

Google warns that opt-in privacy could lead to a 'dystopia' - rbarooah
http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2010/04/googles-opt-in-dystopia.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss

======
eplanit
Beware the advice from those with vested interest. The more invested they are
in the outcome, the more to beware.

~~~
anamax
> Beware the advice from those with vested interest.

Be aware that there are many kinds of vested interest. Money is the least
worrisome interest because those folks can be bought off - "true believers"
are far worse.

------
dhimes
_turn the 'Net into landscapes of "walled gardens" in which consumers are
reluctant and even afraid to explore new services_

I think the only reason so many aren't afraid now is that they don't know very
much about those services and the information collected.

So the argument here is, don't tell people what we do because it might upset
them.

That said, I think the point about driving people to centralized identity
systems is valid, because, again, they won't understand the risks.

Interesting that there's one outcome Google does not anticipate: less mining,
storing, and sharing of private data by websites.

------
TallGuyShort
I think that law would be fairly ineffectual. The people who misuse private
information now, go to great lengths to hide the fact that they're collecting
your information. Google and Facebook use it very effectively, but practically
everyone knows what they're doing. What will change with this law?

------
yanw
Google's points are valid despite the conflict of interest, I'm not a big fan
of any legislative solutions to these types of issues or any internet
regulatory laws, politicians rarely understand technology specially the ever-
changing web, these sort of laws could very well end up hurting start ups.

~~~
mattmanser
That's a pretty blinkered point of view. If you can't trust your law makers to
understand technology, why trust them to understand any other complex subject?
You could use the exact same argument against legislating against global
warming.

It's complex, let's just give up with laws. Not a good stance.

~~~
axod
I don't think many people would be happy with legislating against global
warming either.

Legislate to use less energy, to recycle, etc. But it's hardly clear cut that
we're seeing anything more than a temporary heating phase.

The other point is that technology is changing so fast that by the time
lawmakers understand it, things have all changed.

~~~
nhooey
> _But it's hardly clear cut that we're seeing anything more than a temporary
> heating phase._

It's pretty clear that human activity has been significantly affecting the
climate.

I know this is Wikipedia, but this article is mostly citations:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_c...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change)

