Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Will Google's Greed Ruin the Internet?

By Jeffrey Chester, The Nation. Posted October 6, 2007.


Google's new marketing strategy poses a huge threat to our privacy and democratic aspirations for the Internet.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Jeffrey Chester

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Should we be worried about Google? Ten years after the search engine was launched by two Stanford University graduate students, Google has become an empowering force and adopted behavior that has transformed the way we access news and information, shop for goods and services and -- increasingly -- how we engage in politics. Who would have imagined four years ago, that Google and its subsidiary YouTube would co-sponsor debates in which ordinary citizens could directly engage with presidential candidates?

Last week, Google's stock hit an all-time high, on the strength of reports that the company will earn more this year than the $10.6 billion it earned in 2006. But while Google has almost overnight become a trusted source of information for the technologically attuned, few have thought to question the extent to which its success poses threats to both our privacy and our aspirations for the positive potential of the Internet.

Google's dramatic growth is a reflection of its role as the most powerful player in the world of interactive marketing. Ninety-nine percent of Google's annual revenues (according to its 10K filing with the SEC) comes from selling targeted advertising on its search engine, which is driven by a massive consumer data collection system.

Google is far more than the digital incarnation of Madison Avenue in the twenty-first century. It is the engine driving us into a new communications era, in which interactive marketing will significantly shape our lives. The company is aggressively expanding its advertising role, building out a sales team poised to partner with the biggest brand advertisers on the planet. Google is pitching its souped-up interactive advertising system to global corporations so they can better blend marketing messaged into the news, information and entertainment we consume.

Google's message to Madison Avenue, as expressed at the OMMA Expo in New York this week is that its technology can leverage tremendous insights about global consumers of products and information, and can deliver the right interactive marketing messages to consumers at precisely the right moment. Ellen Naughton, Google's director of media platforms, urged advertisers to "fish where the fish are," a reference to the millions of viewers of online video, including YouTube. Naughton was particularly proud of "Green Tea Partay," a Google-sold video ad that has drawn more than 3 million viewers to date on YouTube. It's a cheeky video, in which Smirnoff Vodka marketing messages are subtly integrated into the insistent beat of an preppy California hip-hop routine.

As Wall Street celebrates Google's success as a marketing platform, the company's plans to extend its business and power are cause for concern, according to a handful of privacy and consumer groups in the US and the European Union, and elsewhere. Google has engaged in a rapid series of acquisitions, giving it control over YouTube (the world's most powerful online video service); Feedburner (which distributes content and ads to more than a half-million blogs and other news feed sites); and it is in the process of acquiring the online data collection behemoth DoubleClick. Much about Google's corporate goals can be gleaned from the $3.1 billion it is willing to pay to control DoubleClick.

As the online ad technology and data collection system favored by Fortune 500 companies, DoubleClick proclaims that its prowess is "...why all 10 of the world's top 10 brands, 8 of the top 10 global agencies and 8 of the top 10 U.S. and European Web sites choose DoubleClick to help meet their digital marketing needs." It has "1,500 of the world's top publisher, advertiser, agency and advertising networks as clients...." Among the attractions DoubleClick also offers: an elaborate data collection operation delivering "billions" of targeted, personalized, interactive ads each day, and a service that allows it to track more than 100 different ways we watch video online (If you're troubled by the drinking messages stealthily embedded in the story line of "Green Tea Partay" video think how marketing messages will permeate YouTube programming once Google finalizes its purchase of DoubleClick.)

Digital Gold Rush

Google isn't alone among the digital giants swallowing up online marketing properties. More than $33 billion has been spent in an ad-industry-focused merger and acquisition spree during the first half of 2007, Advertising Age reported in July. Microsoft, Yahoo!, Time Warner, ad giant WPP, and, of course, Google were among those spending big bucks to acquire firms that collect, analyze and target us largely via stealth and highly sophisticated interactive ad technologies (adding to their empires such interactive marketing entities as Tacoda, BlueLithium, Third Screen Media, and aQuantive).


