| ▲ | neilv 2 hours ago | |||||||
That questionable-sounding stunt by the media outlet wasn't comparable: Google/Alphabet knows much more about individuals than addresses, salary, and political donations. Google/Alphabet knows quite a lot about your sentiments, what information you've seen, your relationships, who can get to you, who you can get to, your hopes and fears, your economic situation, your health conditions, assorted kompromat, your movements, etc. Schmidt is actually from OG Internet circles where many people were aware of privacy issues, and who were vigilant against incursions. But perhaps he had a different philosophical position. Or perhaps it was his job to downplay the risks. Or perhaps he was going to have enough money and power that he wasn't personally threatened by private info that would threaten the less-wealthy. We might learn this year, how well Google/Alphabet protects this treasure trove of surveillance state data, when that matters most. | ||||||||
| ▲ | ciupicri an hour ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
OG = Original Gangster? | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | mindslight 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
> Schmidt is actually from OG Internet circles where many people were aware of privacy issues, and who were vigilant against incursions. > But perhaps he had a different philosophical position. Or perhaps it was his job to downplay the risks I feel that as the consumer surveillance industry took off, everyone from those OG Internet circles was presented with a choice - stick with the individualist hacker spirit, or turncoat and build systems of corporate control. The people who chose power ended up incredibly rich, while the people who chose freedom got to watch the world burn while saying I told you so. (There were also a lot of fence sitters in the middle who chose power but assuaged their own egos with slogans like "Don't be evil" and whatnot) | ||||||||
| ||||||||