homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam

The Geek Culture Forums


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Geek Culture Forums   » All about the comics!   » The Joy of Tech   » Google

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Google
Callipygous
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2071

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 11, 2010 03:54      Profile for Callipygous     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Nice comment Google vs net neutrality, but is there actually a more serious problem?

First Google made much the best search engine, then with their contextual advertising, they opened a great gushing money well, which as a byproduct has kept most of the Internet free at the point of consumption. In exchange for this "free" Internet, we have surrendered a lot of our privacy. Does this bother you, particularly when you hear the stories about the Google Earth vans, that "accidentally" gathered a lot of info from wireless networks as they passed by? I know that on there are a lot of people here who are very security conscious when it comes to Wi-Fi networks, not using Facebook, but I guess we just could not get by without Google, and nobody wants to pay for their favourite sites, so this issue is not much debated.

--------------------
"Knowledge is Power. France is Bacon" - Milton

Posts: 2922 | From: Brighton - UK | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Ashitaka

SuperFan!
Member # 4924

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 11, 2010 04:29      Profile for Ashitaka     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I am ok with the status quo. If you are very security concious, is it possible to prevent information on you from being gathered. But 99.9% of internet users have not done so. But since people actually do have the Option of not releasing personal data, even if it is difficult,( PGP, use a hard wired router, don't use google) I do not support change at the moment.

I simply want the option not to release my data. in regards to net neutrality , I simply want the option to surf the non corporate internet, even though my internet experience would probably be greatly enhanced if net neutrality was overturned as 90% of my internet surfing is porbably the big corporate entities that would probably pay for teh faster connection to its customers.

--------------------
"If they're not gonna make a distinction between Muslims and violent extremists, then why should I take the time to distinguish between decent, fearful white people and racists?"

-Assif Mandvi

Posts: 3089 | From: Switzerland | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
TheMoMan
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1659

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 11, 2010 04:48      Profile for TheMoMan         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
____ For those truly paranoid, how much do the Credit-card, Cell-phone, and Google know about us along with the Credit reporting agencies? Just to come up with a Credit Score. Now throw in ISPs and our browsing habits, have I painted a picture yet?

____ This guy called the "Flint Slasher" will probably be caught by tracking Credit-cards, Cell-phones. If not tripped up by the data, it will play at trial.

____ Bonny and Clyde out on the lam in Yellowstone will phone home with a toss phone, that will give away their location.

--------------------
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.


Benjamin Franklin,

Posts: 5836 | From: Just South of the Huron National Forest, in the water shed of the Rifle River | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
quantumfluff
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 450

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted August 11, 2010 18:10      Profile for quantumfluff     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Let's first separate the issues or privacy and net neutrality. They are two different things entirely.

With regards to privacy, all businesses (web and brick & morter) collect data about you use it to varying degrees to market to you. There are related spectrums of how much data can be collected and how it can be used. Each sovereign nation designs it's consumer protections as it sees fit, and there are consumer protection laws and agencies to enforce those philosophies. In the US, we trust companies by not the government. In the UK, you trust the government but not companies. Both opinions are wrong.

The neutrality debate is about something totally different and almost everyone gets the fundamentals wrong. Net neutrality does NOT mean that ISP cannot throttle your speed at all. The important concept is that they cannot throttle your speed based on the *content* of your bits.

For example, it is reasonable for a network provider to change your available bandwidth based on aggregate demand at the time of day and/or your total monthly usage. It is unacceptable to look into your packets, decide you were downloading music from a non-partner and slow that down.

An even better example (and I can't understand why US senators can't seem to get this) is that it would be unacceptable for my (political party slanted) ISP to slow down or block traffic to web sites that it doesn't like. When Rupert Murdoch gets control of a cable franchise, we want consumer protections against them blocking "the wrong opinions.".

With that in mind, you can evaluate the Google-Verizon policy proposal. (Which is exactly that - a policy PROPOSAL they hope others will follow, not a business arrangement). What it does is let *wireless* carriers manage bandwidth however they want but require *wired* providers to play by the neutrality rule. There is a provision for wired providers to sell special access to particular content, but that has to be differentiated from basic offerings. What this means is that the basic service cannot block any particular web site, but *if you pay more* you can get fast access to MySpecialInterest.com. It requires the differential to be explicit.