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: google, double click, democratic internet

Jeffrey Chester is executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy (www.democraticmedia.org).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Meh. Google makes money on teh interwibbles...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Oct 6, 2007 12:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...like that advert on teh side of teh browser of your average alternet punter.

Have fun; and much capital to you, too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» ATTN cable subscribers: Posted by: vox persona
Entering The World of Mad Max
Posted by: packofwolves on Oct 6, 2007 4:01 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our destiny, like so many science fiction films we've seen over the years, is catastrophe, revolution, and destruction. When watching Mad Max did you ever really believe that our world would be headed for similar nightmare scenarios? For me, I recognized the way the world was headed back when Roller Ball hit the screens despite my youth. It is a sad day for all of us, on a global scale, when we are literally controlled by a couple of gigantic corporations - unable to break through their barriers to see what's really happening. We're already so saturated with advertising and propaganda that for many of us we believe what we're seeing and hearing, after all it's pounded into our brains at every turn. Before long, we really won't know fact from fiction and history will be written through the eyes of greed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who owns the future?
Posted by: PJT on Oct 6, 2007 4:22 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the global media future that Google is building ultimately does not serve the common good, the marketplace will go somewhere else and we can hope somebody will invent something better. Why is Google today and Bill Gates yesterday? Who or what is tomorrow?

The power of computing predicted by Kurzweil in The Singularity is Near is just around the corner. This enormous power will not come free. You have to pay for it somehow and that will be through your habits as a consumer. In the not too distant future, if you want to be plugged in, you will consume product day and night, sleeping and awake, conscious and unconscious, and you will pay for it. If you like it, you will pay for it. If you don't like it, turn it off and go read a book, or, invent something better, and YOU give your product away free. Privacy? I accept the loss of privacy as one cost of enjoying the technology. Philip J Tramdack

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Logic?
Posted by: edith on Oct 6, 2007 4:55 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
what's the logic behind the author's assertion that Google could or would desire the limitation of media outlets? Google's interest is in an ever expanding network of content providers as well as advertising generation ever more specialized. For specialized media, including political media like the Nation which attracts relatively few readers and advertisers, Google is it would seem a marketing agent sent from cyberHeaven. No group too small to target. This may raise privacy concerns (although don't choose to click on the ads if you wnat privacy.). But does Google threaten media diversity? Media diversity in the print area is an ideal and not a realtiy. The Google influenced Net has a far better track record to encourage diversity than print.

Sorry, but I don't see the threat, potential or actual, to media diversity from Google's layering the Net with ads, which is inevitable given the resistance of consumers to fee access sites.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Logic? Posted by: kelly.nickell
» RE: Logic? Posted by: beeofdoom
Monopolism Is The Inevitable "Telos" Of Kapital
Posted by: woody, tokin' librul on Oct 6, 2007 5:59 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course, Google--or some other outfit--will ruin the Intertubes. Nothing so potentially liberatory, democratizing, ennabling of the voices of the People as thje Tubes can be allowed to stand unmolested, unregulated, unexploited. The corpoRatization of the whole fucking World, and the commodification of Every-fucking-thing cannot--may not be allowed to--be obstructed by anything so ephemeral as the democratic aspirations of the People. Are you crazy?
It's not now and never has been a matter of whether, but only when and how.
Apparently it's here and now...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Greetings fellow consumer units!
Posted by: frankly1 on Oct 6, 2007 6:10 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As the ordinary American somnambulates through their existence the questions posed by this article are mute. The vast majority of the population have already been captured. They are simply not equiped for critical thought or subjective reason having been dumbed down and indoctrinated into submission, they simply consume products and facile entertainment. Try to have a conversation with an average American on anything such as history, civics or foriegn affairs and it will be a short pointless event as you will find that they know virtually nothing. Then begin a conversation on football or amercan idol and you will hear long and considered opinions. Google and any other information gathering will, in the future, be used to root out any divergence from the norm so that they can be reprogramed or eliminated. The true definision of power is getting people to do what you want them to do while they believe they are doing what they want to do!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You nailed it! Posted by: xi_people
Here's a tip to keep your privacy on google.
Posted by: maxpayne on Oct 6, 2007 6:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Avoid installing the toolbar and on that site, TURN OFF COOKIES !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Proxy Servers Posted by: gellero
Author is obviously not a techie...
Posted by: Smartcookie on Oct 6, 2007 6:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most technical people know that privacy has been a thing of the past for a while now if you are fairly smart, especially if you work in classified military or intelligence projects.

