Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 22nd May 2010 21:18 UTC
Google This issue kind of fell by the wayside in all the WebM and Android violence, but apart from the cool things Google did this past week, they've also done something really bad. They claim it's a mistake, but the company has collected 600GB of data from open personal wireless networks in 33 countries through its Street View cars, prompting several countries to initiate official investigations into the search giant.
Thread beginning with comment 426084
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Permission
by mrhasbean on Sat 22nd May 2010 22:14 UTC
mrhasbean
Member since:
2006-04-03

Search providers deal with lots of data, and much of it is private. There are other less invasive methods of locating people to within an area that is small enough for most static applications. Or here's a suggestion, ask them if they WANT their location stored so that search results can be customised. On mobile devices - well at least on the iPhone, I can't speak first hand for many of the others - you are asked if you want to allow location services to find your position.

As I drive along in my local area My iPhone regularly asks me if I want to join wifi networks it locates. This doesn't give me the right to collect all the locations and use that information for my own purposes. Especially when their targeted search results are just another marketing tool for them to sell their advertising.

This follows further too. Just because I might put a file that contains personal information on a server somewhere for a short period buried deep in a random folder structure so that someone in another part of the world can gain quick access to it doesn't mean I want Google to index it and serve it up in their search results. While there are methods to prevent this they are not known by a lot of people. I believe at the moment all search providers are afforded way too much freedom. The web has matured to a stage where I believe they should have to be specifically allowed by the user to search and index sites. No code in the header to allow it = no index.

We just need some governments to stand up and have the kahunas to do something about it, but then, with the amount of data governments collect on people it would be a bit like Tommy Lee giving Tiger Woods a lecture on commitment.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Permission
by Shannara on Sat 22nd May 2010 22:51 in reply to "Permission"
Shannara Member since:
2005-07-06

Not true. If someone put up their formerly private information on the web, it is NO LONGER PRIVATE ... A lot of people either forget or ignore that fact.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Permission
by gnemmi on Sun 23rd May 2010 02:28 in reply to "RE: Permission"
gnemmi Member since:
2006-08-17

Sorry but you just haven't the slightest idea of what you are saying.

Where I store my information does not, in any way whatsoever, modify my rights upon it unless I specifically grant someone else the total or a at least a part of the them.

Storing _my_ information on _my_ server, does not give you, google or whoever else any single right upon it. Where I choose to store something of my property, does not change the nature of my rights upon it.

Edited 2010-05-23 02:31 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Permission
by looncraz on Sun 23rd May 2010 21:06 in reply to "RE: Permission"
looncraz Member since:
2005-07-24

Not true. If someone put up their formerly private information on the web, it is NO LONGER PRIVATE ... A lot of people either forget or ignore that fact.


Not sure why your were modded down for that. You speak the absolute truth. If I put my social security number on the internet, I should very well expect for it to be stolen.

Maybe because your comment doesn't really relate to the article, where a company drove around collecting ( rather useless ) information about WiFi networks is getting in some trouble.

I think, however, that it is the individual's responsibility to properly protect their network. It isn't terribly difficult.

The real truth, from the ground, is that most (knowledgeable) people really don't care if someone can hop in on their wireless network, so long as they aren't causing harm in any way.

I don't.

I have a 100% unsecured wireless network with as much amplification as I can provide so that anyone can get internet. I know most don't know enough to cause harm, and I know to secure the few areas that need security ( I own a LOT of computing power ).

Now, if someone comes in and snoops around, they will find some barriers ( notably my secure Linux server ), but even if they get past that and access all of my data - well, okay.. I have nothing to hide.

Seriously, who does? Sure, many people use Quicken or QuickBooks for financial data, but who is dumb enough to actually put enough information to destroy yourself in a single place?

I would never do that.

But that may just be me. I remember every single account number I've EVER had, and I just create a name. I also shred all mail that may identify me...

Maybe I'm just paranoid, though.

--The loon

Reply Parent Score: 2