Private
The End of Anonymity
There's been a lot of talk recently about the changes in Net Neutrality laws, and the possibility that they may change drastically in the coming years, thus disallowing for free communications between peers.
It's worrisome that Google, monolithic as it is, keeps popping up in these conversations as being not-quite-for neutrality...
In the latest, CEO Schmidt was quoted:
via Network World
It sounds like a lack of anonymity is protection for the people, and since we get to "keep our privacy", who will complain?
But how far is the tagging going to go? At this point in time it's possible to log on to any PC and anonymously access and upload information online... if that ability is taken away, if there must constantly be a number associated with my self a personalized set of statistics which correspond to my number, is that not an invasion?
As if Google doesn't already hold such information, anyway... Sadly I only recently discovered that little gmail "feature" that saves every search one has ever conducted. Or what about "Foursquare", charmingly named after the childhood game, but logging every willing participant's steps OFF-line as well?
Not to mention, the possible future problem that some are calling "tiered internet"; here.
Basically that if wireless takes over as the future medium of online operations, things don't look good for our cyber-freedom.
"Save the Internet" adresses the new Google/Verizon pact, but I don't know much about it yet.
Certainly this directly concerns everyone at SC... how will we proceed?
It's worrisome that Google, monolithic as it is, keeps popping up in these conversations as being not-quite-for neutrality...
In the latest, CEO Schmidt was quoted:
"Privacy is incredibly important. Privacy is not the same thing as anonymity. It's very important that Google and everyone else respects people's privacy. People have a right to privacy; it's natural; it's normal. It's the right way to do things. But if you are trying to commit a terrible, evil crime, it's not obvious that you should be able to do so with complete anonymity. There are no systems in our society which allow you to do that. Judges insist on unmasking who the perpetrator was. So absolute anonymity could lead to some very difficult decisions for our governments and our society as a whole."
...
"The only way to manage this is true transparency and no anonymity. In a world of asynchronous threats, it is too dangerous for there not to be some way to identify you. We need a [verified] name service for people. Governments will demand it."
via Network World
It sounds like a lack of anonymity is protection for the people, and since we get to "keep our privacy", who will complain?
But how far is the tagging going to go? At this point in time it's possible to log on to any PC and anonymously access and upload information online... if that ability is taken away, if there must constantly be a number associated with my self a personalized set of statistics which correspond to my number, is that not an invasion?
As if Google doesn't already hold such information, anyway... Sadly I only recently discovered that little gmail "feature" that saves every search one has ever conducted. Or what about "Foursquare", charmingly named after the childhood game, but logging every willing participant's steps OFF-line as well?
Not to mention, the possible future problem that some are calling "tiered internet"; here.
Basically that if wireless takes over as the future medium of online operations, things don't look good for our cyber-freedom.
"Save the Internet" adresses the new Google/Verizon pact, but I don't know much about it yet.
Certainly this directly concerns everyone at SC... how will we proceed?