Now step back and think what the landscape is rapidly approaching - wired == TV and wireless == entertainment while I am on the subway. Wired matters for news delivery. Wireless does not.

Overall, this is a huge consumer win. The FCC has been caving like crazy to demands from content providers. There was no eminent victory for the consumer advocacy groups on the horizon. Getting non-censorship on the wired side (and that includes fixed-wireless) is worthy first stake in the ground.

Posts: 2901 | From: 5 to 15 meters above sea level | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Callipygous
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2071

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 11, 2010 19:45      Profile for Callipygous     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That's an interesting spin on it QF, however I'm not sure that I buy the wired is for serious stuff, wireless is for fluff argument, because we don't know how things will develop in the future, and even now people use their wireless devices for more than entertainment. I'm also not sure how you can paint this as a win for consumers, because as far as I can see, rather than a stake in the ground, the wireless deal could at some future date spread to the wired Internet. Ultimately the distinction between the two is false, it's just one Internet, however you access it, and either Google supports net neutrality or it does not. Since it does not there should be a proper legal framework with teeth, to ensure that this important principal is not eroded.

--------------------
"Knowledge is Power. France is Bacon" - Milton

Posts: 2922 | From: Brighton - UK | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
TheMoMan
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1659

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 12, 2010 04:22      Profile for TheMoMan         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
____ I live out in the boonies, you know where your cell phone doesn't work. We do not have cable for TV/ISP. Wireless is the hope for us, but if they are not held to the same rules as wired why bother.

http://www.infoworld.com/d/the-industry-standard/when-it-comes-wireless-if-google-wins-you-lose-635?page=0,0

http://policy-management.tmcnet.com/topics/policy-management/articles/95004-policy-management-net-neutrality-you-say-regulations.htm

____ Say that the grand kids are here and need to complete a home work ass. Would throttling slow them down?

____ Right now there is a wireless provider (WiMAX) however his rates make the Sat companies seem cheap. On some days my iDen phone at 19K as a modem makes the dial-up ashamed. Wireless may be fluff in some places, however here it may be the best shot at being connected.

____ However upon further research It appears that Google & Verizon what to dump wired improvements, now that to me is unfair, even if I benifited from their actions.

--------------------
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.


Benjamin Franklin,

Posts: 5836 | From: Just South of the Huron National Forest, in the water shed of the Rifle River | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
quantumfluff
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 450

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted August 12, 2010 06:30      Profile for quantumfluff     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
They will have to clarify the distinction between fixed wireless (WiMax to your home) and mobile (cell phone) wireless. For former provides internet connectivity for many people. It must play by the same rules as wired.

Personally, I would like to see more people connect that way, as I think most municipalities should own their own connectivity and provide it to residents. Hauling bits should be identical to supplying water, hauling garbage and paving roads. It's just part of infrastructure. Let's cut the telephone and cable companies right out of the equation.

Posts: 2901 | From: 5 to 15 meters above sea level | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
GrumpySteen

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan
Member # 170

Icon 1 posted August 12, 2010 07:04      Profile for GrumpySteen     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Cheer up. Wireless and wired are treated exactly the same way, just as you want them to be.

The current situation is that ISPs can throttle and block any traffic they want to regardless of whether it's going over their wired or wireless network. Exactly the same. It's completely legal and there's nothing you or anyone else can do about it except switch ISPs (and that's not a real option in much of the country).

The only way the situation will change is if regulations are put in place. Regulation will only happen if enough of these companies start being evil about it. What Verizon and Google are proposing isn't anywhere near evil enough, but I'm confident that some company will eventually go there.

--------------------
Worst. Celibate. Ever.

Posts: 6364 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
TheMoMan
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1659

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 12, 2010 07:19      Profile for TheMoMan         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
____ So in your mind it is OK. For a city to go into competition with an established business, how do you plan to pay for the service, taxes, the ISP just laid off its workers, now they are drawing unemployment.

