[LinuxUsers] Code Reuse in Google Chrome

Mon Sep 8 07:49:43 UTC 2008

This is TOR is such a good idea.......

Chris...

On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 2:44 AM, Paul Saenz <downtoearthman at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 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.
> Learn Now
> _______________________________________________
> LinuxUsers mailing list
> LinuxUsers at socallinux.org
> http://socallinux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linuxusers
>
>

-- 
"As we open our newspapers or watch our television screens, we seem to
be continually assaulted by the fruits of Mankind's stupidity."
 -Roger Penrose