Privacy organisations file complaint with FTC over Google’s new privacy policy

vbimport

#1

We’ve just posted the following news: Privacy organisations file complaint with FTC over Google’s new privacy policy[newsimage]http://www.myce.com/wp-content/images_posts/2016/05/logo_420_color_2x-95x75.png[/newsimage]

Two privacy advocating groups have filed an official complaint with the American consumer watchdog Federal Trade Commission (FTC) about the new privacy policy that Google introduced earlier this year.

            Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/privacy-organisations-file-complaint-ftc-googles-new-privacy-policy-81103/](http://www.myce.com/news/privacy-organisations-file-complaint-ftc-googles-new-privacy-policy-81103/)

            Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

The word Google seems to be an antonym for privacy. They know far more about you than you can possibly imagine.

Streetview isn’t just about photographing roads, it is about mapping private wireless networks. This side of the project has received no scrutiny, but has privacy and personal safety implications far greater than being photographed leaving a sex shop.

Google knows the MAC address of your wireless router and its position with alarming accuracy. And this information is publically available to anyone who knows how to search for it.

Think this doesn’t matter? Fast forward to about 33:00 and see for yourself.

//youtu.be/YDW7kobM6Ik

Sent from my [S]iPhone[/S] [I]UTP Ethernet network[/I] using [S]Tapatalk[/S] [I]a PS/2 corded keyboard ;)[/I]


#3

Google/Social media are not words compatible with privacy. My clear advice would be to stay clear, but that is easier than said for some users out there as ‘it is soo easy’ (it sure is, at the cost).

The question is in reality; would you sacrifice convenience for something more secure, even if a little more cumbersome? Do you simply accept new technology or features without being skeptical and resarch the pros and cons of it?

You know, my entire spine shivers when I hear the ‘I ain’t got nothing to hide’ argument - you have misunderstood the whole idea, it really is all about our RIGHT to privacy, forensics should be kept an exclusive, not an all inclusive where we are heading. If you are under suspicion, there could be reasons for tapping your communication, but they never opened my letters back in the day and so why should I allow strangers access to my data or communication?

…still you have your social media acount(s)? Google mail? Whatever you failed to research first? …and then as the next step you complain about getting targeted? There simply never was no ‘for nothing’, whatever you get for free, someone else is paying for and they surely would want to get their money’s worth, so would you I guess.
I would hope for us that we all someday can get back to being as trusting as many of you are without the risks, but the unknown threats that face us every day in the infancy of digital communication (seems to have been around forever, it’s not so it has only just begun)…


#4

One thing is insure if you use Google Chrome you don’t use your login otherwise you might as well let them into your house and sit next to you and your computer.


#5

[QUOTE=Xercus;2785660]Google/Social media are not words compatible with privacy. My clear advice would be to stay clear, but that is easier than said for some users out there as ‘it is soo easy’ (it sure is, at the cost).

The question is in reality; would you sacrifice convenience for something more secure, even if a little more cumbersome? Do you simply accept new technology or features without being skeptical and resarch the pros and cons of it?

You know, my entire spine shivers when I hear the ‘I ain’t got nothing to hide’ argument - you have misunderstood the whole idea, it really is all about our RIGHT to privacy, forensics should be kept an exclusive, not an all inclusive where we are heading. If you are under suspicion, there could be reasons for tapping your communication, but they never opened my letters back in the day and so why should I allow strangers access to my data or communication?

…still you have your social media acount(s)? Google mail? Whatever you failed to research first? …and then as the next step you complain about getting targeted? There simply never was no ‘for nothing’, whatever you get for free, someone else is paying for and they surely would want to get their money’s worth, so would you I guess.
I would hope for us that we all someday can get back to being as trusting as many of you are without the risks, but the unknown threats that face us every day in the infancy of digital communication (seems to have been around forever, it’s not so it has only just begun)…[/QUOTE]
I agree with you when it comes to the tired old “nothing to hide” argument. I’m so sick of hearing people talk about how it’s OK for Big Brother to look over their shoulders, because they “ain’t got nothing to hide. I ain’t gone done no nothing wrong, so what’s the problem?”