____ Research Manassess Va and their failed attempt at broadband over power/lines. The City finally pulled the plug on that money pit.

____ Private industry has the money, and the expertise to cover or blanket the country, they just do not have much motivation to do so. Stock Holders.

--------------------
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.


Benjamin Franklin,

Posts: 5836 | From: Just South of the Huron National Forest, in the water shed of the Rifle River | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
GrumpySteen

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan
Member # 170

Icon 1 posted August 12, 2010 07:22      Profile for GrumpySteen     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I cannot imagine any way in which my post could be construed as supporting the status quo. To make it perfectly clear, I said we're fucked until there are actual regulations put in place.

I trust corporations to do what's profitable, not what's right.

--------------------
Worst. Celibate. Ever.

Posts: 6364 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
TheMoMan
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1659

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 12, 2010 08:52      Profile for TheMoMan         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
____ Sorry Grumpy, I was taking a shot at QuantumFluff, about the cities providing services. Those of us that do not live in cities are left out?

____ We have our own well.

____ We have to buy our own Propane, it is not pumped here.

____ We pay for our own trash removal.

____ We plow our own road.


____ Cost to deliver content, or how far should the signal travel. As the crow flies we are about seven miles from a small town, it even has a zip code of its own. However there is a river, phone lines cross rivers at bridges for roads, guess what there only three crossing that might be suitable. One that is the most direct, now the mileage count is up to nine miles. WiFi has trouble crossing rivers also, UHF is affected by vegitation lots of pine trees along the river. Going the other way it is greater distances. Then there is the small number of people to be served by the huge cost to bring the signal here. The Section (one square mile) we live in has a total of one dozen houses, not a lot of bang for cost.

--------------------
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.


Benjamin Franklin,

Posts: 5836 | From: Just South of the Huron National Forest, in the water shed of the Rifle River | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Callipygous
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2071

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 18, 2010 05:46      Profile for Callipygous     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Today's JOT references some of the nuttier things in Eric Schmidt's WSJ interview, and since it makes a good tabloid headline, it has also been the focus of most of the media attention, but it would be a shame if the more serious issues disappeared behind his comedy turn. I think he is surprisingly frank, though he raises issues rather than propose any answers.

Do you think we are drifting into an Orwellian future? Google, unlike Facebook is for the moment a relatively benign Big Brother, but knowledge is power, and do you really think that they are not, and will not, be slowly corrupted by it, and that it will not attract the attention of other less benign entities? If we had a time machine and could go back 10 years to unpick this Faustian pact, would you be still be willing to exchange so much personal information for free (as in beer) access to your favourite web sites? Lastly since we do not have such technology, are there any new ideas about what we can do, individually and collectively, to protect our online privacy, and oversee how this data is used? I'm not sure that trust in the essential goodness of those involved is enough.

--------------------
"Knowledge is Power. France is Bacon" - Milton

Posts: 2922 | From: Brighton - UK | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
TheMoMan
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1659

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 18, 2010 06:09      Profile for TheMoMan         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
____ This unHoly alliance, scares the poop out of me. First the company with the most data about all of us agrees with a telco that has treated many sub-scribers as if they don't count. These two sleeping in the same bed, this can not be good for the consumer.

--------------------
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.


Benjamin Franklin,

Posts: 5836 | From: Just South of the Huron National Forest, in the water shed of the Rifle River | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
GrumpySteen

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan
Member # 170

Icon 1 posted August 18, 2010 09:02      Profile for GrumpySteen     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Callipygous wrote:
Do you think we are drifting into an Orwellian future?

No. We're drifting into a very different future than what Orwell envisioned. Individuals and small groups have more and more ability to circumvent authority. The powers that be are trying to respond, but the reality is that a centralized authority can't cope with individuals. To retain control, authority must be distributed and Big Brother only works in a dictatorship where one person's vision rules everything.

We are, however, moving toward a society where what we do in public is documented, but only stupid people think that they have a right to privacy when they're in public. The reality is, and always has been, that anything you say or do in public can come back to haunt you. The only difference is that it's harder to deny a photo or movie than it is to deny gossip and the information is now much more widely available than any word-of-mouth story ever was.

