Let's start from the beginning. Google is an Internet giant that is now one of the largest and most powerful companies in the world. As part of its rather aggressive policy, it buys dozens of smaller companies every year and integrates their operations into its services.
At present the company has about 70 different services. From Google search engine, Gmail and YouTube to Feedburner, Google Analytics, Adwords and Adsense.
In order to optimize its products but also for reasons of maintaining usage statistics, when someone uses these services the company records whatever data you can imagine. And many that we can not.
When did he enter, what is his IP, what video did he see, how long did he stay in, to whom did he send e-mails and what do they write, when did he leave and return to a service, if he saw a video all or halfway through the 6th second to the 33rd, if while watching the video he also checked his e-mail. Which ads did he click on, what searches did he do on Google, which rss does he read and which clicks does he coke. The list is endless.
This data and countless (literally countless) others, of course the company does not record them in secret. They clearly state the terms of use of each service. So when you use Google services, you accept that your data is logged. It's part of Google's pay for the "free" services it provides.
After all, we must never forget that when we do not pay for a service we use, then we are not its customers but its product.
In other words, she uses us to persuade potential customers to give her ads or whatever.
But let's get back to the perpetual recording and storage of our data by Google. As we have already pointed out, this practice is neither illegal nor done in secret.
So what has changed now? How did Google differentiate its privacy policy to generate all these reactions?
Why did Internet users and data protection experts speak of a "key blow to privacy" when the Commission said that Google's new policy violated Community law?
Why the Personal Data Protection Authorities of the EU Member States asked the French Authority (CNIL) to consider the policy put in place by Google yesterday?
That is why European Commissioner Vivian Reading was quick to say: "We are deeply concerned that the new rules are not in line with European law. In addition, the provided transparency rules have not been implemented "and" The protection of personal data is a basic rule of the European Union. It is contained in its conditions. It is not optional, it is mandatory ".
What has changed?
In fact, not many things have changed. We have already mentioned that every Google service records every element that the human mind could capture. It's just that this data did not pass from one service to another.
So let's say we watch five videos on YouTube about viticulture. The company would show us some relevant ads, e.g. tools for growers, but only on YouTube.
Suppose we also at the same time exchanged snorkeling e-mail with a friend via Gmail. Google in this case would show us above our e-mail ads for spearfishing.
What it would not do was run ads for viticulture on Gmail and ads for spearfishing on YouTube at the same time.
In other words, so far each service has been "cut off" from the others. The data recorded by one could not be used by the other. That is, if someone clicked on ads in a particular category / topic on Adsense, the company, even though it recorded the information, could not use it to show relevant ads when it used its search engine.
Also, theoretically always (in other words for those who like delusions), these elements were not personalized. The company stored all this volume of information but not without linking it to a specific person. That is, he knew there was a YouTube user for whom he had a gigabyte of data about his preferences, movements, and activities, but he did not know who he was.
The thing that has changed now is that at first these elements are common to almost all Google services. For 60 out of about 70. There are no longer (up to) 60 bulky folders for each user but a colossal folder that will include everything the previous ones had and will cross them in addition.
At the same time, however, there is another change. The creation of Google+. This is the social network that the company has created in order to be an awe-inspiring rival of Facebook. Although it will take some time to compete, it is already doing quite well having surpassed 100 million users.
It is no coincidence that the company promotes and supports it as much as possible.
The point, however, is that to open a Google+ account you must, at least formally, state your true details. This means that Google automatically gains access not only to an inconceivable amount of data on our online activity in recent years but can now identify / link it to our true identity.
So do we have reason to be afraid?
If we had anything to comment on all this rhetoric, it is nothing but the hypocrisy of all those who protest.
In fact, absolutely nothing has changed. Google records everything as it has done since its inception. Now she just does it more systematically and with much more effective tools in her hands. But that does not change the substance at all.
Why bother if your whole life, even the slightest click, is in a database instead of ten or sixty? Why bother that now his identity is automatically known while before he would need anyone who was looking for him or really wanted to know something about him for an additional three minutes?
When you ask Facebook to share the information it records about you and then print it out, you will need more than 1000 condensed A4 pages. Why not bother there but bother about Google?
Believing that we have even a trace of privacy when we use the Internet is like hiding behind our finger. Even if the management or cross-checking of our personal information changes, nothing changes in the fact of their recording and their permanent storage.
The "file" that we exist as citizens of the Internet is continuous, systematic, complete and absolutely detailed. And Google is a very small aspect of it.
Just think of the following. Every three or so police arrest various hackers as those responsible for attacks on ministries or other targets.
If so much information is recorded about them so that they can be apprehended while they are supposed to be experts and take every precautionary measure, how much more will be recorded for us?
So isn't it naive and highly hypocritical to protest Google's new privacy policy?
Source: proho.gr