Posts by RyokuMas

"Do people even realise how many times you are captured on video every single day if you live in a city?"

I don't recall CCTV images ever being sent to a central datacenter and pulled apart, analysed and profiled for the purpose of pitching adverts at people.

Re: Little by little...

"What, like smart TV's and XBOX One's ?"

I was thinking more of Chromecast, but yeah, those too...

Re: My biggest reservation

"Next character to die on Game of Thrones is..."

Their private data, not ours.

Oh wait - our private data is their private data!

... I'll get me coat.

Re: With Microsoft the best things come in threes....

... like Surfaces?

Re: Just what the world needs...

There's plenty of links out there - just search for Google NSA. How genuine any/all of them are - well, that's up for debate. But given the number of links and variety of sources, I for one am reasonably satisfied there's cause for concern.

... of course, there are those out there in whose eyes Google can do no wrong (for whatever reason).

But yes, Mr. O.P. - let's see exactly where you're getting your information from and whether the source is credible enough to be considered "proof".

Re: How do you find someone totally independant? Impossible task.

Q2. What search engine do you use?

Google [ ]

Something Inferior [ ]

Something that does not try and extort money from the little guys [ ]

FTFY

Re: Big = evil?

Careful...

... or you will be accused of complaining to your friends by one of the Google faithful - under an anonymous coward post, natch...

Re: As a niche device owner....

"This especially applies to apps that I have actually paid for in the first place."

I would argue that there's grounds for an additional cost - in certain cases. If the item in question is an expansion pack, I think it's reasonable to attach a price-tag, as this provides further gameplay which will have required additional time and effort on the part of the developers to build. If a player likes the game and wants to play further than the basic version offers, it's their choice to download the pack.

Similarly, there's justification that purely cosmetic items which do not have any impact on the gameplay can have a price tag - if you really want to pay 50p for a fez, that's your call.

In both these cases, the actual purchase mechanic must absolutely be handled responsibly - there should be no way that mummy's credit card is suddenly maxed out because little Jimmy has bought a bundle of costumes for the character on this favourite iPad game.

What is absolutely wrong is the "pay-to-win" model - paying to get something that changes the way the game progresses, be it negating a delay required before a next move can be made, or buying a special item to make things easier.

Of course, in an ideal world, there would only ever be one "in-app purchase" - the payment required to switch from a free trial to a full paid version of a game.

Re: It is not a cancer

"Hard to take when your astroturfing gets caught out, isn't it?"

Same question back at you about spreading FUD, now Google is trying to wriggle out of obeying the law.

Seriously, the whole browser war thing was 20 years ago. Let it go man, you're just going to give yourself a heart attack.

Re: Next step?

"Why doesn't Android have the tooling the allow me to block such privacy invasions?"

When you consider how big a player Google is in Android's development (to the extent of trying to create a walled garden around it), I'd have thought the answer was obvious...

No sympathy from me...

I didn't ask to be tracked and profiled, or have adverts sold to me. I didn't ask for people who know a few things about me to be able to search the web and come up with details on who I am and what I do (case in point - the A.C. troll in this thread who felt he had to take a pop at me because I use C# cross-platform). I didn't want details of things I have looked at and/or bought online made available to parties outside those website I had visited or purchased from.

And I certainly don't want my every action and communication scrutinised by a private enterprise whose only motivation is profit and tries to dodge their responsibilities, while hiding behind a mask of altruism.

Just as happened with Microsoft before them, Google have fallen prey to their own arrogance and hubris, save that Google's capacity for anti-competitive practice is far greater than Microsoft's ever was. They know this - hence their squirming to try and wriggle out of this ruling. Their big fear is that the scales will eventually fall from the eyes of even the most ardent of their fans, and everyone will realise that "Do no evil" is the greatest lie of our time.

Re: BYOD Disliked by Employees in the Know

@Bullseyed - couldn't agree more. Same with my laptop - one of the questions on the employee information sheet was "Do you have the equipment at home suitable to allow you to work from home, should the need arise?" - No I do not! My laptop is my laptop!

Re: Hmm. Already happening

"I wonder what the "catch" will be? Google isn't altruistic at all. They must see money in this."

Spy satellites have been up there for years, and can spot objects of only a few centimeters in size. Couple this to any of Google's existing means to spy on us, and you can "put a face to a name", so to speak. Check your Gmail, and Google can use the physical location of your internet connect to put you in a given building - then watch who goes in and comes out. Change locations a few times, and it's pretty easy to work out who you are from satellite imagery. With a phone running Google Android, it's even easier, thanks to GPS. And I shudder to imagine what would happen if spy satellite technology were combined with Google glass, should it catch on...

Because ultimately, once you have figured out what someone looks like, if you have the means to see them everywhere, you can follow them wherever they go. It won't matter if you don't take your phone or log into Gmail - once the Google spysats know what you look like, that's it - your every move belongs to Google, adding further to its creepy profiling and advertising spamming... that trip out with a few mates to a "gentleman's club", with your phone conveniently "accidentally" left at home? Forget it - Google will know you've been there, and so will your wife when she sees any adverts on your computer screen...

Re: @RyokuMas It's not today's government you need to worry about...(@ RyokuMas)

"Voting with their wallets: If Google sells your privacy to a government or to the highest bidder, don't use Google services"

Fine. Until you stop and think about the near stranglehold that Google has over the average, non-technical public. Android powers somewhere between 70 and 80% of all smartphones. Google search has become so integral into the way modern life works, it actually has become synonymous with web search: "just Google [whatever]". Google analytics are present in the vast majority of high-traffic sites.

Getting the general public to vote with their wallets will take one of two things - a credible alternative of similar capability, or a massive failure on the part of Google. The first of these is unlikely - how does one gain enough capability to be a threat to Google when Google can control a large chunk of what people see on the web? So that leaves Google to have a Microsoft moment, and fall victim to their own hubris.

"Putting pressure on the government -with votes and if that fails, with protests and demonstrations- to change the laws in such a way that these acts -by Google or whoever- are made illegal."

For all the good that will do. Ultimately, money talks - and Google have a shedload of money. A government wants Google to pay the tax they owe? Google will just wriggle out of it, or make a counter threat - how easily could they lower the priority of search results and/or adverts for companies in the country making the demand?

Sure, the American government has the power to order Google to hand over data. But for how much longer? Already Google are trying it on with the European courts, and Indian government - how long until they're big enough to turn on the U.S. - home of consumerism which, via their control of search results and advertising revenue, Google have massive power over? How many laws have Google had passed or thrown out through lobbying?

At the end of the day, unless something changes very soon, we will all be at the mercy of an unelected, profit-motivated private enterprise that sees people as it's property to do with as it chooses, and with more than enough money and influence to ensure that world governments sing to their song.

Re: Good point

"politicians have already started diversionary tactics to make the people believe Google (or whoever) is the enemy."

Google are doing a pretty good job of it for themselves - disregarding all the normal creepy spying stuff, not paying their taxes goes a long way to convince the average man who the bad guys are...

Re: Bring him back

He'd probably spontaneously combust...