Comments on: Google agrees to “Do Not Track” Chrome button

By: perspektivius

perspektivius — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 18:28:00 +0000

Google is the new big bad wolf, however far from Apple, but that’s another case, because iSheep wants to pay for that kind of stuff..

By: Matti

Matti — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:51:00 +0000

I’m not a child (I might have a child’s maturity level, though), but even I can’t understand the bloated mess that is Windows or OSX (or Gnome or KDE, for that matter). Give me a tiling window manager with a bunch of terminals any day of the week!! :-P

By: Aab Bcc

Aab Bcc — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:50:00 +0000

I didn’t say it was. I’m saying Google has failed to live up to its own claims.

By: ZacharyKoterba

ZacharyKoterba — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:35:00 +0000

Uh oh, grammar police over here. I’m sorry, later I will make sure to poor over every post you’ve ever made and point out spelling errors just to show you how important I am.

And if you think Google is evil and that your information is available all over the place you believe that 9/11 is a myth and that possessions are real. Point me towards one credible article/piece of information that shows where Google’s policy has caused actual issues for it’s users? And don’t just send me some Googled forum post, because I’m sure there’s a ton of forums saying that iTunes has gotten their identity stolen as well…

By: ZacharyKoterba

ZacharyKoterba — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:35:00 +0000

Its OK man, the government is not watching your every move…

By: Aab Bcc

Aab Bcc — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:23:00 +0000

It’s over-complicated because it can be simpler. In fact, it used to be simpler and worked perfectly well — just a white page and search box. No need for extraneous bars and crap like Google Instant that overwrote your browser-based saved searches.

This is now no longer the case because of feature-creep and “make work” changes to the UI and layout, many of which are superfluous and unnecessary. How to explain? It’s the difference between iPhone’s OS and Windows Mobile, I guess.

(It has nothing to do with complication in the sense that people can’t understand it.)A child can understand the bloated mess that is Windows, but it’s still a mess.

By: Aab Bcc

Aab Bcc — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:13:00 +0000

Nonsense. Google got along just fine without funneling people into a persistent ID for most of its history. Likewise, Google was profitable for a long time before it became bloated and turned to “make work” changes for its engineers, constantly churning and changing things just for the sake of it. You just have to look at Google’s own forums filled with thread after depressing thread of familiar complaints about aggravating changes to get a sense of how they are turning into Microsoft. Obviously they benefited from people using their products for “free” before the advent of Google ID and more detailed, granular tracking — otherwise they would not have turned into a multibillion dollar company before this. Your claim that there was “no” benefit is false.
They aren’t awesome for adding a button they were prodded into adding. Google pretends to hold itself to higher standards. It trumpets, repeatedly, its corporate ethos of not being “evil.” So it’s not unfair to hold Google to the standards it purports to hold itself to — because it has leveraged that ethos as part of its appeal, in order to attract users. The Google of the past — back when it actually practiced this “don’t be evil” credo instead of merely paying lip service to it — would have adopted a more robust privacy feature on its own initiative. The fact that the Google of today has to be prodded into doing so, not of its own accord, is an indictment of its attitude towards its self-proclaimed motto: it’s now an inconvenience that they don’t really believe in.Don’t claim to respect the privacy and usage concerns of users (or, in other words, don’t claim to be not “evil”) if you aren’t going to hew to those promises.

By: JohnJohnJ

JohnJohnJ — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 15:57:00 +0000

You…. don’t know what “you’re” talking about (nor can you spell). If you think Google’s tracking is anonymous, then you believe in Santa and the Easter Bunny too. And Google quickly agreed to Do Not Track since it’s only a browser request.

By: Radstrom

Radstrom — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:31:00 +0000

Google mean to deliver a truly dynamic product that follows the user and is always designed especially for you.

How can you think the search page is overcomplicated? A child can fully understand it.

By: ZacharyKoterba

ZacharyKoterba — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:28:00 +0000

You…. don’t know what your talking about. Google offers free services. The only way it is able to do this is by gathering information to provide to advertisers. Nothing personal, just massed information like “X number of users visit Y site and click on Z banner” or “X user clicks Y link when in Gmail”. This is all in the terms and services you agree to when you use their services for free. If you didn’t want this, then don’t sign up, its that simple. Personally. I am glad to share this useless information in order to have things for free.

The fact that they added this button just goes to show how awesome of a company they are. They are basically putting this product on sale (if it had a price to begin with). Now you get to use their tool for FREE with NO benefit to them. Personally I would call that unfair to Google, but instead of fighting it, they’ve accepted it. If this in anyway effected Apple/Microsoft, I guarantee their lawyers would fight it to the death.

By: Aab Bcc

Aab Bcc — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:19:00 +0000

Google has turned well and truly evil. In the past, they would have taken the initiative to do such a thing, but now, like Microsoft, it has to be prodded into looking out for its users. Google “turned” right about the time it introduced Google Instant (by forcing users into using it). Or maybe even before, when they seemed to be constantly changing things for the sake of it.

At first it seemed like numerous spurious changes to “make work” for Google engineers — like the constant and unnecessary layout changes, over-complicating the search page (when it used to be so simple), alterations to Google News; alterations that, to undo, you had to have a Google ID in order to “customize” the alterations away. The net effect was to force you to log in, to get a “fix” on your profile and to remove a layer of anonymity.

And then it struck me: the bottom line was to annoy you with changes in order to funnel you into sticking with an identity. You want a stable user experience? Get an ID, was the Faustian bargain. Then there are the unfathomable changes: altering Gmail, making Google Scholar inaccessible from the front of the normal search page. All designed to aggravate (even though Google probably thinks it’s “improving” the product).

Google is not so different from Microsoft now.

By: Aab Bcc

Aab Bcc — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 14:19:00 +0000

Google is not so different from Microsoft now.