At the risk of sounding like a Google apologist (which I am blatantly not), why are all these people making such a fuss over Google Street View? Can't they get a grip and realize that, contrary to their megalomania, no one really cares what their home looks like and few (if any) people are looking up their address to see inside their bathroom windows on Street View?
According to Google, the company did not invade a family's privacy by taking pictures of their home for Google Street View.
"Plaintiffs' privacy claims fail, among other reasons, because the view of a home from the driveway that can be seen by any visitor, delivery person, or telephone repairman is not private," the company said in response to the suit, according to a copy posted at The Smoking Gun.
"Today's satellite-image technology means that...complete privacy does not exist," Google said in its response to the complaint. "Plaintiffs live in the 21st century United States, where every step upon private property is not deemed by law to be an actionable trespass...Unless there is a clear expression such as a gate, fence, or 'keep out' sign indicating that the public is not permitted to enter, anyone may approach a home by a walkway, driveway, or any other route commonly used by visitors, without liability for trespass."
Of course, the family Google allegedly caused "mental suffering" to disagrees.
... Read moreAm I living in a world where privacy doesn't matter? One where my right to do what I want within legal boundaries is stymied by the incorrigible desire to spy on me and know exactly what I'm doing at all times? One where the world is a big fish bowl and I'm swimming around trying desperately to find a private place?
It certainly looks that way.
A new study from Northeastern University secretly tracked the locations of 100,000 people outside the United States by monitoring their cell phone use and found that most people rarely travel more than a few miles from their home.
I'm not too sure why anyone really cares how far people travel from their homes, but this study does raise one important issue: Northeastern University researches tracked individuals without their knowledge with total disregard for privacy concerns. Obviously heeding the advice of legal counsel, the researchers conducted the study in "an industrialized nation" so they wouldn't be tracking US citizens while in the same country.
According to the Associated Press, "Researchers used cell phone towers to track individuals' locations whenever they made or received phone calls and text messages over six months. In a second set of records, researchers took another 206 cell phones that had tracking devices in them and got records for their locations every two hours over a week's time period."
Unbelievable.
... Read more
As the battle for search privacy heats up, an important development from the Ask.com camp arose Friday afternoon that may prove to be a stepping stone for all other search engine policies.
According to Ask.com, the company will be rolling out a new section on its site offering users the option of controlling whether their searches are recorded. And although Google touts itself as the least evil of the bunch, people all over the world are questioning why Ask.com was the first to introduce this defiant and progressive stance on privacy.
The new project will be called Ask Eraser and each search page will include language reminding users of their option. To add even more privacy, the company will be instituting a new policy where it will erase all identifying information from a user's searches after 18 months.
So what does this mean for you and me? Well, to be honest I might consider switching over to Ask.com if its services would equal Google's. Regardless of my privacy preferences, sometimes I need the best available information and frankly, Ask.com ranks towards the bottom of that list. And while I applaud Ask for enhancing our privacy, I can't help but think that it doesn't matter all that much.
More than anything else, Ask.com's announcement that it will be giving users the ability to decide just how private their search queries will be is a marketing ploy. Think about it: Google is the de facto leader in the industry and other search engines simply don't have the infrastructure or technology to compete on search results, so they need to find something else to get ahead. Ask has chosen the only issue that could significantly damage Google in the future: privacy.
If you've been following the complaints made against Google as of late, you know that the company is struggling on the issue of privacy. On one hand it wants to appeal to the public who is asking for absolute privacy, while on the other hand, the company feels it needs to play by government rules. And as we have learned, Google can't have it both ways. But because Ask.com currently travels under the proverbial radar, the company can play the PR game and appeal to those who are looking for the "most private" searching experience.
I think this is whole thing is ridiculous. How many people actually believe that if the government came a-knockin', Ask wouldn't roll over and give them exactly what they wanted? If you believe the company's CEO wouldn't offer them everything the government asked for and then some, you're kidding yourself.
I'm not trying to say that this isn't a good start for this business or claim that I disagree with what Ask is doing, I just don't think anything will come out of it (no matter how much I wish something would). I would like nothing more than to have all of my searches private. And while I have nothing to hide while I search, the queries are used for advertising research just as much as security, and obtrusive advertising is one of those things that really ruffles my feathers.
Which brings me to another complication: Ask.com uses Google's ad service -- you know, that service that Google profits from by collecting and vetting a user's private information. So if Google and Ask.com have a contract for ad services, how can Ask unilaterally come out and say that it won't be collecting private data from users who ask it not to? Won't Google take issue with this as the less-effective the advertising becomes, the less revenue it will incur? Further, is Ask willing to relinquish that revenue potential just because it wants to look like the good guy? Sure there might be other services that can target ads efficiently, but advertising is all about consumer knowledge and without it, it's just plain useless.
So as we enter a time where privacy issues continue to plague the world where a select few are ruining it for the majority, Ask.com is trying to look like the good guy in a battle that it knows it can't win. Regardless of what we would like to believe, Ask.com can play dumb for so long until it's required to comply with lawmakers. It might work for some, but until there is some teeth behind a privacy announcement, I'll stick with Google.
- prev
- 1
- next