We as a society are eventually going to have to face who we are and stop being such hypocrites. The article mentioned Stacy Snyder, who lost her career as a teacher because of a photo of her drinking labeled "drunken pirate." The administrators who refused her teaching certificate have almost certainly gotten drunk at some point in their life, but that didn't stop them from sanctimoniously condemning Ms. Snyder.

It's too late to put the genie back in the bottle, of course, but there may still be a bright, shiny future ahead. Eventually all the old hypocrites will die, leaving a generation who all had their juvenile stupidity documented by friends with cellphone cameras. They'll understand that the behavior their parents found were so offensive is commonplace and think it was incredibly dumb that anyone ever lost their job or was ostracized for such silliness.

(but it should also be said that, as they pat themselves on the back and congratulate themselves on how awesomely open-minded they are, they'll also be making the next generation's life hell over something equally stupid... such is life)

--------------------
Worst. Celibate. Ever.

Posts: 6364 | From: Tennessee | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged
TheMoMan
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1659

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 18, 2010 10:05      Profile for TheMoMan         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
____ Grumpy I have to agree with much of what you say, Big Brother, yes but not the government, all of us. [Smile]

____ Until enough customers holler about their Cell Phones not working where they vacation, the Cell providers will not plant new towers. [Mad]

____ Broadband over power lines was that ever a fiasco, slow too expensive, to easily jammed, too much interference to licensed spectrum users. [Big Grin]

____ If broadband over power lines was up in the super HF bands 30Ghz and up, the speed would be up and the interference would be lower. Then maybe more people would sign on. Again this is still ruled by will people pay. [weep]

--------------------
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.


Benjamin Franklin,

Posts: 5836 | From: Just South of the Huron National Forest, in the water shed of the Rifle River | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rhonwyyn

Solid Gold SuperFan!
Member # 2854

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 18, 2010 17:05      Profile for Rhonwyyn   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GrumpySteen:
The article mentioned Stacy Snyder, who lost her career as a teacher because of a photo of her drinking labeled "drunken pirate." The administrators who refused her teaching certificate have almost certainly gotten drunk at some point in their life, but that didn't stop them from sanctimoniously condemning Ms. Snyder.

That happened at my local university. Part of the problem was that there were underage people at the party. The other was that the university's mascot is Scully the Pirate - they're the Millersville Marauders after all.

--------------------
Change the way you SEE, not the way you LOOK!

Posts: 3849 | From: Lancaster, PA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Callipygous
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 2071

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 20, 2010 16:21      Profile for Callipygous     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Gruber on Schmidt and that WSJ interview But maybe I'm becoming a tin foil hat man, these things don't appear to bother anyone else here much.

--------------------
"Knowledge is Power. France is Bacon" - Milton

Posts: 2922 | From: Brighton - UK | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
TheMoMan
BlabberMouth, a Blabber Odyssey
Member # 1659

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted August 20, 2010 18:00      Profile for TheMoMan         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
____ Callipygous [Wink] It has got to be frame of reference, Things that scare the POOP out of me, and no one here seems to care, things that I have battled with and its a big deal to some here.

____ The forest fires in Russia scare me, I do not want to look out at snow this winter that glows in the dark or melts itself.

____ I do not use Facebook so most of that talk is just noise.

____ Google knows too much about us, and so do our ISP's I tried their browser did not use very long and went back to FireFox.

--------------------
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.


Benjamin Franklin,

Posts: 5836 | From: Just South of the Huron National Forest, in the water shed of the Rifle River | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
garlicguy

Member # 3166

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted August 23, 2010 11:20      Profile for garlicguy   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We have a generous supply of tin-foil available.

Just send us your credit card, driver's license and social security info via Facebook, and we'll ship same day without storing or sharing any of your information. We promise!

Brought to you by your fiends at whichever government agency you fear least.

(oops! I seemed to have dropped an 'r' somewhere.)

--------------------
I don't know what I was thinking... it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posts: 3752 | From: Pluto, no matter what you call it, is still my home. | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged


All times are Eastern Time  
Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | Geek Culture Home Page

© 2015 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0



homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam