Google defies the justice dept

[rwise]

Re: Google defies the justice dept

I for one (and I now many others that feel the same) am on googles side, I hopr they continue to hold private things private! What you or I look for on a seerch engine is only the business of the person looking, wheather it's for porn or a boat part doesn't mater!<br /><br />what JB said, you go google!

 

[technostingray]

Re: Google defies the justice dept

Anybody here ever heard of a guy named Phil Ochs?

 

[SwampNut]

Re: Google defies the justice dept

This is all well and good, but this is pure hypocrisy. This same company censors data in China and has provided information to Chinese officials on dissident activity.

The difference is that they are obeying the current law in China. Right or wrong from your perspective, it is the law.<br /><br />The law in the US says that we have a right to be free from being spied on by our own government. Google is following the law, unlike our own government.

 

[bootle]

Re: Google defies the justice dept

Originally posted by technoradomlyselected:<br /> Anybody here ever heard of a guy named Phil Ochs?

Nope, I've never heard of him, who is he and how is he related to this topic?

 

[technostingray]

Re: Google defies the justice dept

Originally posted by Darth D Invader:<br />

Originally posted by technoradomlyselected:<br /> Anybody here ever heard of a guy named Phil Ochs?

Nope, I've never heard of him, who is he and how is he related to this topic?

Am I being chastised for speaking freely? If you knew Phil Ochs you wouldn't ask what he has to do with the topic.<br />I can't believe what I am reading here. Information is what the internet is all about. This may sound funny, but anything I do on the inernet that is isn't specifically encrypted I regard as public domain. I have been accused of having my head in the sand, well maybe so but no one can pull the wool over my eyes. Things like addmission of guilt or nefarious activity can be monitored at will by any one with access to the internet. Just plug your own name into any search engine and see what it pulls up. These are things that are not hidden. Webcrawlers and visitor data functions are shared on a large net work. On the internet the criminals are smarter than the cops, or haven't you checked your junk mail lately.<br />Imposter, if you would like a short course on what I learned from Phil Ochs, please contact me off line. You know the place....

 

[bootle]

Re: Google defies the justice dept

It is my contention that in simplicity there remains an elegance not lost in the sophisticated epoch that envelops our environment.<br />I assure you my dear sir, that my answer and question posed to you were indeed unambigouous and sincere, a charlatan i am most certainly not.

 

[technostingray]

Re: Google defies the justice dept

Originally posted by Darth D Invader:<br /> It is my contention that in simplicity there remains an elegance not lost in the sophisticated epoch that envelops our environment.<br />I assure you my dear sir, that my answer and question posed to you were indeed unambigouous and sincere, a charlatan i am most certainly not.

And with equal sincerity may I say that I appreciate your honoring my request that to know my take on Phil Ochs you please contact me off line. Indeed what?

 

[JB]

Re: Google defies the justice dept

Google's search engine technology is proprietary, private and protected by the Constitution. To reveal what the Fed's are asking for would reveal company secrets. It would also reveal personal data.<br /><br />Techno. . . . . If what you do on the internet is in the public domain, why does federal law require privacy statements from service providers, and what privacy do they guarantee?

 

[technostingray]

Re: Google defies the justice dept

Originally posted by JB:<br /> Techno. . . . . If what you do on the internet is in the public domain, why does federal law require privacy statements from service providers, and what privacy do they guarantee?

I don't know, why do they require it? Must have something to do with covering their lower posterior. Have a cookie?

 

[JRJ]

Re: Google defies the justice dept

Originally posted by technoradomlyselected:<br />

Originally posted by Darth D Invader:<br />

Originally posted by technoradomlyselected:<br /> Anybody here ever heard of a guy named Phil Ochs?

Nope, I've never heard of him, who is he and how is he related to this topic?

Am I being chastised for speaking freely? If you knew Phil Ochs you wouldn't ask what he has to do with the topic.<br />I can't believe what I am reading here. Information is what the internet is all about. This may sound funny, but anything I do on the inernet that is isn't specifically encrypted I regard as public domain. I have been accused of having my head in the sand, well maybe so but no one can pull the wool over my eyes. Things like addmission of guilt or nefarious activity can be monitored at will by any one with access to the internet. Just plug your own name into any search engine and see what it pulls up. These are things that are not hidden. Webcrawlers and visitor data functions are shared on a large net work. On the internet the criminals are smarter than the cops, or haven't you checked your junk mail lately.<br />Imposter, if you would like a short course on what I learned from Phil Ochs, please contact me off line. You know the place....

For example: Phil Ochs singer of humorus and serious political songs.<br />Born El Paso Texas 12/19/40 died 4/9/76.

 

[rolmops]

Re: Google defies the justice dept

If my memory serves me well,Phil Ochs was a protest folkie.I still have a few of his LPs in the loft.I think he commited suicide,not sure though.

 

[18rabbit]

Re: Google defies the justice dept

Originally posted by tommays:<br /> well the goverment is looking into search terms used to FIND CHILD PORN what they want are the terms and Methods people are useing to find it NOT THE PEOPLE

Part of the problem with that is the mistaken presumption that all child porn is illegal. It is not. Any child porn created prior to 197-something(?) is protected by the first amendment, and can still be reproduced and distributed. I know, weird, but that’s the best the idiots in power could come up with.

 

[technostingray]

Re: Google defies the justice dept

Originally posted by JB:<br /> Techno. . . . . If what you do on the internet is in the public domain, why does federal law require privacy statements from service providers, and what privacy do they guarantee?

Originally posted by 18R:<br />

Originally posted by tommays:<br /> well the goverment is looking into search terms used to FIND CHILD PORN what they want are the terms and Methods people are useing to find it NOT THE PEOPLE

Part of the problem with that is the mistaken presumption that all child porn is illegal. It is not. Any child porn created prior to 197-something(?) is protected by the first amendment, and can still be reproduced and distributed. I know, weird, but that’s the best the idiots in power could come up with.

Originally posted by JB:<br /> I am not aware of any rights to privacy guaranteed by the Constitutions of China, Russia or Iran.<br /><br />What Google does about them is completely irrelevant. What they do with information about our Googling here is relevant.<br /><br />Interesting how crowing about freedom and liberty turns to a croak when it involves freedom to do something you disapprove of.<br /><br />Again: You go, Google.

Originally posted by 18R:<br /> Be aware that ALL of your internet surfacing and communications are being monitored if they are going thru the academy's computers. Prob not a problem, but just in case there is anything personal that you wanted to keep personal...<br /><br />Have a friend that did her training at Quantico (FBI). She told me what gets monitored and how. It was an eye opener, changed the way I use my cell phone, and internet.

Incidently, I did not say that everything I do is public domain, anything that is not encrypted. And to be frank, even the encrypted data I consider to be at risk and and must rely on the integrity of the key operators.