Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Google is evil, very evil

  • Subject: Re: Google is evil, very evil
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2006 14:57:09 +0100
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: schestowitz.com / ISBE, Manchester University / ITS / Netscape / MCC
  • References: <1157354962.367542.69050@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> <1157361842.226313.120440@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com> <1dcts3-2kf.ln1@ellandroad.demon.co.uk> <1157376966.916324.156000@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
  • Reply-to: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: KNode/0.7.2
__/ [ Rex Ballard ] on Monday 04 September 2006 14:36 \__

> 
> Mark Kent wrote:
>> begin  oe_protect.scr
>> Rex Ballard <rex.ballard@xxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>> >
>> > casioculture@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> >> Microsoft has never bothered me as much as Google does.
>> >>
>> >> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/03/google_eavesdropping_software/
>> >> http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060609-7028.html
>> >
>> > OK.  That one really does make me nervous.  Turn on the microsoft so
>> > that we can just "listen to what's going on" and use "fingerprinting"
>> > to identify "target noises".  This sounds so much like "big Brother"
>> > it's really spooky.
>> >
>> > I'm a big fan of google, and I think it's really great that they are
>> > willing to index my web site and anything else I want indexed for the
>> > public.
>> >
>> > I like google desktop, and I like that they can index anything on my
>> > desktop - for me.
>> >
>> > But what if google decides that this Microphone should start doing
>> > speech-to-text, recording everything I say, on the phone, to my wife,
>> > or to a coworker, or to a client, and starts publishing it in real-time
>> > even before I know what I want published an what I don't.
>> >
>> > That seems like something Microsoft would do, not google.
>> >
>> > I hope they've slapped this research guy silly for suggesting this
>> > brilliant idea.
>> > On the other hand, if they have a patent, they can at least prevent
>> > anyone else from doing it for the next 20 years.
>> >
>>
>> This kind of thing is likely to happen, though, isn't it?  Imagine that
>> a smallish device has a flat, internal microphone embedded, maybe just a
>> simple piezo device (crystal mike, as they used to be called, I think?),
>> something without the capability of determining actual speech, but good
>> enough to take a reliable guess at a few things...
> 
> Actually, every laptop has a built-in Microphone which can be turned on
> by a program or an ActiveX control.  Windows powered PDAs include cell
> phones, which have Microphones which can be turned on by a program or
> remotely using an ActiveX control.


http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-09/04/content_5043737.htm


> If you have a web cam, or a headset plugged into your computer for
> Net2Phone, Skype, or Yahoo Voice, or any other VOIP from PC
> application, the microphone could be turned on without your knowledge.
> 
> This would be really useful for identifying terrorists.  How many
> Democrats would end up on the "no fly" list, or in "Interrogation
> Centers" because they said, in the privacy of their own house, that
> something bad should happen to Mr Bush.
> 
> Hitler had the SS, Stalin had the KGB, Bush has the DHS.


http://www.governmententerprise.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=192501161

'Sentinel will be a "force multiplier" because it will give FBI agents access
to information that's "pocketed away in different systems throughout the
bureau," says Mike Gibbons, former chief of FBI cybercrime investigations
and currently Unisys VP for enterprise security services. "The FBI does a
great job of collecting information, but sharing it has been the real
challenge.' (today's news)


> And the DHS has Microsoft. and now Google?


Add Yahoo and AOL. They were two among at least 3 those who gave away search
logs without resistance. Yahoo also used its data to have a Chinese guy
jailed. There was collaboration with a foreign government.


>> Of course, if you become the television, then it would be easier to get
>> the broadcaster to insert RDS-like data to focus the advertising on your
>> web-browsing to match what's on the tele, /but/, this does assume that
>> the same person is doing both.
> 
> Matching ads to content is great, but at can get very intrusive and
> annoying.  Some vendors want to be very intrusive (like the ones who
> want to hook you into MLMs, sell you bootleg viagra, or sell you
> pictures of their sister underdressed).


...Like in Minority Report.


> I go to a site to read up on the latest Linux development, and there is
> an ad trying to get be to find out how Windows 2003 is so much better
> than Linux.
> 
> I go to a site to read about the Lenovo T60p that runs Linux, and there
> is the DELL add telling me how great it runs Windows XP, or that it's
> "VISTA Ready".  If you want to impress me, tell me which machines are
> "Linux Ready" when I search on keyword "Linux Laptop".


Not you... if they target ads successfully, they will know that you will
never be persuaded. They could learn from your posting history on UseNet,
for example. Both Microsoft (research) and Google (Groups) retain personal
'profiles'. These could be augmented to parse the text and learn character.
Statstical methods could even disriminate one person from another based on
various criterion, ranking affinity for things based on word recurrence,
frequency and people (i.e. profiles) you 'connect' with.


>> This reminds me of a claim by a senior researcher from an Israeli NEP I
>> used to do business with claiming that people would never want more than
>> 2Mbit/s into their houses because that's all your brain could handle in
>> one go.
> 
> I guess he hadn't considered HDTV Video, recording on one channel while
> watching another.  That's 10 Mbits right there.
> 
>>  I told him what I thought of that at the time...  it's just
>> naive thinking; imagining that you can predict just /what/ a person is
>> going to do with something.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index