<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is Google Soft On Privacy?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.vanseodesign.com/google/is-google-soft-on-privacy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/google/is-google-soft-on-privacy/</link>
	<description>Helping you build search engine friendly websites</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 17:29:40 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Pandia Gheorghe</title>
		<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/google/is-google-soft-on-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-19297</link>
		<dc:creator>Pandia Gheorghe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 23:49:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/uncategorized/is-google-soft-on-privacy/#comment-19297</guid>
		<description>I also think that Google cannot be called &quot;Big Brother&quot;. The amount of data it goes through make it physically impossible for any human to observe, note or even formulate some theory or reports on us based on the data that we all put through it.

I mean, people who are really afraid of exposing their privacy to Google, they have alternatives!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I also think that Google cannot be called &#8220;Big Brother&#8221;. The amount of data it goes through make it physically impossible for any human to observe, note or even formulate some theory or reports on us based on the data that we all put through it.</p>
<p>I mean, people who are really afraid of exposing their privacy to Google, they have alternatives!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: correlate &#38;#187; There&#38;#8217;s Contextual, And There&#38;#8217;s Exact</title>
		<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/google/is-google-soft-on-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-813</link>
		<dc:creator>correlate &#38;#187; There&#38;#8217;s Contextual, And There&#38;#8217;s Exact</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jul 2007 20:29:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/uncategorized/is-google-soft-on-privacy/#comment-813</guid>
		<description>[...] Additional Reading: For anyone interested in the topic of privacy and Google, Steven Bradley has a very comprehensive post, Is Google Soft on Privacy, which is full of links to additional reading on the topic. Another great read is by Danny Sullivan which intelligently questions some of the criticism. And it is always interesting to get the perspective of Google&#8217;s own, Matt Cutts, who has a post on the topic.   Filed under: Matt Cutts, Google Gmail, Danny Sullivan, privacy, personalization, Google by &#8212; Lou Paglia @ 10:39 pm [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Additional Reading: For anyone interested in the topic of privacy and Google, Steven Bradley has a very comprehensive post, Is Google Soft on Privacy, which is full of links to additional reading on the topic. Another great read is by Danny Sullivan which intelligently questions some of the criticism. And it is always interesting to get the perspective of Google&#38;#8217;s own, Matt Cutts, who has a post on the topic.   Filed under: Matt Cutts, Google Gmail, Danny Sullivan, privacy, personalization, Google by &#38;#8212; Lou Paglia @ 10:39 pm [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Bradley</title>
		<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/google/is-google-soft-on-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-812</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Bradley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jun 2007 05:23:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/uncategorized/is-google-soft-on-privacy/#comment-812</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s true. It&#039;s been quite a number of years since I read 1984, but it was more than just the watching. The thing is that&#039;s how it starts. I think the fears people have is less to do with some of the data collection that&#039;s going on now and rather what might happen in the future.

Imagine it was the government who had access to all the data. Would you feel the same?

Another issue is the idea of someone else gaining access to the data. Every week you read about some other company losing credit card numbers and social security numbers. Or the story is how someone managed to break into a computer database and steal the info. And technology has made it easier to connect all the data points so you might get someone&#039;s address in one place and their credit card details in another.

I think Google gets a bum rap on this simply because of their market share and because they do have access to more data due to that market share. But still they were the only search engine not to hand over user queries to the government and they are the only company anonymizing their data even if it&#039;s not as soon as we&#039;d like.

Google isn&#039;t Mother Theresa like you say, but I&#039;d sooner trust them over Microsoft.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s true. It&#8217;s been quite a number of years since I read 1984, but it was more than just the watching. The thing is that&#8217;s how it starts. I think the fears people have is less to do with some of the data collection that&#8217;s going on now and rather what might happen in the future.</p>
<p>Imagine it was the government who had access to all the data. Would you feel the same?</p>
<p>Another issue is the idea of someone else gaining access to the data. Every week you read about some other company losing credit card numbers and social security numbers. Or the story is how someone managed to break into a computer database and steal the info. And technology has made it easier to connect all the data points so you might get someone&#8217;s address in one place and their credit card details in another.</p>
<p>I think Google gets a bum rap on this simply because of their market share and because they do have access to more data due to that market share. But still they were the only search engine not to hand over user queries to the government and they are the only company anonymizing their data even if it&#8217;s not as soon as we&#8217;d like.</p>
<p>Google isn&#8217;t Mother Theresa like you say, but I&#8217;d sooner trust them over Microsoft.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Forrest</title>
		<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/google/is-google-soft-on-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-811</link>
		<dc:creator>Forrest</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Jun 2007 06:44:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/uncategorized/is-google-soft-on-privacy/#comment-811</guid>
		<description>&quot;Wake-up Google, the World Thinks You’re Big Brother!&quot; is maybe a little over the top?  Having read 1984, I really don&#039;t expect Google to kidnap and torture me into submission.  If watching was all Big Brother did, I don&#039;t think anyone would have minded nearly as much.

I&#039;d love to see web sites, grocery stores, and phone companies to do more to protect our privacy.  But Google was the only search engine to go to court refusing to hand over our search data.  Most phone companies gave over their call records without being compelled to do so.

