Rant Google

[Moonwalker]

Well, it is actually known that Google is saving a lot of data. For some years I seem to have underestimated the Google imperium. But this changed within seconds last night. I was registered to a friends search engine for about 8 month (one of those sites where you can search old schoolfriends). Tonight I canceled my account. All data was deleted from that site, which I checked so far, as possible. But amazingly Google still shows the schools I have visited in relation to my name. You don't see it anymore when you click on the search result and enter the friends search engine, because all data have been deleted. But the information still is visible in the Google search results.

Does anybody have similar experiences with Google?

I found ixquick and changed to it for now http://ixquick.com/

Any different suggestions?

I'm not using Google anymore, not for one second

 

[escapetomsfate]

When you hit search in google, it doesn't search the internet as it is at that point in time - It searches it's own index of web pages that it's "web crawlers" or "spiders" have gathered information on. When you click a link on Google, you follow the link to the actual URL, not the indexed page (which is why you don't see your account when you click the link).

I'm not sure if Google ever deletes data from the index, maybe when it's web crawlers find a page that has changed, it will update.

Any big search engine works like that, otherwise searches take forever, or don't give relevant results.

The only way to be completely safe is to not put any information on the web at all

 

[Andy44]

Google plans to rule the world within 300 years:

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/internet/0,1000000097,39228011,00.htm

Thy really do want to gather all your data.

 

[RichWall]

This one is a particular hot button for me.

Personally, I think we should own our own personal data.

Why should "Free Credit Reprort. com", for example, be able to charge me for my own personal data, or sell it to others. Or even be able to use my "buying" or "browsing" habits info.

If someone or some entity is making use of my info, perhaps I should receive a royalty, or have the right to determine who sees it.

This idea that other entities can use my own information against me, or that it is my problem to fix it if they get it wrong, is absured.

This goes right along with the idea that one is looked on very suspiciously or even refused if you try to make a large purchase with cash, even if it is an just an attempt to keep some semblance of privacy.

Side Rant: Maybe it would be prudent to copyright my own genetic code before someone else does.

 

[Ghostrider]

300 years? I'll be surprised if the internet is still around in 30 years time.

 

[TSPenguin]

One can only gather information you actualy leave. By not putting personal information on any site where crawlers might come is a good start. Not putting up any is even better. Switching your IPs every now and then, using a VPN service or an onion network like Tor makes you effectively invisible.
Until there comes the point where you are simply identifieable by the fact that you are not. Because everybody else is.

 

[Bj]

300 years? I'll be surprised if the internet is still around in 30 years time.

What? Why would the internet fail in 30 years?

 

[garyw]

Why should "Free Credit Reprort. com", for example, be able to charge me for my own personal data, or sell it to others. Or even be able to use my "buying" or "browsing" habits info.

They don't. They charge you for using their service, their staff, their equipment for choosing that method of browsing your personal data. If you choose to not use that method then you don't pay.

It's like some Government departments charging an admin fee.

 

[Ghostrider]

What? Why would the internet fail in 30 years?

More than fail it could be obsolete, out of favor with the public or crippled beyond recognition. Probably a combination of the three.

 

[Moonwalker]

More than fail it could be obsolete, out of favor with the public or crippled beyond recognition. Probably a combination of the three.

Why?

 

[Quick_Nick]

Why?

Why don't we use telegraphs?

 

[Moonwalker]

Why don't we use telegraphs?

Why shouldn't we use the internet anymore?

 

[garyw]

Why?

Because.

 

[Hielor]

Well, it is actually known that Google is saving a lot of data. For some years I seem to have underestimated the Google imperium. But this changed within seconds last night. I was registered to a friends search engine for about 8 month (one of those sites where you can search old schoolfriends). Tonight I canceled my account. All data was deleted from that site, which I checked so far, as possible. But amazingly Google still shows the schools I have visited in relation to my name. You don't see it anymore when you click on the search result and enter the friends search engine, because all data have been deleted. But the information still is visible in the Google search results.

Does anybody have similar experiences with Google?

I found ixquick and changed to it for now http://ixquick.com/

Any different suggestions?

I'm not using Google anymore, not for one second

The problem here isn't with Google. The "site where you can search old schoolfriends" allowed the google spider to see your data, and more likely than not, you gave permission for that to happen (if indirectly).

Google was not maliciously storing your personal information. They arrived at a page on the web, they indexed it. That's what search engines do. If a search engine didn't do that, it would be worthless.

Google did nothing wrong here. If anything, blame the site you used. Or blame yourself for putting your data up there.

