Re: OT: This Administration is starting to worry me.

Ben Hogland wrote:

"Kevin W. Miller" <i09172strudelyahoo.com> wrote in message news:KPKdneTWlqtvmUneRVn-pg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


Google has also said that it could be a violation of privacy. I think that they would know. I have no more reason to think that they're lying than I do to think that the government is lying about its reasons for the request. Do you?


Seems to me, and it's just an opinion, that the reason Google prefaced the statement with "it could" in regard to privacy is that an IP address isn't, in itself, giving the name of the searchee.

That assumes that IP addresses will be in the list. You don't know that it will, and I don't know that it won't.


I really think bill is getting wrapped around the axel by literally assuming there will be no IP addresses attached to the data 

And you got outraged by assuming it would.

and some of the rest of us are assuming that of course there will be IP addresses attached.

assuming that "of course"? How does that work? If it's "of course", you don't have to assume. So show me how "of course" is true.

You can do this by showing me how user personal info is "of course" - and maybe by some Natural Computer Law of which I'm ignorant - included automatically in a list of search terms and list of random web sites.

I just don't understand why the information would be of any interest or usefulness to the government without the IP information

Is it possible that, just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean the gummit has no legitimate use for it?

not to mention the fact that Google as come right out and said it could be a violation of privacy.

"could". You think they don't know one way or the other? And if they do, why don't they say so, and end this?

I guess I'd sooner give Google the benefit of the doubt for the moment rather than assume that there is no chance of any privacy violation.

What's apparent to me is that you and and others in here started out by being outraged and suspecting the gummit - and Google gets what's left - the benefit of the doubt. This, in spite of the fact that none of you have shown that the gummit is asking for more than just a list of search terms and random websites, and in spite of the fact that Google has made a mighty weak argument that those lists will contain or reveal user personal information. I don't believe them. If it would be in those lists, they would Know it, and could demonstrate it. They haven't yet. Why not? Reasonable proof that the lists would contain personal user info would put nearly everybody on Google's side right now. What are they waiting for?

You said in an earlier post that Google could just click click and find out all sorts of things from their datagases. Well, if they're that good, why can't they just click click and remove any user personal info that might be in lists that they give to the gummit? If they can click click and find it, they can sure as hell click click and remove it.

There's obviously important information about this Google/gummit confrontation that hasn't come to light yet.

Ben 

--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: This Administration is starting to worry me.
    ... lists the gummit want. ... through government fiat instead of simply attempting to purchase the ... Every institution that registers with the Google search engine can ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
  • Re: OT: This Administration is starting to worry me.
    ... This, in spite of the fact that none of you have shown that the gummit is asking for more than just a list of search terms and random websites, and in spite of the fact that Google has made a mighty weak argument that those lists will contain or reveal user personal information. ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
  • Re: OT: This Administration is starting to worry me.
    ... >>>Google has also said that it could be a violation of privacy. ... >> Seems to me, and it's just an opinion, that the reason Google ... >> I really think bill is getting wrapped around the axel by literally ... > be in those lists, they would Know it, and could demonstrate it. ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
  • Re: OS X compile
    ... Because people keep posting them, and their posts are wrong and need ... this Neo guy or not, for some silly reason, and the ones that think I am ... except for google groups users. ... discussing Neo or for calling people names that you think might be Neo. ...
    (rec.games.roguelike.angband)
  • Re: - E04 - Leadership! Google, Guido van Rossum, PSF
    ... thus Google is flexible in this. ... Or some even more stringent qualification, such as the state's Bar exam ... The reason you don't see this kind of thing emphasized in Python ... immutability to reason about program correctness, ...
    (comp.lang.python)