who's requiring them to retain anything? For 180 days? And retaining for policing/security reasons doesn't mean you should use the data for other privacy-invading targeting.
Actually there's no law in the U.S. about data retention (E.U. has one) but companies keep the data for their own engineering and marketing purposes AND to stay in good graces of authorities. (The Patriot Act and ECPA, among other laws, specify what data has to be turned over with a lawful request, but they don't require any entity to actually have that info.)
Re: Eric Schmidt: "If you have something [to hide], maybe you shouldn't be doing it"
#124I'd like Eric Schmidt to publicly release his search history, both his work-related and private searches.
What if his statement was not intended as a moral imperative, but as practical advice? Perhaps he is saying, "The fact of the matter is that we're required to retain and release lots of information. If you don't want that information being passed around, you probably shouldn't give it to us. Sorry, we do the best we can under the circumstances." "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you sho…
Even if you want to search for that - do so without logging into your google account.
Re: Eric Schmidt: "If you have something [to hide], maybe you shouldn't be doing it"
#125I'd like Eric Schmidt to publicly release his search history, both his work-related and private searches.
At least he is telling you that all your searches are forwarded to the authorities under the patriot act. The cell phone companies haven't got round to warning you that your phone's location is given to the police 8million times.
Sprint did.
Re: Eric Schmidt: "If you have something [to hide], maybe you shouldn't be doing it"
#126I hope you're all pleased you jumped on the bandwagon. Here are his actual words from the video:
Judgement matters... If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place... If you really need that kind of privacy, the reality is that search engines - including Google - do retain this information for some time and it's important, for example, that we are all subject in the United States to the Patriot Act and it is possible that all that information could be made available to the authorities.
Schmidt's statement is clearly pragmatic. One might even argue there's an implied criticism of laws like the Patriot Act. Could he have phrased it better? Yes. He shouldn't have said the sentence in question. But next time, actually read/watch the primary source so you can get the full picture. His closing remarks completely change the tone of the conversation. Are you really going to let The Register do your thinking for you?
Re: Eric Schmidt: "If you have something [to hide], maybe you shouldn't be doing it"
#127I'd like Eric Schmidt to publicly release his search history, both his work-related and private searches.
What if his statement was not intended as a moral imperative, but as practical advice? Perhaps he is saying, "The fact of the matter is that we're required to retain and release lots of information. If you don't want that information being passed around, you probably shouldn't give it to us. Sorry, we do the best we can under the circumstances." "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you sho…
Telling me how to do what I want to do is practical. Telling me what to do or not to do is patronizing.
Re: Eric Schmidt: "If you have something [to hide], maybe you shouldn't be doing it"
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would a search engine that doesn't look at your search string work?
Of course it needs your query string, but it could run your search and then forget about it. Arguably Google was better when it didn't take your history into account when calculating the results.
[citation needed]
Re: Eric Schmidt: "If you have something [to hide], maybe you shouldn't be doing it"
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
What if his statement was not intended as a moral imperative, but as practical advice? Perhaps he is saying, "The fact of the matter is that we're required to retain and release lots of information. If you don't want that information being passed around, you probably shouldn't give it to us. Sorry, we do the best we can under the circumstances." "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you sho…
Exactly. Finally, a reasoned response. I came in here just to say this; Can't believe what an uproar this is causing...
The uproar is caused because here's a man who knows more about me than my own mother and he is saying things my mother would have been ashamed of :-)
Re: Eric Schmidt: "If you have something [to hide], maybe you shouldn't be doing it"
#130reminds me of this riff on privacy by Bruce Schneier from a few years back addressing the same notion that Schmidt is quoted here to believe http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/05/the_value_of_p...
Privacy protects from abusive power, and privacy protects from irrational judgment: true but incomplete. Privacy allows us to tolerate these problems - rather than being forced to confront them. That may not be a good thing.
Society is full of things we compartmentalize, minimize and tolerate.
Mostly, because we don't know how to confront them. I certainly don't know how to patch human nature so that power doesn't corrupt. So, in the meantime, I'll take privacy, thanks.