PRIVACY DOES NOT EXIST. Go take a look at google earth, now what do you think the military has? Real-time earth rendering, with object trackin via satellites. It's coming you better believe it, if it's not already there partially.

Let me repeat that for you: Privacy does not exist! With the advent of technology privacy is a thing of the past, it's only luddites that still believe it exists.

Markets and Corporations in the drive for profit have eroded privacy period because they want to know everything in order to maximize gain and minimize loss and risk.

Orwell had it wrong: It's not the government you need to be worried about, it's private industry. Since governments are beholden to the big players of private global industries. Private industry cannot ever be regulated very easily due to the globalization of markets, and the fact that so many people live desperately in financial insecurity. In many countries where there is no enforcement of the law, this allows private industry gets away with near anything these days as long as it doesn't effect the economy too much, otherwise even private industry + gov will go after the bad corps if it threatens market stability in a way thats bad for everyone.

Money rules as it always has.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Changing search results
Posted by: Jodi on Oct 6, 2007 7:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any critical discussion of google should pay attention to the fact that it alters its results. Last week, researchers in the Netherlands "caught" google moving 911truth.org out of the top results for searches on 9/11. Go to mastersofmedia.hum.uva.nl and find the issue-dramaturg in the index or go to jdeanicite.typepad.com/i_cite/2007/09/richard-rogers-.html for a summary and link.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Changing search results Posted by: makeadifference
Privacy Has To Be Legislated: Unfortunately...
Posted by: InsertNameHere on Oct 6, 2007 7:52 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Google is one of the companies blatantly helping the Chinese government filter out information considered taboo. If you do a search for Tienanmen Square on normal Google, you will get a bunch of stuff on the massacre. Not so, on Chinese Google. Query Tienanmen and you get nothing on the massacre. That should tell you where it's loyalty to the truth lies in relation to profits.

If you want privacy, then your respective national government needs to hear from you on privacy legislation. Unfortunately, in North America, the U.S. especially, the core of voters are those working class, meat and potatoes, Republican types. It's easy to forget when you spend most of your time on the internet, that there is a very large number of broke motherfuckers out there that don't use the net, and of that group that does, they aren't using it for blogs, or reading news. Therefore, the necessary groundswell of support necessary for such a measure just isn't there.

My point is this, the major core of voters has no use for this issue because the internet doesn't figure highly in their lives. I know you like to think your little left or right-wing blog is reaching the masses, but most of the masses are either working, drinking, fighting or fucking.

Cheers!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't Use Google or verizon.At&T Etc.
Posted by: drblack on Oct 6, 2007 8:39 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These companies have way too much power ...use scroogle scraper, Linux, and small companies for your communications needs.
The big companies will steal your Freedom and privacy and in the end will charge you an arm and leg to do it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Elitist? Please. Posted by: apophenia_monkey
I don't know about greed but they're sure ideological. Their searches are biased to the right.
Posted by: yellow on Oct 6, 2007 9:10 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Google's biases are toward wingnuts. Google anything about Jews and do ya get the Virtual Jewish Library first. NO!! Ya still get Jew Watch!! Google FDR, New Deal. Ya get CATO Institute crap which is all FDR bashing. I just goes on and on. You Google Russian Revolution and low and behold you get wingnut Jewish banker conspiricy theories about Jakob Schiff, and dozens of 'em, before ya even get good old fashioned anti-Soviet conservatism from the likes of Neo-cons. I learned more about Eustice Mullins and Willis Carto than I ever thought possible only because I wanted to investigate the history of the FED!! Do the wing nuts pay these guys or what?? It stinks!! Search Engines are not supposed to be politically biased. Sometimes I think some of our Alternet readers control Google.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Googley Eyed
Posted by: peacelf on Oct 6, 2007 9:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I understand that the purpose of this article is to create awareness of the new and exciting ways in which internet media "captures" our attention, lulling us into a deep consumeristic sleep.

