Video: The Google Toilet and our inevitable future

There’s a battle brewing on the internet and you may not even be aware that it even exists. Companies like Google, Microsoft, Facebook, they know more about you than your significant other. They know what you’re searching for and when, what sites you visit, who you email, who you constantly check up on, who you ignore, and who knows what else. With all that data sitting on a server somewhere, they all try to do the same thing: sell you more junk. Whether or not you actually even need said junk, it doesn’t matter, since just showing you an ad for something makes someone, somewhere, a penny or two. The more users, the more eyeballs, the more profit potential. Most websites work the same way. Notice the ads on our site?

Now imagine if someone had access to all the information that’s collected about your usage habits and then used it against you? What if the government one day asked Google for a list of all your searches during a specific stretch of time? Seems crazy, but law enforcement already has the power to ask your wireless operator where you were las Friday at 05:00 in the morning. “If you ain’t doing something wrong, you got nothing to worry about” is what cowards will say about all these recent privacy invasions.

But enough scaring the living bejesus out of you, check out the video above that aims to poke fun at the future of data mining. If it doesn’t make you think twice about how you use the internet, then you need to get your head examined. Don’t just randomly upload all your precious memories and every thought that’s bouncing around your head to a service that could care less about you. They’re using you to make a quick buck and they’re actually doing a damn good job too.

[Via: Daily Mobile]

About The Author

Stefan Constantinescu

Stefan Constantinescu (@WhatTheBit on Twitter) has loved technology since as far back as he can remember. It started with computers, but in the past few years his passion has turned to mobile devices. As a mobile phone enthusiast who lives and breathes devices that connect to the internet, he knows he is not alone with this radical fascination of all things wireless. He is strongly opinionated and enjoys a good debate so leave comments in his posts and he’ll get back to you! Stefan began blogging as a hobby in the fall of 2006 and joined IntoMobile in the summer of 2007. Later he got a job at Nokia in March 2008, but as of June 2009 he has rejoined the IntoMobile team. He is currently based out of Helsinki, Finland.

Anonymous

Oh wow, OK that makes a lot of sense when you think about it.

http://www.anon-web-tools.edu.tc
Happymind

I wonder if there may be a misconception Google naysayers may have; namely, that Google trades in personal data. In fact, virtually all the ads and enterprise activities use anonymous information. Granted, there may be databases that tie this anonymous information to an individual, but more on that later. So, those ads really target non-identifying markers that, by themselves, do not reveal the person behind them, but do reach the person in question… again, without the solicitor knowing who this person is unless that person chooses to revel themselves by responding. This is important because there is essentially a layer of information that protects the consumer. So, a person can choose to remain anonymous if they with. However, a problem arises if a third-party requests the identity tied to the anonymous information (the government, a third party business or others). Google has a policy of not revealing that information. But, by law, it may have to be given to law enforcement in the case of possible criminal activity. This seems reasonable to me in that that internet should not be used for criminal activity, but the definition of criminal activity is arguable and subject to interpretation. However, that is a social and legal issue that must be addressed separately.

Now, about those databased tied to a specific person. Google has never actually addressed this issue in public. Some would argue that Google really prizes this information. However, we really don’t know because it has never really been addressed. It may very well be that the Government does not want Google to delete first level personal information such as names tied with location, but in my humble opinion, Google does not need to keep this. Or, if they do, they would support extraordinary means to protect that data. In other words, they are not the bad guy and do not release the the actual associated names in conjunction with location to any third party. If I am wrong, then please provide substantial and believable proof.

For now, most people should realize that information linking you to an IP address (email, etc) may be provided, but that may, but not necessarily, link directly to you. It is only when you respond and provide your personal information to that third party that they then actually know who you are. This suggests that persons be careful and thoughtful on how they interact with the internet. This is just common sense and extends well beyond any Google issues.

Finally, there is the issues of databases tying your actual identity to your activities. This also goes well beyond any Google issues because many companies, internet providers, and web sites do this. Anyone really concerned with this issue can write their politicians or join protest groups supporting the aim of not permitting the storage of personal information and make it illegal to tie anonymous information (such as IP address) to specific person. However, one must realize that Government will appose such a effort because this is how they catch criminals. How this is resolved, if it is resolved, is yet to be determined. But, Google is not the architect of a conspiracy to create a big brother mechanism and in fact has very robust privacy policies. The issue with Google is really a industry problem that needs to be address as such. Vilifying Google will not solve this problem. However, e-mails to Google expressing concern could have a positive effect in getting Google on board as an advocate for potentially solving this problem which really does need a solution. Ironically, I think inundating Google with requests for solutions is likely to be more affective than petitioning your local Congressman or Senator. They neither understand nor care.
Chuck

@Happymind: “If I am wrong, then please provide substantial and believable proof.”

You’ve made a number of unsupported statements / inferences. Why don’t -you- provide “substantial and believable” proof that you are -right- ?