PS: Avoiding social media is simply not enough. Facebook can and will track you whether you use it or not. You have to take things one step further by denying your apps from communicating with Facebook.com in the first place. There are multiple ways of doing this: host files, browser addons, firewalls… take your pick. Likewise for Facebook.net (it’s not just Facebook.com), fbcdn.net, Google.com, GoogleAnalytics.com, gstatic.com, YouTube.com, YouTu.be, ytimg.com, GoogleSyndication.com, GoogleAPIs.com, GoogleTagManager.com, GoogleTagServices.com, GoogleAdServices.com, DoubleClick.net, and practically a million others.

That’s not even getting into the government’s illegal wiretapping of the internet. The only remedies for that are encryption, web relays (that is, proxies, VPNs, TOR, and other similar technologies), and constant activism. Of those three things, activism is easily the most important. If you don’t stand up against big government now, anti-freedom sectors such as the NSA will find new ways of countering the aforementioned self-protection measures. This is especially crucial with Trump taking the White House, as he’s going to bring surveillance to a whole new level, while forcibly silencing anyone who opposes (unless a large quantity people oppose so loudly, he can’t possibly silence them all).


#6

[QUOTE=TSJnachos117;2785724]I agree with you when it comes to the tired old “nothing to hide” argument. I’m so sick of hearing people talk about how it’s OK for Big Brother to look over their shoulders, because they “ain’t got nothing to hide. I ain’t gone done no nothing wrong, so what’s the problem?”

PS: Avoiding social media is simply not enough. Facebook can and will track you whether you use it or not. You have to take things one step further by denying your apps from communicating with Facebook.com in the first place. There are multiple ways of doing this: host files, browser addons, firewalls… take your pick. Likewise for Facebook.net (it’s not just Facebook.com), fbcdn.net, Google.com, GoogleAnalytics.com, gstatic.com, YouTube.com, YouTu.be, ytimg.com, GoogleSyndication.com, GoogleAPIs.com, GoogleTagManager.com, GoogleTagServices.com, GoogleAdServices.com, DoubleClick.net, and practically a million others.

That’s not even getting into the government’s illegal wiretapping of the internet. The only remedies for that are encryption, web relays (that is, proxies, VPNs, TOR, and other similar technologies), and constant activism. Of those three things, activism is easily the most important. If you don’t stand up against big government now, anti-freedom sectors such as the NSA will find new ways of countering the aforementioned self-protection measures. This is especially crucial with Trump taking the White House, as he’s going to bring surveillance to a whole new level, while forcibly silencing anyone who opposes (unless a large quantity people oppose so loudly, he can’t possibly silence them all).[/QUOTE]

Of course, I just thought it was to expansive for the subject… All the way to exclusively using different computers or virtual install for each and every feature, like I try to, isolated and secured if needed. This Forum VM accesses only two forums, nothing else… Pretty much isolates any data as the main objective is to give away as little as possible in the name of your right to privacy. In the case of this forum where I am registered with valid data…

In the end it will always be as secure as it gets and most probably border to paranoia :wink:


#7

Google has been upfront about this but there are many companies out there using data consolidated from multiple sources for purposes for which it wasn’t intended or carrying out or covert illegal data collection.

I think you pretty much have to assume that everything you do online is accessible to someone in some form or another.

[B]Wombler[/B]


#8

[QUOTE=Wombler;2785806]Google has been upfront about this but there are many companies out there using data consolidated from multiple sources for purposes for which it wasn’t intended or carrying out or covert illegal data collection.

I think you pretty much have to assume that everything you do online is accessible to someone in some form or another.

[B]Wombler[/B][/QUOTE]
Google only admitted when they got caught…so I doubt they would’ve even come clean about this. Sure they have a disclaimer about cookies but what else they do is all secret until someone ratted them out.


#9

Like I said, we as consumers really should decentralize our usage and give them hell :wink:


#10

[QUOTE=Xercus;2785846]Like I said, we as consumers really should decentralize our usage and give them hell ;)[/QUOTE]
Or just give them hell for the hell of it.

First one to replace the Google’s logo with the CDfreaks one wins… um… how about a cool title? :bigsmile: