Wiping Data Hits Flu Predictions(news.bbc.co.uk)
news.bbc.co.uk
Wiping Data Hits Flu Predictions
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8058084.stm
5 comments
Tracking the search queries for things like 'flu symptoms' helps the CDC (and other health organizations) to keep track of the growth and movement of disease through the population, as many more people will search online before actually going to their doctors. Protecting people's 'alleged' privacy over preventing pandemics is ridiculous. What are people trying to get away with that is more important than stopping the spread of disease?
Its hard for me to tell, but is this sarcasm? Playing on peoples fears of death by disease in order to promote archival of personal data reminds me more of the Bush administration and less of Google.
Google is going to be in for a rude awakening when a ambitious politician comes along who makes it his personal crusade to reign in the aggregation and data mining of personal data (right or wrong, it will happen.)
Google is going to be in for a rude awakening when a ambitious politician comes along who makes it his personal crusade to reign in the aggregation and data mining of personal data (right or wrong, it will happen.)
I agree.
Reading that logic - we need to be able to keep all your search data for much longer so that we can, uh, track flu season - sounds strangely reminiscent of the Australian government's logic that they need to be able to filter the internet so that they can keep out child pornography. In both cases, a party is making a huge grab for power using a somewhat innocuous reason that's framed as being hard to oppose.
I'm not sure, but I think this community opined on it slightly differently when they Aussies were doing it...
Reading that logic - we need to be able to keep all your search data for much longer so that we can, uh, track flu season - sounds strangely reminiscent of the Australian government's logic that they need to be able to filter the internet so that they can keep out child pornography. In both cases, a party is making a huge grab for power using a somewhat innocuous reason that's framed as being hard to oppose.
I'm not sure, but I think this community opined on it slightly differently when they Aussies were doing it...
I would agree that Page is probably being intellectually dishonest in his argument that H1N1 is a prime example of why Google should be allowed to retain data longer, but I don't think your comparison holds. At its core, what you're describing is taking away the privileges of very many people to potentially (dubiously, in my opinion--I do hate "think of the children" crusades) protect a few people. The debate surrounding Google and data retention is more about Google taking some risks with the privacy of the consumers who use it in order to take actions that will benefit it long-term--and which I strongly believe can and will benefit its consumers as well.
Sure, there's potential for abuse here, but that's true of all technology. I don't think we, as hackers, should let that hold society back when there are valuable things to gain from its advance.
Sure, there's potential for abuse here, but that's true of all technology. I don't think we, as hackers, should let that hold society back when there are valuable things to gain from its advance.
This is why I think Google is _not_ evil and _very_ important. They will play a vital role in finding a way to protect (actual) privacy while still doing some extremely useful analysis. It's important to have a check on what they're doing, but calling them evil does no good.
This is a decent article and (in some sense), I agree with Page's argument - though the H1N1 reference is a bit over the top.
I'm not sure where the rather sensationalist headline comes from, though; would you consider offering a nuanced argument as to why user data retention makes the company "evil" to back it up?
I'm not sure where the rather sensationalist headline comes from, though; would you consider offering a nuanced argument as to why user data retention makes the company "evil" to back it up?
Why should Google be forced to follow European law? Last I heard, Google was a US company and (to my knowledge) the US doesn't have much in the way of data retention laws.
Way to prey on people's fears google.
I don't believe Google is evil, and while I know they will make more money out of me by keeping my data for longer, I'm sure more of my data will help them give me an improved experience, if only by a little. Why should I care? After all, I've been happily giving it snippets from my daily life for years, it's not as if they're getting anymore than they've already had in the past...