Don't use google

[pat]

Sure many of you know about this site, but I didn't ,till a friend mentioned it to me.
There is great concern about google monitoring peoples visits of certain sites and info is being logged.God bless big brother!!!!
If you are concerned about your privacy try using Ixquick Web Search
It's private doesn't log anything about you etc.They have an info video on the page which actually led on to another interesting link to another video called Fall of the Republic.
The latest trick here in Free England is..police are going to use drones 20,000 feet in sky
ostensibly to catch tractor thieves,road rage motorists and fly tippers.They cost 3million quid each.They have been used in Afghanistan..but they didn't find Bin Laden...so if anyone here BELIEVES they are for catching tractor thieves..whatever you are taking please send me some.Also a pair of rose tinted glasses wouldn't go amiss too.

[tcmgpt13]

Yes, 1984 has truly arrived in modern life. Scary reading.

New York Times article
February 5, 2010
Google Asks Spy Agency for Help With Inquiry Into Cyberattacks

By JOHN MARKOFF
SAN FRANCISCO — Google has turned to the National Security Agency for technical assistance to learn more about the computer network attackers who breached the company’s cybersecurity defenses last year, a person with direct knowledge of the agreement said Thursday.
The collaboration between Google, the world’s largest search engine company, and the federal agency in charge of global electronic surveillance raises both civil liberties issues and new questions about how much Google knew about the electronic thefts it experienced when it stated last month that it might end its business operations in China, where it said the attacks originated. The agreement was first reported on Wednesday evening by The Washington Post.
By turning to the N.S.A., which has no statutory authority to investigate domestic criminal acts, instead of the Department of Homeland Security, which does have such authority, Google is clearly seeking to avoid having its search engine, e-mail and other Web services regulated as part of the nation’s “critical infrastructure.”
The United States government has become increasingly concerned about the computer risks confronting energy and water distribution systems and financial and communications networks. Systems designated as critical infrastructure are increasingly being held to tighter regulatory standards.
On Jan. 12, Google announced a “new approach to China,” stating that the attacks were “highly sophisticated” and came from China. At the time, it gave few details about the attacks other than to say that a theft of its intellectual property had occurred and that a primary goal of the attackers had been to gain access to the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists.
In reaching out to the N.S.A., which has extensive abilities to monitor global Internet traffic, the company may have been hoping to gain more certainty about the identity of the attackers. A number of computer security consultants who worked with other companies that experienced attacks similar to those of Google have stated that the surveillance system was controlled from a series of compromised server computers based in Taiwan. It is not clear how Google determined that the attacks originated in China.
A Google spokeswoman said the company was declining to comment on the case beyond what it published last month. An N.S.A. spokeswoman said, “N.S.A. is not able to comment on specific relationships we may or may not have with U.S. companies,” but added, the agency worked with “a broad range of commercial partners” to ensure security of information systems.
The agency’s responsibility to secure the government’s computer networks almost certainly was another reason Google turned to it, said a former federal computer security specialist.
“This is the other side of N.S.A. — this is the security service that does defensive measures,” said the specialist, James A. Lewis, a director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “It’s not unusual for people to go to N.S.A. and say ‘please take a look at my code.’ ”
The agreement will not permit the agency to have access to information belonging to Google users, but it still reopens long-standing questions about the role of the agency.
“Google and N.S.A. are entering into a secret agreement that could impact the privacy of millions of users of Google’s products and services around the world,” said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a Washington-based policy group. On Thursday, the organization filed a lawsuit against the N.S.A., calling for the release of information about the agency’s role as it was set out in National Security Presidential Directive 54/Homeland Security Presidential Directive 23 , a classified 2008 order issued by President George W. Bush dealing with cybersecurity and surveillance.
Concerns about the nation’s cybersecurity have greatly increased in the past two years. On Tuesday, Dennis C. Blair, the director of national intelligence, began his annual threat testimony before Congress by saying that the threat of a crippling attack on telecommunications and other computer networks was growing, as an increasingly sophisticated group of enemies had “severely threatened” the sometimes fragile systems behind the country’s information infrastructure.
“Malicious cyberactivity is occurring on an unprecedented scale with extraordinary sophistication,” he told the committee.
The relationship that the N.S.A. has struck with Google is known as a cooperative research and development agreement, according to a person briefed on the relationship. These were created as part of the Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986 and are essentially a written agreement between a private company and a government agency to work together on a specific project. They are intended to help accelerate the commercialization of government-developed technology.
In addition to the N.S.A., Google has been working with the F.B.I. on the attack inquiry, but the bureau has so far declined to comment publicly or to share information about the intrusions with Congress.