I doubt that anything we do will stop any SEC actions, nor will we be able to impose the people's will in inspiring legislation that challenges this new media frontier that most people, especially legislators, do not understands. And, in a deregulated, fundamentalist free market economy, anything goes.

That means it's time to educate the public. Why not use Google's own "democratic" channel, YouTube, to increase awareness? I think it would be an interesting test of whether Google lives up to the democratic challenge.

peace

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Googley Eyed Posted by: Smartcookie
» RE: Googley Eyed Posted by: MAD
Yawn - Another Monopolistic Juggernaut . . .
Posted by: MAD on Oct 6, 2007 10:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With the power to track you, control what you view and the very medium on which you view it. What's the big deal here? Jesus, you people really are paranoid. Personally, I think it's wonderful that someone is tracking my every digital move and anticipating that I need more antioxidants or might vote Green. Come on! These guys are just a pair of benign tech nerds looking to make a modest living.

Oh, and collaborating with the Chinese government in severely limiting/censoring data is in no way an indication that they might cooperate with our government in a like way. I mean, honestly, It's not like I've found an article on Google one day and watched as it disappeared the next. Oh, wait . . .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't smear Google
Posted by: PeaceLove on Oct 6, 2007 11:05 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Google's an easy target, apparently. For my own part, I think Google is the most exciting company on the planet and is doing more to democratize information than any other company in history. I'm inclined to believe that they're motivated by a desire to change the world and empower all the world's citizens. Most of their developments have followed this model.

But while seemingly on the side of the public interest, Google has taken such positions for its own reasons, principally to expand its online advertising business...

On what evidence does the author base this claim? Might it not be possible that Google's stated mission of bringing all the world's information to all people at all times is supported by closer tracking of individual usage? In other words, why not assume they created the system they wanted to see and then figured out (brilliantly) how to monetize it?

And, BTW, when you Google "9/11 truth" the first hit is 911truth.org. So whatever the Dutch researcher cited in the "Changing Results" comment above found on September 30th is no longer true. The whole world is watching Google, and they can't get away with such blatant jiggering of results.

I've always found Google to be an extraordinarily reliable search engine, with an almost paranormal ability to extract accurately what it is I'm searching for -- even when my search request is somewhat non-specific. Only by analyzing billions of individual requests laterally can they assemble such a powerful and useful search tool.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Don't smear Google Posted by: MAD
» RE: Don't smear Google Posted by: Joe
Google is crap now.
Posted by: ccluelessfl60 on Oct 6, 2007 11:48 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems to me that everytime I try to find a web site and type in the name it goes everywhere but where I want to go. I understand that the adverizers need a inroad but if I do not want a service I will not remember the advertiser with fondness.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» TRULY Posted by: gellero
Google is everywhere, like it or not
Posted by: unitedstatesofstupidity on Oct 6, 2007 12:41 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just about every site that uses advertisements (commercial sites, and "free" hosting services) utilizes google analytics to provide "targeted" advertising content. More and more software installers (commercial and free) are including google toolbar and you must opt-out if you don't want it. Google toolbar tracks all your web surfing behavior and sends it to google just by being installed. Google desktop search sends all kinds of info about you and your files to google, only to help you get targeted advertisements of course!

How much of that is personally identifiable info? Just because your name isn't attached to the data, doesn't mean you can't be identified by ip address. Maybe google says they're being ethical, but what are you going to do when the fascists in the government "legally" seize google's data, and use it to track you down for whatever reason they say protects democracy and freedom at this given moment?

It's not like much of anything on the internet was truly anonymous before google got so entrenched, there are always ways you can be identified and tracked if the powers that be want to...

The flip side of the coin is that just because all of this data is out there which could potentially be used to identify you and watch your every move, doesn't mean anyone is doing so. The sheer amount of data which is being accumulated and mined is so unbelievably huge that they could never track everyone out there even if they wanted to (and probably there are people that do). Sifting through all that data and log information is seriously time consuming, and the manpower and expertise to do it on the scale that would be required to truly have a "big brother" just doesn't exist, and I doubt it ever will.

