The issue with Charlie Patton is one illustration of why there needs to be oversight of Google’s activities to protect Internet users
Facts like the Charlie Patton clearly evidence the need for not only an oversight of Google’s and other internet companies’ activities, but also a call for awareness about the direction that the Internet has been heading. The protection of its 3.2 billion users, 40 % of the global population (and growing) is a global issue and needs immediate attention. The purpose of the Internet is to connect people, businesses and institutions. The Internet is a powerful communication tool that can permit access to information and distribute power, but if not regulated will march into the opposite direction, or even worst, …show more content…
In their case it comes from advertisement, not from the search service itself. Other vehicles like newspapers, radio and television have used this business model, but the Internet has changed the advertisement industry and in benefit of comfort and business has been betraying privacy and private property. Google collects data without users’ consent. Although there are privacy statements and agreements on the web, they are taken for granted and are not acknowledged by users. At the beginning of Google’s privacy page disclosure there is an intriguing statement: “When you use Google services, you trust us with your information”. This page is rarely seen and since the information is the propriety of users it should be more explicit. Google speaks for its users since there is no evidence that users are willing to share and trust their information to Google or they have expertise to do so. This is not a way for creating a trusted …show more content…
Both are reality today. Alternative search engines as duckduck.com, ixquick.com, startpage.com will become preferred engines and regulatory policies may prohibit data search collection. Google seems to be aware of the risks and is trying to mitigate them using the Internet and its users in a “take action” campaign. Google’s activities are in between these lines and cannot be fully guaranteed. At the same time they promote privacy and fight for government intrusion they break their beliefs by collect data from its users. Their technology domain gives them advantages but doesn’t guarantee user protection as it is clearly seen on this
Facts like the Charlie Patton clearly evidence the need for not only an oversight of Google’s and other internet companies’ activities, but also a call for awareness about the direction that the Internet has been heading. The protection of its 3.2 billion users, 40 % of the global population (and growing) is a global issue and needs immediate attention. The purpose of the Internet is to connect people, businesses and institutions. The Internet is a powerful communication tool that can permit access to information and distribute power, but if not regulated will march into the opposite direction, or even worst, …show more content…
In their case it comes from advertisement, not from the search service itself. Other vehicles like newspapers, radio and television have used this business model, but the Internet has changed the advertisement industry and in benefit of comfort and business has been betraying privacy and private property. Google collects data without users’ consent. Although there are privacy statements and agreements on the web, they are taken for granted and are not acknowledged by users. At the beginning of Google’s privacy page disclosure there is an intriguing statement: “When you use Google services, you trust us with your information”. This page is rarely seen and since the information is the propriety of users it should be more explicit. Google speaks for its users since there is no evidence that users are willing to share and trust their information to Google or they have expertise to do so. This is not a way for creating a trusted …show more content…
Both are reality today. Alternative search engines as duckduck.com, ixquick.com, startpage.com will become preferred engines and regulatory policies may prohibit data search collection. Google seems to be aware of the risks and is trying to mitigate them using the Internet and its users in a “take action” campaign. Google’s activities are in between these lines and cannot be fully guaranteed. At the same time they promote privacy and fight for government intrusion they break their beliefs by collect data from its users. Their technology domain gives them advantages but doesn’t guarantee user protection as it is clearly seen on this