View Single Post
Posts: 3,464 | Thanked: 5,107 times | Joined on Feb 2010 @ Gothenburg in Sweden
#1313
Originally Posted by danramos View Post
Speaking of sticking your head in the sand, I'm pretty sure 1984 wasn't about oligopolies. If you think so, you might want to go back and actually read it. Last I checked, Google wasn't the only nor biggest threat to privacy. Have you actually used or understood what Facebook does and how it has violated trust in practice, not theory, before? How about Microsoft? If we're to go on a practical and historic track record, I'll trust Google before I promote Microsoft and Nokia--especially given that the latter have ACTUALLY proven their not trustworthy while Google has at least been relatively transparent about what they collect and share and with whom. Better still, I'm glad to see Google is one of the few that actually CHALLENGES government requests for private information of its customers in addition to their ACTUAL and genuine efforts to promote openness and open-source, unlike Nokia's puffered statements that proved less than open or open-source promoting.
NONE of above is IMHO any better than the other. Difference is you say Google is better I say thats bullish. Same **** different name. I am sure evryone is in bed with US governance.


Dont come say Google is a more ope. Also the fact that google just tried to scan every book, without asking for permission, saying "hey people wants info to be free" yeah right. What they want is to take control on everything related to media.

Funny is the younger generation are stupid enought beleive in "google is your friend". Like they care more about you than any other no way!

Last edited by mikecomputing; 2013-04-16 at 17:21.