They don't. They charge you for using their service, their staff, their equipment for choosing that method of browsing your personal data. If you choose to not use that method then you don't pay.

It's like some Government departments charging an admin fee.

Freecreditreport.com is not affiliated with the US government.

 

[Moonwalker]

Any further intelligent explanations why the Internet should be obsolete in 2040?

The problem here isn't with Google. The "site where you can search old schoolfriends" allowed the google spider to see your data, and more likely than not, you gave permission for that to happen (if indirectly).

Google was not maliciously storing your personal information. They arrived at a page on the web, they indexed it. That's what search engines do. If a search engine didn't do that, it would be worthless.

Google did nothing wrong here. If anything, blame the site you used. Or blame yourself for putting your data up there.

Google exactly is the only search engine that shows the schools I have visited in relation to my name. I tried a lot of others for now, but no results.

Well, I actually don't care because of my common German name that exists thousands times. But it opened my eyes wide of what Google actually does. Something experts warn of for years. But I won't enter it anymore anyway. I've also canceled my Google-Mail account, after I've noticed that there is a few hundred spam mails each week, without having shared the email at all. It was the most worst and annoying email account I've ever experienced. It did not look and feel safe at all from the very beginning. There is something going on for sure. The data protection promises by the responsible persons are nothing more than lip service.

I'll use ixquick from now on. It does not record the IP, nor does it store log files. Ixquick uses and combines other search engines, but anonymously. I think that's why it got a seal of approval for data privacy from the European commissioner for data protection.

Privacy International calls Google to be the worst company regarding data privacy (out of 23 big companies). But I'm not really surprised when I think about the fact that Google is a US company, and so part of an endemic surveillance society.

 

[Hielor]

Google exactly is the only search engine that shows the schools I have visited in relation to my name. I tried a lot of others for now, but no results.

Google does have the largest database. "Google has it but others don't" doesn't mean that Google is intentionally keeping data that others aren't. Alternately, depending on what site you're referring to, they may have a specific data-sharing agreement with Google. I'm pretty sure Facebook has something like that.

Something experts warn of for years. But I won't enter it anymore anyway. I've also canceled my Google-Mail account, after I've noticed that there is a few hundred spam mails each week, without having shared the email at all. It was the most worst and annoying email account I've ever experienced. It did not look and feel safe at all from the very beginning. There is something going on for sure. The data protection promises by the responsible persons are nothing more than lip service.

Wait, an e-mail that you never shared? Pray tell, what is the purpose of an e-mail account that you never tell anyone about?

The simple test of this would be to create a g-mail account and literally never give it out to anyone. I highly doubt it would pick up very much spam at all, much less hundreds per week.

Privacy International calls Google to be the worst company regarding data privacy (out of 23 big companies). But I'm not really surprised when I think about the fact that Google is a US company, and so part of an endemic surveillance society.

Please to not start with the country-bashing...

 

[the.punk]

Any further intelligent explanations why the Internet should be obsolete in 2040?

Because maybe the internet could be overloaded with information. The internet is very complex. Maybe this don't happen, we don't know.

 

[Ghostrider]

The internet could be obsoleted by many things. For instance, filtering is now becoming a real threat, with western countries like Australia deploying filtering solutions for all traffic in and out of Down Under. At first it will be opt-in, then opt-out, and in the end mandatory. And then, a good lot of other countries will follow. Ten years down the lane, the 'net will just be a sanitized shopping mall.

 

[simonpro]

The simple test of this would be to create a g-mail account and literally never give it out to anyone. I highly doubt it would pick up very much spam at all, much less hundreds per week.

This is true. I have two gmail accounts, one for emailing my girlfriend when I'm away on work, and one for general purpose emailing.
The one I use for general stuff gets 40-50 spam emails per day (mostly as it's freely printed on one or two websites and has been picked up by robots). The one I use for talking to my girlfriend never, ever, receives spam.

 

[tl8]

The internet could be obsoleted by many things. For instance, filtering is now becoming a real threat, with western countries like Australia deploying filtering solutions for all traffic in and out of Down Under. At first it will be opt-in, then opt-out, and in the end mandatory. And then, a good lot of other countries will follow. Ten years down the lane, the 'net will just be a sanitized shopping mall.

It is in the works, but no means final.

The thing that is being questioned is the effectiveness of it. Many groups, including child protection don't think it will work (change the DNS).

And only 'Normal' web traffic is being monitored, the minister in question has said P2P will be filtered but the trail didn't go that far.

Regardless I still want my 100Mbit/s fibre connection...

No more download limits