What is Digg?30 Comments
- sheywood, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Excellent coverage in this and accompanying articles. The chart to compare policies is particularly useful.
- cybe, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7What does the NSA Know About You?
- bitswapper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6The number one priority of any incorporated business interest is to maximize value to shareholders, public or private. This supersedes all other goals - its the definition of a corporation. Combined with the status of corporations as legal entities not unlike human beings, you have a theoretically perfect psychopath or sociopath. An entity incapable of guilt with absolutely no internal moral code whatsoever.
So, when a corporate entity claims it will 'do no evil', bear in mind the statement comes from a perfect sociopath.
As for online info about you - that's what the Internet is all about; the free flow of information. You should expect everything you do on the Internet to be public knowledge, attainable by others. Step carefully, delete cookies often, anonymous when you can, and try to connect from behind a NAT among many other users, stop mindlessly clicking 'yes' to every malware attempt at installing something on your computer, don't use software with a track record of allowing malware invisibly onto your system (like windows, for example), and assume a healthy skeptical attitude.
Remember that every line of code in the software you are using is a potential port of entry onto your system for malware that can easily be used to track you. Resist DMCA, DRM, 'trusted computing' and their kind. These are just more ways and excuses to track what you do online. Avoid using software that willfully submits to such online tracking. - aarons44, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5If you really want to be scared, read the Google Watch Web site, or EPIC's anti-Google page. There's a whole lot going on that we don't know about. Google states in its AdWords policy that they do not store AdWords on a per-user basis, and they do not link them to any other information such as search information or any other Google products you might use. Yet their AdWords patent specifically mentions that very activity...
- livestradamus, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7They know I have holes in my socks
- Saintlink, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7If America ever turned into China (God forbid), you can bet that even Google would drop the "Do No Evil" policy. That they gave in to the Red Dragon is extremely sad, but it is also a warning to all users elsewhere in the world where freedoms still exist.
- rubored, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6AOL is ***** up...
Releasing search records is, too! - duke, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Folks, before you get too condescending about AOL users, just consider how much Digg knows about you - the topics you endorse, the ideas you reject, the beliefs you hold, the videos you watch, plus all the stuff that AOL knew about its users. Whether you trust the folks at digg or not, consider that for an estimated $60M, AOL or someone else could own all that information about you, and recoup some of its investment by sales of your data to willing buyers.
Privacy policies are worthless and irrelevant because they aren't enforceable by users, they can be changed at the drop of a hat, and companies can be sold. We already know of employers who screen job applications through MySpace and Facebook to weed out those who are dumb enough to post intimate facts. Sooner or later, every smart-ass remark you make here may be for sale, and possibly used against you.
Have a nice day. :) - Izzie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4they already did drop the "do no evil policy"
AFAIK it occured when google sold his to stock exchange market - anasazi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5if your seriously taking a large corporation's "do not evil" policy as pure gospel then your setting yourself up to be disappointed, and possibly screwed depending on what google knows about you and who they might eventually give it to.
"do no evil" is a great marketing policy but have no doubt that will go bye bye if google starts a decline.
bottom line: large corporations are out to make money for shareholders, not to protect consumors. - databasecowboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I understand your concern regarding tracking. I am not saying this is the case with Google's AdSense patent, but I am told that patent lawyers generally throw in every possible use for something when they apply for a patent just to give them the option to do so later and also to stop someone from doing something similar. Supposedly this is why amazon files so many lame patents is to keep more nefarious characters from doing so and using it paralyze e-commerce. Regardless, paranoia is awareness.
- aarons44, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You forgot to mention the fact that Google reads EVERY eMail coming into and out of Gmail, without asking for consent. If I write to a Gmail address, my mail gets read. Google never asked my permission for that. You also forgot to mention how they bent to the demands of China, basically squashing human rights for a few more years. Google is far from perfect. Maybe better than the rest, but I still would consider a proxy or safe-Google tool for certain occasions.
- eddigg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Not too far off in the future "America's Funniest Searches"
- LiterateWolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I just deleted my personalized search account. I prefer Gmail for emals but I switched to Clusty a while ago since they don't maintain records very long....and they don't censor search results.
- daedal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Google knows way, way too much about me now more than ever since I forgot to remove the "Search tracker" function.
- Qoogirl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What do they know?
