bakunin’s Techdirt Profile

bakunin

About bakunin




bakunin’s Comments comment rss

  • May 31st, 2013 @ 5:04pm

    Google lied about their approach toward evil. Or have changed their minds since?

    Indeed, whenever I see folks trying to feel good about GOOG, I cringe yet again as I recall that they long got away with their motto supposedly being "Do no evil." Their business model is not one of selfless giving {newsflash?!} So, poking about for a link or 2 to support my argument, I happen upon:


    Google Moving to Help Destroy Anonymity
    Google’s motto is “Do No Evil“. And Google notes in a patent application:
    When users reveal their identities on the internet, it leaves them more vulnerable to stalking, identity theft and harassment.
    So you might assume that Google is fighting to protect anonymity on the web.
    But Schmidt’s new book reveals that Google will support the destruction of anonymity (via Wall Street Journal):
    Within search results, information tied to verified online profiles will be ranked higher than content without such verification, which will result in most users naturally clicking on the top (verified) results. The true cost of remaining anonymous, then, might be irrelevance.
    Search Engine Journal explains:
    [Passages from Schmidt's book] confirm what many industry writers have been passionately clattering away about for months now. Google+ is an identity verification network. As the network continues to grow, content associated with a verified identity will rise to the top of Google search rankings.
    (Google+ is now the world’s second most popular social network.)
    In other words, Schmidt acknowledges (in the first quote above) that authoritarians want to destroy anonymity … and Google will help them do so.

    from
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/google-moves-to-destroy-online-anonymity-unintentionally-helping-auth oritarian-governments/5322542

    and if you need more convincing try
    https://alethonews.wordpress.com/2010/01/26/googles-deep-cia-connections/

    Furthermore, it seems to me unlikely their attempts at appearing Gov-defiant could be genuine when they so actively engage in censorship of views - not obscenity but just ideas which also don't smear/slander anyone - by whatever secret starchamber process they obey. Case in point: Alex Jones' sites with various reports (okay I have 2 big qualms with him but 70% of the time he's a very important, impassioned advocate of the Bill of Rights.. just appeared on AM radio in my area-- check yours (his 3 hours/day must be something for typical car-driving, broadcasts-beholden media consumers!)) used to come up in googl searches but they've basically just blacklisted them. Much the same on youtube.

    ps. Apart from KPFA's "Guns and Butter" which I've listened to since inception, the place from where I've been hearing since forever the term "National Security Letter" is the intro to a regular segment of the Peter B. Collins podcast called "Boiling Frogs", featuring historic whistleblower Sibel Edmonds. From there, she's gone on her own in a great way, with her Boiling Frogs Post:
    http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/?s=NSL