« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

I told you so

This is going to be short and sweet. Very sweet.

Remember when I said this?

As if it wasn’t bad enough that Google is trying to ram through Net Neutrality, to give government control over every Internet-connected computer network in the country (which is almost all of them, these days). But now Google is scanning your home networks directly.

I was assured that I was being “paranoid,” that nothing actually private was being recorded, and that Google could be trusted to be reasonable on this.

Oops, I told you so.

Yeah, the source for the new claim that Google was actually snooping data and not just MACs? Yup, Google. The same company whose leader laughed at us for questioning the threat his company’s database-gathering ways pose to our privacy.

They now claim that they “typically” gathered only “fragments” of data, but we know what that means when they have to qualify that. They don’t know for sure just how much confidential information their snoopers have gathered and correlated with your home address.

Once again, Google is proven to be untrustworthy. They’re just unreliable. When I then think about how many conservatives are using GMail? I wish I hadn’t thought about it.

COMMENTS

  • http://www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com SoFiMil

    Gibbs may have denied it, but the WH also collected our e-mail addresses and who knows what else. As in your case, here too they called Jack Tapper and the Tea Party Express a small (as opposed to vast) band of paranoid nuts.

    Looking forward to the 2010 election.

  • http://www.barrypopik.com barrypopik

    I read about the Google snooping and thought of your posts.

    It’s probably worse than we know.

  • Hugh

    If we don’t use GMail, and use Bing, Yahoo, or other search engines can they track us also?

  • vongruetz

    So Google came out and admitted that a few years ago they accidentally recorded data that was being transmitted over non-password protected networks. When they realized what had happened they deleted the data and announced what happened. It’s not like they were hacking in to your private network and stealing something. Then they came out and confessed all of this before they had to. This is really a non-story and I think you’re making a mountain out of a molehill here.
    The point is that you should put a password on your network or else anyone can hop on and record whatever they want. Not just Google.

    ps: I hate Eric Schmidt so don’t think I’m a fan of google or anything.

  • archer52

    Google and Obama are spooning. Why? Are they positioning themselves to be the government’s proxy in the whole net neutrality thing? If you want to access the Internet you have to go through Google?

  • rbdwiggins

    on the internet or wireless service, unless you are using a secured network.

  • finaljeopardy

    NT

  • Hugh
  • Bill S

    It?s not like they were hacking in to your private network and stealing something.

    Uh, yeah. Yeah it is. That’s exactly what it is “like”. That’s the entire problem.

  • kowalski

    I know Google has a lot of disk space out there in that vast cloud of theirs, but even so –

    It’s pretty hard to “accidentally” collect more than 600 gigabytes of data while you’re driving around in a multicolored car with a goofy-looking mast affixed to the roof. I can hear the conversation in the GoogMobile now:

    “Wait, slow down, there’s a red light coming up. And watch out for the squirrel.”
    “Hey, when we stop, better check the cameras.”
    “Yeah, hang on…”
    “OK we’ve got plenty of space, everything’s running fi…hey, wait…
    “What?”
    “What the heck is this gigabyte of data over here in this file…”
    “ETHER_GRID_331W226N802.11GBN.BIN”
    “Duh, Mr. Street View, reach up and grab the curb, OK?”
    “Huh?”
    “You are so dense, Captain Techno — that’s unencrypted WiFi network data.”
    “It IS ?!?!”
    “What planet do you think this is, nimrod? Better rename that file, though: “JUSTABUNCHOFACCIDENTALSTUFFDONOTDELETEWINKWINK.BIN”

  • The_Rebel

    by removing the Google custom search from its site.

  • Finrod

    If you made your network private by putting a password on your wireless router, like anyone that’s competent and has the least bit of concern about their network privacy would do, Google wouldn’t be able to access anything on it.

    Hooking up an unprotected wireless router to your network is the Internet equivalent of leaving all your doors and windows wide open and leaving town for a week; if you did that and then tried filing a claim on your homeowners insurance after people nicked your stuff, they’d probably just laugh at you for being stupid.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    What Google specifically does is special because they gather lots of data from lots of different sources and bring it all together.

    Nobody else does that.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Just because you leave your doors unlocked it doesn’t mean you’re giving a snooper permission to come in and poke around.

    Nobody’s making insurance claims against Google’s acts. They’re blaming Google for snooping.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Just don’t allow any Google cookies or scripts to run on your computer.

  • The_Rebel

    n/t

  • The_Rebel

    Just thought maybe we could send a message.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    We don’t pay them money for it.

    Corporations only listen to messages that have dollar signs tacked on.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    You’re asking me to go to war with RedState’s Beltway Overlords over a symbol. I have better things to do with my time.

  • The_Rebel

    Just replace it with a Yahoo custom search. If someone must have a Google search, let him do it on his own. Google doesn’t own the world, yet.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    I don’t own RedState. Eagle Publishing does.

  • http://pocketchangeproductions.net/ anotherindyfilmguy

    Doesn’t that sort of snooping directly violate a bunch of states wiretapping laws?

    If so shouldn’t the people in charge of the program be charged, fined and imprisoned and the gathered data removed from google’s custody/deleted?

    Just asking. If the google execs think they are gods perhaps like all with such egos it is time for them to fall flat on their faces…

    Wondering if I’ll be removed from googles search stuff now… also wondering if that’s really a bad thing…

  • The_Rebel

    Guess we can’t fight city hall.

  • http://www.marklaiminger.org Lammo

    which is usually that the communication must be private. See, for example, RCW 9.73.030 here: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9.73.030

  • Hugh

    was if we use other search engines can Google track us too. Also, I don’t use GMail. I use Microsoft Outlook.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Google doesn’t have access to Microsoft’s stuff.

    As long as you don’t use Chrome. :-)

  • Bill S

    Locked or unlocked, it’s still a crime.

    Protected or unprotected, it’s still snooping.

  • Finrod

    What they did was the equivalent of taking pictures of someone’s house with the doors and windows wide open. Sure, it’s arguably negligent of them since someone could use those pictures to see a big screen TV sitting there just inside the open front door and go steal it, but I really don’t see how this is really substantively different than the guy that was sued by Barbra Streisand for taking pictures of the California coast. Google was noting the existence of open wireless networks, not doing anything on them.

  • Finrod

    If you take pictures of someone else’s property while standing on a public street, is that ‘snooping’? Are you going to rant about Google StreetView next?

    Google simply noted the existence of these public networks. They didn’t try to access them.