Be afraid! Or not, take your pick..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Eyes watchin' you!
Posted by: Cathyc on Oct 6, 2007 2:11 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm watching your every move...

[url=http://users.chartertn.net/tonytemplin/FBI_eyes/]I only have eyes for YOU[/url] Ha! Ha!

BTW, Living in Fear is a contradiction in terms.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Eyes watchin' you! Posted by: Cathyc
Corporate Media
Posted by: frank69 on Oct 6, 2007 3:03 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Money, money, money, makes the world go round! With apologies to "Cabaret."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lots of Money For Delivering More Useless Information
Posted by: sofla100 on Oct 6, 2007 5:24 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Before Google, there were other search engines, some of which are still around. But, the issue with Google is that it has taken on crazy proportions. And, it points out the ridiculousness of our priorities and capitalistic system. I mean, many a teacher or nurse does far more to benefit society then some techie nerds who cornered the market on useless information. The fact that they can parade this information in some jizzed up hierarchical way to squeeze money out of companies does not really strike me as all that innovative either. So, what is the point? Should we also be surprised then that Google will also act to corner the market on this parading of useless information, so as to become a monopoly and make even more money? The bottom line, what does this say about our society when this company is worth tens of billions of dollars? Meanwhile, our schoolchildren cannot get a decent education and our poor cannot get medical care. Messed up priorities is what it is all about.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

skeptical
Posted by: luisbaez on Oct 6, 2007 7:09 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am as worried as anybody about protecting my privacy but I don't see, yet, where Google threatens that. Or maybe the author was not persuasive enough. In the meantime I use this wonderful search machine. They have adds? I guess I haven't even noticed them that much. They have to live from something, don't they?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is my reality,
Posted by: Missing Piece on Oct 6, 2007 9:57 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
False Flag because of
Peak oil, so we are in a
Resource war, to stop a pending
Market crash.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The fun thing about being targeted by advertising is...
Posted by: PhantomOfLiberty on Oct 6, 2007 10:06 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
..you don't HAVE to buy ANYTHING. Is anyone else annoyed at the heightened state of alarm that surrounds everything? We give the same weight to articles about "racist" video games or misused language regarding transgendered folks as we give to horrifying lies about the war in Iraq or what really happened on 9/11/01.

Duh, we're living in an F-ed up age and, yes, corporations are scary but we don't have to buy their crap. We don't even have to click on banners or ads or videos.

So here's a tip:

Consciously reject ads that you know (and you know when) are targeted at you. And as someone else suggested: Turn off your cookies and don't add them to your browser's toolbar. Tell your friends and family to do the same if you want to do something about it. The only reason these giant-mega companies are giant and mega is because people buy their crap. Chill out and be a responsible human being.

Peace.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

An odd take on internet expansion
Posted by: nellie blogger on Oct 6, 2007 10:46 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Given a choice between Google, which is trying to expand access and flexibility, and companies like Verizon and AT&T that are trying to create a tiered, restricted, and wealth-based system -- well, I'll take Google's vision of the future any day, thank you.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» freedom to choose to not choose Posted by: frantaylor
Stop clicking on Google Ads
Posted by: frantaylor on Oct 7, 2007 12:25 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If everyone just stopped clicking on Google Ads, they would very shortly go bankrupt and we won't have to have this discussion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

why should we stop
Posted by: gellero on Oct 7, 2007 1:24 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They provide a service that people want. More power to them.

PS....if you want to hide your identity use an INTERNET PROXY SERVER.

