Google and Data Collection

So what's up with Google? From an LA Times article:

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-...mostviewed+(L.A.+Times+-+Most+Viewed+Stories)

It just seems a bit hard to believe that something like this could happen on accident....

 

I've heard a lot of speculation about what kind of data they were collecting but little fact. Anyone know exactly?

 

Some articles from a german site that covered the issue through the last weeks (in google result order):
http://translate.google.de/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Fnewsticker%2Fmeldung%2FGoogle-speicherte-WLAN-Daten-dauerhaft-1014916.html&sl=de&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8
http://translate.google.de/translat...schuetzern-WLAN-Daten-uebergeben-1015409.html
http://translate.google.de/translat...chnitte-Loeschen-und-aufbewahren-1005865.html
http://translate.google.de/translat...gle-loescht-erste-WLAN-Nutzdaten-1001530.html
http://translate.google.de/translat...-ueber-WLAN-Datensammlung-Update-1000800.html
http://translate.google.de/translat...er-ueber-gespeicherte-WLAN-Daten-1018900.html
http://translate.google.de/translat...-scannen-private-Funknetze-Update-984118.html
http://translate.google.de/translat...-verstoesst-nicht-gegen-US-Recht-1020943.html
http://translate.google.de/translat...olgen-aus-WLAN-Nutzdatensammlung-1001945.html
http://translate.google.de/translat...e-stoppt-Sammlung-von-WLAN-Daten-1000683.html
http://translate.google.de/translat...-Google-1026665.html&sl=de&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8

 

Looks like they were only able to collect pieces or fragments of information?

 

Because Google is a big corporation they can do whatever the fuck they want.

Individuals would go to jail for what they do.

 

that little in 3 years all over the world? it's like one millionth of byte from everywhere they passed by....

 

They are ADMITTING to that little.

 

if it was more they wouldn't have admitted

Also, comeone! from UNENCRIPTED wireless! who uses ue wireless nowadays? ?_?

 

Oh please. Anyone who thinks this is either grandstanding or completely in-the-dark about how technology works.

1) Google was driving down the street.
2) The cars were collecting SSID info from all WiFi routers.
3) The routine collecting the SSID info and matching it to location also had a subroutine which grabbed packets (the code had been reused from a prior project).
4) The packets were only sampled from OPEN WiFi networks which were broadcasting into the air.

There was -NO- hacking whatsoever.

What Google did was the equivalent of any private party walking down the street and overhearing little bits and pieces of various conversations that other people were having.

The fact that any politicians anywhere are making a big deal out of this just goes to show how stupidly idiotic (and out of touch with technology) some of them are.

-hl718

 

Damn, if I used Firefox this would be a must have. Fuck, almost makes me wanna switch from Chrome... Wait, holy shit! Chrome!?! Tracking even more of my life! :crying::banghead:

 

Actually, the equivalent would be a private party hiring trucks to drive down an unlimited number of streets and record little bits of conversation between people. The scale of it all does matter as that's where the harm is.

 

Which is also legal - that's the problem. At least here in Americadia, anything visible/audible "in public" is fair game, for varying definitions of public. (but see also a relatively recent Supreme Court case involving cops using infrared cameras - this was ruled to be an overreach) American law hasn't caught up to technology when it comes to privacy, since our Constitution was written in the days when it was taken for granted you could just walk out into the middle of a cornfield and have 100% privacy. The result is this kind of "CAN THEY REALLY DO THAT" situation - the answer is usually yes.

 

If one only wants to use Google's search engine, there's also Scroogle, which acts as a kind of filtering proxy. Of course this doesn't help with AdWords, or if you're using Google Maps, Mail, Docs etc, but it's better than nothing.

Me, I'm routing everything through an instance of Privoxy, which filters out all ads, cookies and whatnot and only lets through the stuff I've explicitly allowed.

 

I think you are over simplifying what happened with that analogy. It is not like hearing a conversation as you pass down a street whilst walking.

It's like having a huge gang of folks walking down many streets looking in people's windows. They catch glimpses of things that are going on if the curtains are open. Regardless, they take a picture of your garden as they continue on.

 

Which is legal in most cases, taking pictures from public property to private. Hence how famous people are photographed.

 

Fuck se dörty Internetz!

 

It depends on which country though.

 

People who use ad blockers are just selfish. You should think about how people are making money on all the free content we have access to.