An open letter to Eric Schmidt • Hacker News Board

Re: An open letter to Eric Schmidt

#31

Post by vanelsas » Thu, Dec 10, 2009, 6:39 AM UTC

snprbob86 wrote: post #19

fserb wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot thank you enough for this comment. I've been hearing non-sense comments over this quote for a week now, including the original post on this thread.

People forget that CEOs, politicians, celebrities, and everyone else are people too . Everyone knows what it is like to say something, but mean something else. Everyone knows what it is like to have to clarify what you just said. People who speak publicly, as part of their job, make far fewer errors than us "normal" folk, but they still make errors. When they make a single error, it is perfectly acceptable to raise a…

It's wrong. I can imagine tons of things that I might want to hide form others, and none of these things necessarily are evil things. The problem isn't about hiding. It's about freedom of choice.

Re: An open letter to Eric Schmidt

#32

Post by vanelsas » Thu, Dec 10, 2009, 6:42 AM UTC

felixc wrote: post #10

jbrun wrote: post #2

Corporations are amoral, they do what is in their interest; the people decide the morals (or laws) of their society. A lack of privacy is not Google's fault, they are simply respecting the laws. Americans let the Patriot Act be passed into law, not Google. Stop blaming Google and start blaming your democratically elected government. People now have more privacy and liberty in continental Europe and Canada than they d…

While I agree with you that the real solution is better privacy protections enshrined in law, I have to point out that you can't really derive an "ought" from an "is". In other words, the fact that corporations are amoral doesn't mean that Google ought to be amoral too, especially given their claim that they "do no evil". I think that's the author's point: he's not saying that they're doing anything illegal, just tha…

Thanks, couldn't have said it better.

Re: An open letter to Eric Schmidt

#33

Post by vanelsas » Thu, Dec 10, 2009, 6:47 AM UTC

csallen wrote: post #14

Okay don't crucify me here... but am I the only one who thinks that this vague concept of privacy is overrated? Everyone on the internet is so concerned about their stuff being "out there". What does that even mean? Tens of thousands of real-life strangers see your face, your children, your address every year. If I wanted to stalk a random person all day every day in real life, how much information could I gather? Wh…

Privacy to me isn't about hiding things. Its about the freedom to choose where to draw the line. If you read Bruce Schneier's post, you will find a few (there are tons) examples of this. And just because everyone 'does it' doesn't make it right. Google is the biggest implicit data collector in the world. Their motto suggests that they do not want to be 'evil'. They have a responsibility to ensure this data exchange for value becomes more explicit. [fixed annoying typo]

Re: An open letter to Eric Schmidt

#34

Post by vanelsas » Thu, Dec 10, 2009, 6:47 AM UTC

psranga wrote: post #22

csallen wrote: post #14

Okay don't crucify me here... but am I the only one who thinks that this vague concept of privacy is overrated? Everyone on the internet is so concerned about their stuff being "out there". What does that even mean? Tens of thousands of real-life strangers see your face, your children, your address every year. If I wanted to stalk a random person all day every day in real life, how much information could I gather? Wh…

Go read the full Bruce Schneier article that was also posted on HN. According to you searching for an embarassing incident/health problem etc on Google is equivalent to putting your private diary on your coffee table? Well trolled. Privacy is a fundamental requirement to remain human.

Fully agree

Re: An open letter to Eric Schmidt

#35

Post by vanelsas » Thu, Dec 10, 2009, 6:49 AM UTC

DrJokepu wrote: post #21

fserb wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the point you're trying to make? One could use your argument for any single entity in the world. "I'm not implying that Coca Cola's CEO does or would put poison on the beverages, only that some non-null set of employees there, probably including the CEO if he were really determined to do so, could." Replace Google/review private email with anything and you'll have a meaningful sentence: Obama/release nukes, k…

Exactly what I'm thinking. I thought this tinfoil hat mentality has died with slashdot. Face it: any e-mail provider can read your e-mail, including the e-mail provider of your recipient. The sysadmin in your office can read your e-mail. Your ISP can read your e-mail even if you host your e-mail server (unless you use https). Same goes for the ISP of the recipient. The only way to be safe was if everyone hosted their…

Two wrongs do not make a right. Google needs to step up and deal with this.

Re: An open letter to Eric Schmidt

#36

Post by known » Thu, Dec 10, 2009, 6:54 AM UTC

I think every effort to empower common man will be resisted because legislative, judiciary, administration & corporations will not allow their clout to be diluted and they want you to be subservient forever.

Re: An open letter to Eric Schmidt

#37

Post by DrJokepu » Thu, Dec 10, 2009, 1:50 PM UTC

vanelsas wrote: post #35

DrJokepu wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly what I'm thinking. I thought this tinfoil hat mentality has died with slashdot. Face it: any e-mail provider can read your e-mail, including the e-mail provider of your recipient. The sysadmin in your office can read your e-mail. Your ISP can read your e-mail even if you host your e-mail server (unless you use https). Same goes for the ISP of the recipient. The only way to be safe was if everyone hosted their…

Two wrongs do not make a right. Google needs to step up and deal with this.

How could they possibly solve it? One of the most important features of Google Mail is fast searching of e-mails. For them to search e-mails, they need to be able to index them so they can't just encrypt the emails on their storage.

Frankly, for me the abilty to search my emails quickly outweights the risk of some nosey Google employee with a shallow private life reading my private email or bank stuff or whatever.

Re: An open letter to Eric Schmidt

#38

Post by vanelsas » Fri, Dec 11, 2009, 10:03 AM UTC

DrJokepu wrote: post #37

vanelsas wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two wrongs do not make a right. Google needs to step up and deal with this.

How could they possibly solve it? One of the most important features of Google Mail is fast searching of e-mails. For them to search e-mails, they need to be able to index them so they can't just encrypt the emails on their storage. Frankly, for me the abilty to search my emails quickly outweights the risk of some nosey Google employee with a shallow private life reading my private email or bank stuff or whatever.

Let Google ask you specifically if you are ok with that. You get fast search, and you give up some privacy in return. A clear and explicit exchange.