Check out this ad, which apparently ran in Times Square:
http://techyum.com/2010/09/times-square-ads-out-google-ceo-schmidt-as-worlds-creepiest-ice-cream-man/
ConsumerWatchdog.org paid for this ad. They also have have a site dedicated to Google, called Inside Google.
The ad is a brutal critique of Google CEO Eric Schmidt's recent statements about internet privacy. While the ad seems to be over the top, in my opinion, it does touch on many concerns people have about Google. I discussed these in a previous post on this blog, "Young will have to change names to escape 'cyber past'? Google will do our thinking for us?", August 30, 2010.
My first reaction is that Schmidt is an engineer at heart, and an honest one. He doesn't fully comprehend the impact of his statements. He's just assessing the situation and giving straightforward answers, discussing reality as he sees it. Should we vilify Schmidt for telling us the hard truth that we need to hear?
Google's whole business model is based on trust. Store your e-mail on Google's servers. Store your documents on Google's servers. Store your LIFE'S INFORMATION on Google's servers!
If people can't trust Google, that business model falls apart. They will stop using Google's services and a good chunk of the eyeballs watching Google's ads (and thus a large chunk of Google's revenue) will be lost.
On the other hand, it is quite possible that Schmidt is brilliant. Better to feel out the public's reaction BEFORE trying something new and making a huge mistake like they did with Buzz.
Google has some tough decisions to make. Google sits on a HUGE amount of information. The temptation must be great to try to monetize that information, at the expense of their users' privacy. Was Buzz just a mistake or was it a sign of bigger problems at Google?
From Counternotions:
"Buzz launch wasn’t flawed, Google’s intentions are"
http://counternotions.wordpress.com/2010/02/15/buzzback/
This article raises a serious question about Google. They did miss the boat on one item, however: "It’s ludicrous to think that the Buzz fiasco was simply a result of under-testing. Indeed, it was not an implementation snafu at all, as often described. It was a reflection of the strategy with which Google has decided to capture the enormous territory left up for grabs by the decline of Microsoft."
The author of the article seems to think that either Buzz was not tested enough or that Google has evil intentions. These are not the only two possibilities.
Buzz was tested internally at Google. But if everyone is on the same team, working for the same company, the fact that Buzz contacts were populated from GMail contacts was not at all controversial. It was the natural way to implement it, to make sure people tested it and used it. The mistake, of course, was rolling it out to the public in the same way. Put it another way: This could have been an honest mistake, a result of mistaking extensive INTERNAL testing for sufficient real-world testing. The former does not take the place of the latter.
I may be biased but I believe that Google's privacy missteps and misstatements are more likely a result of engineering myopia and brutal honesty than evil intentions. But Google is such a large company that even if it makes mistakes without evil intentions the public will not cut it any slack--nor should they. If Google compromises on privacy, users could be seriously harmed.
And finally, leave it to XKCD to lend the proper perspective on this issue. In other words, if Google truly is evil they are doing a really shitty job at it.
XKCD #792, "Password Reuse"
http://xkcd.com/792/
No comments:
Post a Comment