[LinuxUsers] Code Reuse in Google Chrome

Mon Sep 8 07:44:10 UTC 2008

Peter Manis wrote:

>If you read the privacy policies of a lot of websites they talk about storing tracking information in cookies and how they use information >they collect to improve services.  You don't actually know how much information they are capturing.  They use statements that can be >very general.  If a site tracks the pages their users go to within their site, that is viewed as analytics despite what they might actually >be using it for.  You give your personal information to a lot of large companies and most companies that have even half decent >services share that information between services and tracks what services you are using and how often.

Thanks Peter for that information. Although I was may not have been familiar with a few of the specific terms that you pointed out, like the term analytics, in general I was aware of what you wrote in the previous paragraph. Long before I was even aware of the fact that companies were tracking info on the net, I as opposed to Kragen Auto parts, Circuit City, or any of the other chain stores asking me for my personal information. It was unsettling to me, and I didn't like it. That is just my nature. I like to stay under the radar. Now if anyone wants to spill thier beans or their guts, please do so. If you wanna put a friggen T-bone through you nostrils body peircing style, I don't mind. By the same token, I hope no-one will mind if I like to keep my private information to myself. This is still America, the land of the free, isn't it. 

If you read the news articles surrounding the Viacom issue it states that Google was granted time to clear identifying information from the database to protect its users.  So like Chris said, "Granted they have it, but what have they ever done that was bad?".

Yes, I am aware of the Viacom ID database info judgments. That, in fact, was another case where I was impressed with Google, because they protected the interest of their users. At least, it was seemingly so. Just as Chris pointed out that having the data doesn't necessarily makie Google a sinister agent of world domination, the fact that they didn't allow their users info to go to viacom in the public eye, doesn't prove their inocence. Personally, I like to keep in mind that many powerful and rich people are ruthless in their quest to gain riches and power.

On the other hand, I do not think that all people who are rich and and powerful are ruthless and evil, but let me present a concept to you. If 6 people were playing poker, and four of them were honest, and two of them were dishonest to the point that they were ruthless in thier attempt to win, because, of course, they could obtain a great deal of money to supply themselves, and their many women with the plealures of this world, then most likely, the ruthless cheaters would have a much greater chance of winning the spoils. Now in business, there are many honest people trying to find a good way to make good honest money. On the other hand, because of the population of the world, there are also a great many people who are filthy rich, and they got that way because they were willing to cheat, steal and bribe their way into fortunes. As a matter of fact, these ruthless people have a great advantage over honest people, because they are willing to cheat, steal, bribe and murder in order to succeed in their quest to obtain riches and power. They believe that they are better people by simple virtue of their success, and that they deserve their fortunes above all others. In many cases, these riches have been handed down, along with the ruthlessness for centuries. This is a known fact proven by the 15 or so bank families that preside over the riches of Britain alone, and also by the Rothchilds, who financed both sides of every major war since at least Napolean. Just as in the case of the poker game, they have the advantage, and in many cases they will come out on top as the winners. These are all facts of common knowledge. A perfect example is Enron. We have no idea what goes on among the multitudes on companies that exist in this country alone. Every couple of months we hear about a senator who has hundreds of thousands stacked up in their freezer, or congressmen who had houses built for them in Alaska as gratuity. Those are just the ones that get caught. I would suggest that those are just the one's that made someone mad. They are examples for the rest of them, just letting them know as long as they play along and keep thier mouths shut, they will be safe. I see the very same thing happening right here at La Sierra University, a 7th Day Adventist organization.

With that said, it would only be common sense to realize that whenever a winning idea comes along, like Google, these ruthless people will be right there at the front door ready to invest when they go public. To a ruthless, power hungry person, it would seem that weilding Google would be a powerful tool for whatever they want. I'm not saying that this has happened. Let me repeat that. I'm not saying that this has happened. So everyone take a deep breath, and notice what I am saying. What I am saying, is that I think it would be naive to think that it cannot happen. Needless to say, I would hate to burst anybody's little buble, and imply that Google is not their innocent little fairy Godmother, just waiting to make all thier dreams come true, but, personally, I prefer to be cognizant of reality.

>I also don't see what control you are speaking of... if the services they provide are working well enough to pull in the majority of the >people that is a good thing, they don't really have "control", that would imply they can force people to continue to use their services.  >That is like saying MySpace used to have control over X% of internet traffic because every 9th grader in the country logged in 14 >times a day.

Please refer to the previous email I sent to see what I meant about control.

I would have far more fear logging into a hotmail account than I would a Google account.

I would tend to agree with that, except that I don't send any sensitive information over the net, and if someone is tracking my traffic, I'm not really concerned for now. My plan is to learn to do things anonymous, and encrypt all my data. But that's just fun for me. Like I said, I like my privacy. That's just me. I'm not hidding in the corner, shivering like ren, in ren & stimpy (courtesy of Manny...thanks LOL) waiting for the Google police to come and get me.

Anyways, I appreciate your comments Peter, just wanted to explain my point of views, since it seems that so many are critical of them. Hope you don't mind the humor, cause that's all it was. None of it was pointed at you, or anyone else. Just trying to lighten up the situation. And anyone who cant take a joke, is a joke. So what can I say.

_________________________________________________________________
Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn “10 hidden secrets” from Jamie.
http://windowslive.com/connect/post/jamiethomson.spaces.live.com-Blog-cns!550F681DAD532637!5295.entry?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_domore_092008
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://socallinux.org/pipermail/linuxusers/attachments/20080908/21493492/attachment.htm>