Google Asks N.S.A. to Investigate Cyberattacks - NYTimes.com

[Desperate4aCure]

i agree google is horrible

[Keavy]

Yeah, but no more horrible than any of the rest.

Microsoft and Yahoo just joined forces on search and ads to try to compete with Google.

Google drives the lion's share of clicks to sites. I spend about 200 bucks a week on search advertising. 180 of that is to google. With the same keywords, same site, same ad...... google produces way more hits. Probably 60% of all my total hits.

I'm not saying they aren't douches of the highest order, just that they are a necessary evil to get traffic to your site.

Yahoo will show my ad for stuff that isn't even relevant, or for keywords that aren't on my list.

You can use Firefox and use the browse privately feature, clear your cookies and temp files after a session. They can't track squat without a cookie.

[fracty]

I think worse than Google are the "club cards," AKA tracking cards that monitor everything you do.

YEARS back in the marketing journals it used to be a big issue - trying to figure out how to get ppl to give up their privacy, both on the Internet and live. Well, they finally made up these FAKE discounts via the cards.

First you do NOT get a discount. In fact, every time a store implements the tracking cards you end up paying more. They just raise the prices and then add a fake discount, and they raise prices on various other products. Stores mgmnt know that you can give a discount (or fake one) on some things, but charge more on things they know from experience most ppl buy. But in the case of the tracking cards you actually pay more.

This would not be so bad if it ended here, but from the start the plan has been to find a way into your homes and personal life to know everything about you. this is worth TRILLIONS of dollars to advertisers and to politicians. They will save and make so much money have such a targeted, pre-qualified demographic. No more wasted ads.

The problem is eventually they will tailor you news and ads so you only hear partial info in political cases. As far as shopping, of course they are using it to see how they can squeeze every last penny out of you.

I have met one of the Chief Officers at a company who a few years back sold their tracking technology to Ralph's Grocery chain. It's interesting the general public doesn't know about it. And I don't know how much it is operative at this point, but it has been so long ago I assume it is fully operational, or at least is in test markets.

The technology uses one or more centrally located devices that track your entire movement through the store and what you put in your cart, what you stop to view, what you end up buying and not buying, who you are on your ahem... club TRACKING card, and patterns about how you move through the store. Things like that can help them find ways to get you to buy more.

Every time anyone uses a tracking card not only does it desensitize that person, but everyone else watching. That is how they are implementing these things. Gradually desensitizing. The goal is for you to be tracked in your home via smart technology.

It might seem far out, but the technology is already being used in places. If you want to protect yourselves, but more importantly your children tell the stores you will not use those TRACKING cards. Call the management. Tell them you are boycotting until the tracking cards are gone.

I met one of the senior management (executive, not store management - the lower levels typically have no marketing knowledge) in a Ralph's store and I politely confronted him about the inaccurate info tehy give consumers (saying your info is private-IT'S NOT, and not telling the true intentions, and saying it is a discount when it is not. ) At first he kept denying it. Finally he burst out laughing as I kept presenting marketing industry facts to him and he admitted, "OK, you are right. But the average consumer doesn't know that."

It was a big joke for him. But stay away from those cards.