If you don't know what that is, educate yourself and quit bitchn'....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: why should we stop Posted by: jingles
google can send me all the ads they want........
Posted by: eosrk on Oct 7, 2007 6:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
....cause I delete them daily!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Some ways to banish Google from your online life.
Posted by: Krotos on Oct 7, 2007 9:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Google fanboys can stop reading right here, because I don't have much to say to you. But for the rest of you who are rightly suspicious of Google and don't want to do business with or enable it in any way, there are many ways you can mostly divorce your online existence from it. You can get Firefox and install the Adblock utility, and then block .*google* (this will block not only the main site but also tracking sites like google-analytics). Also, you can disable cookies or enable them for the originating site only, and then have them automatically deleted whenever you close Firefox. This will make it harder for Google (and other advertisers) to keep track of your web surfing. And, of course, don't use the Google search engine! The one I use is Clusty.com, which has no connection to Google and no notable differences in performance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Move the discussion forward!
Posted by: Jackrabbit on Oct 7, 2007 10:24 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you for this introduction to the vertical monopoly of the internet and personal information that Google is reaching for. This seems like an issue that is very complex and it is one that needs to be discussed so that people can understand its relevance and what the best way to deal with it is.

While it does seem like an important issue to me, I don't see why it rises to the level of ethnic cleansing in Darfur or Iraq refugees overburdening the infrastructure of Syria leading to more instability in the region. I want to get excited about the issues brought up in this article, but I don't feel its immediacy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

google
Posted by: cwilsondrum on Oct 7, 2007 7:17 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
don't worry just as soon as google gets all the information on everyone the government will take it over. too much information is too much power! and google will have to be controlled by the pentagon, maybe already is ,,only google doesn't know it. those wiretap dudes put a lot of wires in in san fransisco.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Internet portal sites...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Oct 7, 2007 7:38 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
a lot of online traffic flows in one way or another through portal sites these days with these sites limiting or slowing traffic not having their certificates or cookies, and is slowed by network throttling... if their cookies or certificates are present then no throttling occurs but speed is still reduced because of increased traffic to and from reporting spiders... [you don't realize the true network speed]
M$N is bad this way, Google I'm not sure about, AOL has done this as a business practice since day 1... this list goes on and on...

privacy is possible, but to have privacy these days will slow and limit browsing because most sites link through portal sites and with out certificates and/or cookies, network throttling can and does occur, you just don't notice it because speed is only reduced in the amount that their reporting takes place... in some rare instances its a little slower to encourage certificate placement...

I tend not to worry about this, I glean all certificates, DRM and cookies as a matter of practice to keep my connection to the world as lean and clean as possible!

The open source people ARE aware of this growing threat and alternative highways are becoming available... people and sources must realize that there are alternatives out there, and must be encouraged to use them...
We as consumers must avoid the major portals and there business moles as much as possible, but only if you want or need to protect your privacy....

THIS IS JUST ANOTHER REASON TO SUPPORT OPEN SOURCE, LINUX and all the people behind this model!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

2 points...
Posted by: chomsky on Oct 8, 2007 9:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, they can identify you by your IP address.
That kind of works but, ISPs tends to change your IP, so it's not reliable (only the ISP can identify you given an IP and a date/time).
Same problem at work where most employees traffic will go through the gateway. So google and others will see the same IP for all employees.
For the privacy freaks, you can use the TOR network...
Then, they can identify you with the cookies. That's the main reliable way. If you search for hot chick on google, they will create a cookie and associate the owner with "likes hot chick".
Then, you go on some shopping site to buy some viagra. There are some doubleclick adds. Doubleclick now knows you want viagra.
But, doubleclick as been bought by google; so google now knows you like hot chicks and want viagra.
But they still don't know who you are... until you go check your gmail account! Now they can associate that with your identity.
Add to that, by example your resume (online wordprocessor), your accounting (online spreadsheet), etc...
Now, many peope say "so what", it won't harm me...
Maybe. Maybe for now.
What about tomorrow?
What do you think a fascist country would do with all that information at their disposal?
What do you think the pro-war governement will do with your peace-activist profile?
Why do you think some peace-activist and governement critics have been put on Bush's no-fly list without any explanation?
What do you think corporations (insurance company, etc) would do with all that information at their disposal?

So, as already stated, you should at the minimum setup your browser to delete your cookies each time you close your browser. Especialy after you visited a site that knows your identity (from payment option by example).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Open source free software is our path to Freedom
Posted by: I3IVIIVI on Oct 24, 2007 11:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OpenZuka.org is a small effort to provide an open, transparent, not-for-profit home for free software searh.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]