^ Good. Just desserts. With any luck, it's more than a virus for obtaining mere intelligence...
I don't know why anyone would be on facebook (google+ etc). Even if it had been benign it always had the potential to be a spying and manipulation system.
Also Assange or Wikileaks did try to inform the masses that Facebook, Google, etc were govt utilities to spy on the common man.
Some other basic stuff on Google etc that anyone who's been reading the news over the years would know:
Google was involved in many lawsuits. Some petty some big. IIRC some of these was how long they were allowed to keep user search data (i.e. what you type into the google search form) in various parts of the world. Initially, in the region of Europe, Google said this was I think 2 years (as was supposedly mentioned in fine print on their site somewhere). The argument was that this was for the purpose of analysis of search terms, so that they could provide better service and more targeted advertising. Whatever (but it can certainly be analysed for other features - the question is, do you know what they do with the data?) Some years later, Google said it would keep all your search data indefinitely.
People who know, will tell you that Google - and all famous search engines - know your identity: tying you to your search terms.*
So they advise you to use many different search engines, and not favour one. It's also good for the competition.
* Like the AOL identity leak fiasco many years ago: some disgruntled employee of AOL put names to queries and posted this in public. It became headline news. People talked about privacy issues. Did some moral self-reflection. And then it went away.
Some other court cases that Google and other search engines got into were with the US govt, which insisted it should be able to subpoena Google, Yahoo etc for user search data and that these search engines should just hand over. The US pretended it was to catch paedophiles (if that were true, why are catholic priests moved to parishes all around the US by the Vatican and the rest of the world, has the US govt done anyting about that?) The search engines made a big drama about their moral right to protect "user privacy" etc. And then, from memory, one by one they caved and can now all be asked to give up the data when requested.
Not that any of these search engines felt the morality pinch before in China, where they divulged whatever the govt there wanted to know about dissidents who used gmail and yahoo mail etc for communicating. Having said that, China at least knows how to act out of self-interest: it banned all spying and propaganda outlets.
- Wikipedia - banned (for obvious reasons).
- Google was on trial, misbehaved once too often I believe and had to relocate to still peddle themselves in Chinese territory. China has a popular super search of its own.
- and China (where facebook is banned) has its own social networking site that blows Facebook out of the water.
Of course China spies on its own citizens and invasives too. But like I said: at least they protect their own national interest.
In contrast: the installed Indian christogovt will adopt every single spying tool to help their foreign masters get a better picture, except when the same tools can also be used to undermine said government or at least rock their boat. Then it will start banning stuff. Sure, the sockpuppet govt of India - like China - spies on its own citizens, but unlike China, the Indian govt (nothing Indian about it) promotes invasives and seccessionists. It leads the charge in splitting the nation.
I don't know why anyone would be on facebook (google+ etc). Even if it had been benign it always had the potential to be a spying and manipulation system.
Also Assange or Wikileaks did try to inform the masses that Facebook, Google, etc were govt utilities to spy on the common man.
Some other basic stuff on Google etc that anyone who's been reading the news over the years would know:
Google was involved in many lawsuits. Some petty some big. IIRC some of these was how long they were allowed to keep user search data (i.e. what you type into the google search form) in various parts of the world. Initially, in the region of Europe, Google said this was I think 2 years (as was supposedly mentioned in fine print on their site somewhere). The argument was that this was for the purpose of analysis of search terms, so that they could provide better service and more targeted advertising. Whatever (but it can certainly be analysed for other features - the question is, do you know what they do with the data?) Some years later, Google said it would keep all your search data indefinitely.
People who know, will tell you that Google - and all famous search engines - know your identity: tying you to your search terms.*
So they advise you to use many different search engines, and not favour one. It's also good for the competition.
* Like the AOL identity leak fiasco many years ago: some disgruntled employee of AOL put names to queries and posted this in public. It became headline news. People talked about privacy issues. Did some moral self-reflection. And then it went away.
Some other court cases that Google and other search engines got into were with the US govt, which insisted it should be able to subpoena Google, Yahoo etc for user search data and that these search engines should just hand over. The US pretended it was to catch paedophiles (if that were true, why are catholic priests moved to parishes all around the US by the Vatican and the rest of the world, has the US govt done anyting about that?) The search engines made a big drama about their moral right to protect "user privacy" etc. And then, from memory, one by one they caved and can now all be asked to give up the data when requested.
Not that any of these search engines felt the morality pinch before in China, where they divulged whatever the govt there wanted to know about dissidents who used gmail and yahoo mail etc for communicating. Having said that, China at least knows how to act out of self-interest: it banned all spying and propaganda outlets.
- Wikipedia - banned (for obvious reasons).
- Google was on trial, misbehaved once too often I believe and had to relocate to still peddle themselves in Chinese territory. China has a popular super search of its own.
- and China (where facebook is banned) has its own social networking site that blows Facebook out of the water.
Of course China spies on its own citizens and invasives too. But like I said: at least they protect their own national interest.
In contrast: the installed Indian christogovt will adopt every single spying tool to help their foreign masters get a better picture, except when the same tools can also be used to undermine said government or at least rock their boat. Then it will start banning stuff. Sure, the sockpuppet govt of India - like China - spies on its own citizens, but unlike China, the Indian govt (nothing Indian about it) promotes invasives and seccessionists. It leads the charge in splitting the nation.