Google isn&#039;t Mother Theresa here, but it&#039;s not Saddam Hussein, either.  It seems like a lot of bandwagon hysteria.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Wake-up Google, the World Thinks You’re Big Brother!&#8221; is maybe a little over the top?  Having read 1984, I really don&#8217;t expect Google to kidnap and torture me into submission.  If watching was all Big Brother did, I don&#8217;t think anyone would have minded nearly as much.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d love to see web sites, grocery stores, and phone companies to do more to protect our privacy.  But Google was the only search engine to go to court refusing to hand over our search data.  Most phone companies gave over their call records without being compelled to do so.</p>
<p>Google isn&#8217;t Mother Theresa here, but it&#8217;s not Saddam Hussein, either.  It seems like a lot of bandwagon hysteria.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: There&#38;#8217;s Contextual, And There&#38;#8217;s Exact &#38;laquo; correlate</title>
		<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/google/is-google-soft-on-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-810</link>
		<dc:creator>There&#38;#8217;s Contextual, And There&#38;#8217;s Exact &#38;laquo; correlate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jun 2007 03:39:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/uncategorized/is-google-soft-on-privacy/#comment-810</guid>
		<description>[...] Additional Reading:  For anyone interested in the topic of privacy and Google, Steven Bradley has a very comprehensive post, Is Google Soft on Privacy, which is full of links to additional reading on the topic.  Another great read is by Danny Sullivan which intelligently questions some of the criticism. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Additional Reading:  For anyone interested in the topic of privacy and Google, Steven Bradley has a very comprehensive post, Is Google Soft on Privacy, which is full of links to additional reading on the topic.  Another great read is by Danny Sullivan which intelligently questions some of the criticism. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven Bradley</title>
		<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/google/is-google-soft-on-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-809</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven Bradley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jun 2007 01:29:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/uncategorized/is-google-soft-on-privacy/#comment-809</guid>
		<description>Jordan I thought it was funny in part because I think I was commenting on your post about the same time Andy was publishing his. It&#039;s ok since both posts are worth reading.

Adam I agree, but. If I feel it&#039;s necessary I know how to keep things private, but there&#039;s a lot of info out there and it&#039;s so much easier to connect. I think it generally gets used in essentially harmless ways, mostly to direct more targeted ads at us, which isn&#039;t a bad thing. It&#039;s not just about what you say either.

I don&#039;t really want everything I search for known. Not that there&#039;s anything I&#039;m concerned someone will find out, but I think it&#039;s my business and no one else&#039;s. Also think about all the things like social security numbers and credit card info that&#039;s been stored somewhere. As it becomes easier to connect the data it will be easier for people to get away with using that some of the more sensitive data.

I agree Matt. I think Google is named the worst mostly because it brings the most attention to their report. It is kind of odd that Google seems to be more concerned about privacy and yet the perception is they have the worst record on privacy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jordan I thought it was funny in part because I think I was commenting on your post about the same time Andy was publishing his. It&#8217;s ok since both posts are worth reading.</p>
<p>Adam I agree, but. If I feel it&#8217;s necessary I know how to keep things private, but there&#8217;s a lot of info out there and it&#8217;s so much easier to connect. I think it generally gets used in essentially harmless ways, mostly to direct more targeted ads at us, which isn&#8217;t a bad thing. It&#8217;s not just about what you say either.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t really want everything I search for known. Not that there&#8217;s anything I&#8217;m concerned someone will find out, but I think it&#8217;s my business and no one else&#8217;s. Also think about all the things like social security numbers and credit card info that&#8217;s been stored somewhere. As it becomes easier to connect the data it will be easier for people to get away with using that some of the more sensitive data.</p>
<p>I agree Matt. I think Google is named the worst mostly because it brings the most attention to their report. It is kind of odd that Google seems to be more concerned about privacy and yet the perception is they have the worst record on privacy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matt J</title>
		<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/google/is-google-soft-on-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-808</link>
		<dc:creator>matt J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:42:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/uncategorized/is-google-soft-on-privacy/#comment-808</guid>
		<description>I think the privacy international report set out to name the biggest search engine as the worst for privacy because it would get them the most press. I hadn&#039;t heard about privacy international before this.

From what i have seen, With googles stand against subpoenas and their option to personalise searches or not, They seem to understand that poor privacy standards is bad for business. And if there&#039;s one thing i know about google, It&#039;s that they are all about the business.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the privacy international report set out to name the biggest search engine as the worst for privacy because it would get them the most press. I hadn&#8217;t heard about privacy international before this.</p>
<p>From what i have seen, With googles stand against subpoenas and their option to personalise searches or not, They seem to understand that poor privacy standards is bad for business. And if there&#8217;s one thing i know about google, It&#8217;s that they are all about the business.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SEFL</title>
		<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/google/is-google-soft-on-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-807</link>
		<dc:creator>SEFL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jun 2007 17:48:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/uncategorized/is-google-soft-on-privacy/#comment-807</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m not worried about it in the slightest.  If I don&#039;t want someone to know something, I don&#039;t tell anyone.

It&#039;s amazing how, with all of the paranoia and BS about how everything needs to be protected, people forget that the simplest form of security is not to give information out in the first place.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not worried about it in the slightest.  If I don&#8217;t want someone to know something, I don&#8217;t tell anyone.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s amazing how, with all of the paranoia and BS about how everything needs to be protected, people forget that the simplest form of security is not to give information out in the first place.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jordan McCollum</title>
		<link>http://www.vanseodesign.com/google/is-google-soft-on-privacy/comment-page-1/#comment-806</link>
		<dc:creator>Jordan McCollum</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:34:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.vanseodesign.com/blog/uncategorized/is-google-soft-on-privacy/#comment-806</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m glad you found it humorous that we both posted on Marketing Pilgrim.  I&#039;m also glad that we ended up making slightly different points!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m glad you found it humorous that we both posted on Marketing Pilgrim.  I&#8217;m also glad that we ended up making slightly different points!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

