The Cellar - Not sure about Google

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- The Internet (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=8)

- - Not sure about Google (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=25655)

yeah, this is no big deal to me. maybe, since I never have looked for a penis enlargement product, my emails will have something I actually am interested on the right side.

Sick of my tapatalk sig

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clodfobble (Post 790712)

for example men's ear and nose hair grows like crazy after a certain age.

FIFY

Quote:

Then there is Google's YouTube connection...

You have linked to an explanation of facial recognition software on the iPhone and told us that this suggests YouTube is a Problem... why?

It appears to be because somebody filmed the explanation, and put that video on YouTube.

This is paranoia out of ignorance, and demonstrates your lack of understanding so thoroughly that it's painful to point it out, like I'm being harsh on you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 790774)

You have linked to an explanation of facial recognition software
on the iPhone and told us that this suggests YouTube is a Problem... why?

It appears to be because somebody filmed the explanation,
and put that video on YouTube.

This is paranoia out of ignorance, and demonstrates your lack of understanding
so thoroughly that it's painful to point it out, like I'm being harsh on you.

UT, Do you mean ignorance of the technical aspects of facial recognition software,
or ignorance of the abuse that might result from Google's new policies?
I am certainly ignorant of the former, but I'll argue the latter.

I feel several issues were revealed in that link.
Primarily that law enforcement will undoubtly be using the software in the field - without warrants - for "identification".
Thus "mug shots" will permanently accumulate of completely innocent individuals.
Likewise, the existing database of YouTube will no longer be under the control of the User, and civil rights will be out the window.

Here is another example... this one focused on Google's Picasa, but it the same for YouTube

Cyberbullying Research Center
Sameer
10/7/2008

Quote:

<snip> We’ve also pointed out how individuals can unwittingly open their friends
up to victimization by posting or revealing personal information or pictures about them to social networking sites.
This will continue to be a problem, particularly with new developments in technology.

One example that stands out in my mind is Google’s new version of Picasa, their photo-editing and sharing software.
They’ve implemented a facial recognition system that can analyze one picture
and then scan for matches across hundreds or millions of others.

As an innocuous example, I might want to upload a picture of myself, tag it as “Sameer Hinduja,”
and then allow the software to be continually scanning other photo albums/galleries (e.g., Picasa or Flickr)
to see if anyone else might have uploaded another picture of me.

Apart from visual confirmation (when I look and verify if the person in those other pictures is, in fact, me),
further corroboration can be made if they are tagged as well (either with my name or one of my fun nicknames!).

Extending this logic, it is easy to envision how someone with malicious or perverse intentions
could use this technology to stalk someone else, or even create a dossier of knowledge
about that person (based on the pictures) useful for gaining their trust or developing a rapport.

I am a bit concerned. And this is only the beginning as we move forward in this increasingly panoptic digital age.

The issue is NOT the technical aspects of facial recognitions software.
Nor is the issue a matter of whether or not law enforcement has the right to identify a person.

The issue is the change in control of the information obtained by Google
... without the consent of the User.

OK, you confused me by objecting to YouTube and then posting a YouTube video entirely unrelated to YouTube.

You are now just complaining about technology and data privacy in general terms, not about Google. Got it.

And BTW, yes, law enforcement needs a warrant to ask Google about specific issues, and Google's new and entirely transparent privacy policy won't change that, nor would it change the amount or connection of information available to law enforcement.

And BTW yes, if a person makes their Facebook page available to the public it will also be available to cops. And if they don't, it won't. Okay then?

Quote:

The issue is the change in control of the information obtained by Google... without the consent of the User.

It's entirely consensual. You read their privacy policy and if you don't agree with it you don't use all the free Google products.

There's almost no change. And if somebody had asked you a week ago whether Google uses your Google Maps lookups to improve your Google search experience, you would have said, well I fucking hope so, because that's a no-brainer, has no impact on my privacy, and would be extremely useful information that would help me get to what I'm looking for and improve my life.

Don't pee yourself because the WaPo wrote an inflammatory headline. You'll be peeing yourself every morning!

It's not unrelated to YouTube, and I'm not complaining about technology.
In my post immediately above, I specifically said:

Quote:

Likewise, you miss my argument when you say:

Quote:

And BTW yes, if a person makes their Facebook page available to the public...

That little word "if" carries a lot of weight.
Google's new policy takes the "if" out of the equation.
The (signed in) Google User can no longer opt out.

There's an old saying that Congress can write any law,
and Congress can also change any existing law.
On March 1st, Google will show how this option can spread.

Google doesn't publish your information at all!

And it still won't!!

It's just telling you, openly, that it's going to do what every single other company in the world has always done!!!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamplighter (Post 790791)

As an innocuous example, I might want to upload a picture of myself, tag it as “Sameer Hinduja,”
and then allow the software to be continually scanning other photo albums/galleries (e.g., Picasa or Flickr)
to see if anyone else might have uploaded another picture of me.

Apart from visual confirmation (when I look and verify if the person in those other pictures is, in fact, me),
further corroboration can be made if they are tagged as well (either with my name or one of my fun nicknames!).

OK, this tidbit from that article really interested me. It's the ultimate vanity search, and I really want to do it. I would love to see what other pictures of me are out there in the world. I'm certain they exist. I've been to enough tourist destinations and gotten in front of enough people taking pictures of the White House or whatever that I'm sure strangers have my picture. I downloaded the most recent version of Picassa and can't figure out how to do what they are talking about. Picassa can scan the images on my computer and also in my web albums for pictures of me. But how do I get it to scan Flickr or strangers' Picassa albums? Or is he saying a hacker could do that?

I want my ultimate vanity search.

Are you saying someone could google my goo-goo-googly eyes? :eek:

That's what Lamplighter's article is saying, but I don't think so.

The government probably can, sure. But us regular stalkers can't.

I just hope they don't have ass recognition software, or some people will never be able to run for public orifice, I mean office. Or shouldn't. ;)

UT may be right about my paranoia.
I opened my email this a.m. and there was a email from Google, explaining their new privacy policy :eek:

OMG, are they reading my posts on The Cellar ?

Then, slowly I remembered I had posted a question on Google Help forum the other day.
Crisis averted :redface:

Actually, I got the same email in both my gmail accounts.

In trying to figure out how to to the ultimate vanity search, I went to gmail, google+, and picassa. All 3 had notices of the new policy.