They see the average US adult something like times a month.
You really think changing your search engine is going to do a GD thing?? But their advertising hinges completely around one fundamental truth. When you have a problem, or a question, or a need - and you need the correct answer fast - you go to Google. I guarantee if you need to look up how to give CPR or do a Heimlich, you're running late and you need directions to an interview, or you need a plumber right now because its 3am and you've got an exploded pipe, or a backed up drain You're not going to go to wolfram alpha or freaking Bing.
You're gonna go to Google.
- Reconstruction Under Fire: Case Studies and Further Analysis of Civil Requirements (Rand Corporation Monograph);
- Johnny Be Good - Out from the Darkness: an Incredible True Story.
- Whatever Is...: A Couples Devotional for Christian Dating in a Secular World?
Incredibly well put. Another thought: why raise an alarm about a free product google search collecting data, when Microsoft's OS a pay-for product does the same? Inconsistent much? You can't run Bing in anything but Windows, IIUC, so the author is advocating changing collecting agencies, not ensuring privacy. Admittedly, I do use Chrome, so naturally Google Search, but I nonetheless agree that Google knows far too much about us all.
I should probably give DuckDuckGo a try though.
Had It Not Been Lyrics
For now, and I'm sure this is the same for much of the population, I'm programmed to automatically go to Google. I gave Bing a chance because of the rewards. That was a year ago. I learned 2 important lessons over those 12 months: Bing's rewards are terrible, but Bing search results are worse. I am glad to be back to Google search. But I agree with the premise of this article: with so much data running through Google tools, individual privacy is at risk.
You do realize that Microsoft Bing is all about data mining as well right? They're no different than Google. Windows 10 iteself is a glorified version of the Chrome desktop aimed at gathering as much information as possible with a small amount of anonymity. When suggesting a new search alternative to Google, Duckduckgo. Where exactly did you suggested that?
See a Problem?
For real I can't see alternative for Google. If you are smart enough you can use Google without giving them too much data about yourself. Just use incognito mode in chrome, change applications permissions at your phone, etc. Use it smart. Of course you can't hide all informations about yourself but you don't need to login as Adam Smith, use nickname, turn off GPS if it's not necessary. I prefer to use Google than anything else to store my private data, because it's much more difficult to hack Google servers than anything else probably in the world.
So don't throw away Google at all. This means that even if you're not using Google, not using WhatsApp and don't have a Facebook-account, your name, phone number, birthday and likely your address is already in Facebook's databases as soon as one of your colleagues uses that app - and this WITHOUT even asking you if you agree with Facebook having your data - thank your friends for uploading your data without asking you first. If there are more than two or three of your friends who use the Facebook-app, Facebook is already able to profile you pretty good according to your friends, their friends and all their preferences - without asking you for any agreement for this profiling.
Comparing to that, I prefer Google's style of data-collecting since they show you very transparent that and what data they are collecting - and you still can opt out or even have to opt in in first place from everything. The true "privacy-enemy" are Facebook and similar, not Google Privacy and the rights conveyed by the expectations of privacy concern more than just one's self. The data and conclusions drawn from it involve public officials, your progeny and loved ones.
Though officially divorced from named individuals through ai and big data sources identity is not too difficult and the results of ai conclusions can impact credit, jobs, insurance, and political targeting. These are of great consequence and individuals need a method to identify and contest such conclusions. Because if their enslavement-apparatus is actually used for this nefarious end, how can any potential revolution be organised when no-one has privacy any more?
WOLFEES GRAMOPHONE: "GOD SEARCHED THE WORLD" ALEX BRADFORD GROUP SPECIALTY LP SP P USA
Never going to happen? Think about it: why wouldn't 'they' enslave us, if they can stop you revolting, through knowing your every move before you do, due to years of spying on you? Unprecedented in human history, is this level of power. Naive fools love to call out 'paranoid' people for being all "tinfoil hat" but it's their fault, and ignorance, not the tinfoil hat brigade's.
Hey Man I agree with your Spirit. Talking with these people is like speaking at a brick wall and even worse.
If you see this, I acknowledge you! Here's to truly being alive, and the innate beingness and capacity of the Self as worthwhile.
go to site Be Well. Most people are too usual, too boring as to be of any interest. If you'd stop considering your life or existence "important", you can enjoy everything Google provides for free.
- 7 Marks of a Gospel Community;
- Threat of Zee contagion spreading awaits market (IANS Special).
- See a Problem?;
- Two Months to Motivation.
The world will be exactly the same 50 years after you have died, nobody's is really important , so stop complaining about someone watching you - nobody gives a sh I'm so agree. If you are in the average of people in the world, nobody at Google cares about your private things. If you are a president, major or you have some important position in your community, then I can understand your concerns.
However, most of us are in the average. You're both right in one sense. Yes, we're all boring nobodies. Hiding one's true self is the result. Cognitive dissonance is the result of doing that to any highly-effective level. Adding an extra layer of two-facedness to life is a step backwards, not forwards, IMHO. Speaking from experience of what it is like to be watched constantly in a given context, community etc, pre-internet and the damage done to one's humanity is SEVERE.
Or some derivation of 'severe'. This is the thing: depending on how conformist one is [born to be]. Hence why scared, overly-conformist people who think this makes them safe, think that no harm can be done by being watched all the time. They value conformity and don't realise that taking that too far makes humans into robots and creates fascism etc. Dude, it's not the narcissistic or individualistic "they're watching me, I must maintain control" logic at the heart of this although that logic is the collective logic of the spies, face it - they can never resist using a tool, even when it's illegal and they become the bad guys that their existence is justified by, ironically.
Except that in the past, there was usually much more chance of opting-out and escaping. Today, not so much. I think we all can agree that we give up information about ourself the minute you interact with the world. Now the question is what is that information being used for and are those using it being transparent about it?
He's like the family member you always wanted.
I feel Google is the most transparent and even gives me the controls necessary to manage what the information that gathered on me. It is also amazing how this article was surfaced via my Google Now because Google knew I was interested in this kind of stuff. If Google was evil, they would never surface this type of article that has a opposite position to Google. Also that Ad shown at the bottom of this article was probably targeted based on Google data which ultimately helps you as the author monetize the traffic you are getting.
Your logic is flawed: "Google allow x, so Google can't be evil as they'd not allow x if they were whilst allowing y, z etc.