If you're like some people I know and just check your e-mail and post a resume here and there, not much. If you're a pirating teen with an addiction to new bands and all that glitters, well, hmmm...
I am surprised that these four companies, given some of the more "Makes you go hm..." US Homeland Security laws of late, have not had to cite their privacy policies more often as they go around targeting individual users. I don't know how many digg users are living in the US, but apparently many states now require you by law to give your full name and address to a police officer if asked; any questions or resistance to providing your full name is against the law. Coupled with your name, place of residence and your surfing habits, imagine what some people can be convicted for. For good or worse.... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1- Google helping China to censor the internets.
- Yahoo assisting China to jail dissident.
- AOL leaking search queries to the public.
- Microsoft collecting private info without your consent and they admits planting backdoors into your system.
Then they promise they will protect your personal information. I want to believe! - Joseppi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Duke:
I've had the same thoughts lately ... I think I'm going to shut up. - soccer93, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i cant believe they do that i mean who can u trust these days
- im3ngs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Search logs are quite possibly the single most revealing record that we've ever had ability to create,'' Bankston said. ``They're practically a printout of the goings-on in your brain.''
If that doesn't scare you about your searches... I don't know what would. - LiterateWolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Clusty.com
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1It amazes me that with so much public information freely available via the internet, people are more enthusiastic than ever to air their laundry in public via blogs etc!
Especially now, in MS's word they will keep records for as long as is important to their needs, i.e. forever, now that mass data storage is cheap and getting cheaper.
Plenty of things I'd love to put up in a blog for all to read, but not if it could come back and bite me in the ass 20 years from now.
It sickens me that the net has been made so enticing and necessary to the world's populations, only for big corporations to monitor, track and log every action we take online. - netgoddess, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Seems to me there's a simple measuring stick to use: look at who's *actually* keeping user info private.
Yahoo: turns over email whenever someone flashes a badge
AOL: publishes search logs on the Internet, with no real anonymization
MSN: hands over search records to the DOJ, with token anonymization
AT&T: actively helps the NSA set up secret wiretapping facilities
The US government: wants to know everything you do online, wants ISPs to record all user activity and keep the logs for 2 years.
Google: yells loudly, goes to court to prevent the DOJ from getting any user info at all, wins in court.
Forget the marketing slogans, look at the actual track records. Actions speak louder than words. - CRasH180, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2While this is often the case, has there ever been instances of large corporations that did somtething with the information they collect about their users for any kind of good? I cannot site any examples, so I am not certain. More often than not, it is the consumer that getsthe shaft in the end.
"Free" is never free. There is always a price of some kind. - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"If America ever turned into China (God forbid), you can bet that even Google would drop the "Do No Evil" policy."
These companies want to offer you complete "service" packages, which basically ties you to them. Eventually they hope to charge subscription fees if the services become successful/exclusive enough.
They host your "homepage," your email, your searches, IM, and eventually productivity apps. Add that all up; if you fully utilize these services, they've got a complete profile of you, a summary of your friends, and passwords you use, etc. Technically, they could even look at the docs and files you've been uploading. That is, if you've uploaded anything other than porn. :p Just hope it wasn't illegal porn or warez.
Is that dangerous? You've all done something not-quite-legal online, if it's linked to your profile and another John Ashcroft comes along -- perhaps put into office by the MAFIAA lobby -- then you're going to be screwed. It might be something as small as paying a fine, but it might be worse. - aarons44, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I agree, they may have been throwing everything in that they could think of. But there's nothing to prevent them from adding those features in the future. It's not against the law, they've already been granted the patent, and they can legally change their practices and privacy policy without notifying any of their customers / users. I just finished the Safe Harbor paperwork to certify my employer's new product against the EU Data Privacy Directive. The laws for public companies in Europe are so much stricter. These companies would be in such trouble if these breaches happened there.
- Yarps, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Gee, one more reason to use some sort of proxy. Here is one for search engines:
http://www.blackboxsearch.com/ - solomongrundy0, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0They pretty much know nothing... Disabled search tracking... Proxies... etc. I would be very shocked if they knew more than... Well just about anybody else in my life as it seems people ignore me. ^_^ Which is sooo beneficial.
- streamx, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"Obedience Breeds Discipline, Discipline Breeds Unity, Unity Breeds Power, Power is Life"
This article is brought to you by Umbrella Corporation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umbrella_Corporation - ashishkc5, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0hello nice one is this is abcde fissafd
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is