

Surveillance as a Business Model - r0h1n
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/11/surveillance_as_1.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

======
a3n
> Google has a more intimate picture than I do. The company knows exactly what
> I am thinking about, how much I am thinking about it, and when I stop
> thinking about it: all from my Google searches. And it remembers all of that
> forever.

Then _stop using Google search_!

People say that Google search gives them better results than whoever. What
Google is best at is giving you what Google finds. Which is good, but not
essential.

Use DuckDuckGo, they are currently in their defacto "don't be evil" period.
Use something else when DDG jumps it.

~~~
CodeMage
I would highly encourage anyone who thinks that the solution is as simple as
"don't use XYZ" to see what Moxie Marlinspike had to say about "Changing
threats to privacy" at Defcon 18:
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG0KrT6pBPk](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG0KrT6pBPk)

~~~
a3n
Interesting talk, thanks.

Are you referring to Moxie's "expanding social choice?" Yeah, it's an issue. I
don't feel I'm losing anything in that area by not using Google _search_.

Or are you talking about Google Analytics' encroaching into the fundamental
functionality of a site, beyond mere analytics, so that blocking Analytics
breaks the site? To that I would say to a site owner, don't use Analytics. As
for me the visitor ... dunno.

We do what we can and what we have the energy for. And while we should use and
develop a lot of these technical solutions, we'll get longer term bang for the
buck if we restrict the operations of our spies. Make 'em follow the
Constitution, in the US, for example.

Except, how would we know? And even if we did, as Moxie points out, now that
the NSA is collecting data where Google et al. collects it, other powers and
criminals are also doing the same thing at the same places.

So it's a mix, and I don't know how it's going to play out.

But I don't use Google search. Mostly.

------
Forrest7778
Its obvious that there's a ton of money in selling people's information for
advertising, but I don't think that people are even that angry that their
information is being sold so much as they aren't aware of what information is
being sold. I think that it'd be interesting to see more transparency in
selling of information so that target advertising can still be easily done
which allowing the users to actively choose one product over another if they
don't want their email addresses being given out as compared to cookies for
search relevancy or something along those lines.

------
r0h1n
Sorry, looks like this is a repost of a Nov 20th piece Schneier did for CNN
-[http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/20/opinion/schneier-
stalker-e...](http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/20/opinion/schneier-stalker-
economy/index.html)

~~~
privong
It is (and he notes that at the bottom of the post). Schneier frequently
reposts his essays from other sites.

~~~
r0h1n
I know it is, and I missed it while posting this to HN. Worse, I've semi-
ranted about such Schneier reposts earlier :-/

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6641908](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6641908)

