Your Googlesearch are saved four 2 years

[scorpion]

That Google are saving al searches that have been done whit their search engine is no secret.
Presumably do MSN and yahoo exactly the same thing. Anyhow is it surprising many users
who have no idea about that.
Last summer demonstrated AOL whit clarity how easy such information can come in wrong hands.
The users are identifying by IP addresses and whit unique web browser cookie that will rest until 2038. According to Google are the only reason four save the information is to get the search engine better and to present relevant advertisements four the visitors. They have even create a function as do that you can go backwards and look at old searches you have done if you like.
Many of Googles other services are to find under the same head domain Google.com And this do it possible four Google to connect together information from al their services. To example
GMail.
After much critic Google has promised that al searches older than 2 years should bee anonymised. Im not sure about that Google gonna do that because a such extensive and detailed information about invidual users can have a big value four many different intressents.
Marketing and crime busting four example.
Besides is there a rumour about that Google and CIA shall have a close cooperation. In that case Im sure about that CIA want a copy before the annonmysation will be done.
Its good that Google start to erase the connection between user and what they have search after. But 2 years is a long time
If you want to avoid to bee tracked there is some tricks. First at al is to never search after your own name or address. You can also block cookies from Google by surfing true an anonymous proxy. If you use firefox can this addition bee worth a try. https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/743/
More tip you can find here: Online Privacy: http://www.masternewmedia.org/news/2...ow_to_hide.htm

[JohnnyWalkerBlackLabel]

mamma.com

[chefmike]

Nice links guys...I didn't know that firefox had that add-on, I'll have to check it out...and the mamma.com site looks worthwhile, I just bookmarked it.

[moose146]

looks like your mums gonna knnow you like trannies

[suckseed]

yeah, thanks. Hey Johnny, here's one for ya!

[vanished]

Scorpion

I contacted Google a while ago and, when I googled one of my screen names, I had the usual string of potentially embarrassing hits but then there were far others (my screen name was being passed around the universe)

Well, they said they purge every so often.

I think you hit on something exceptionally insightful and potentially frightening. How is not to say that the next Fuhrer will say, with his "Administration" (str8 guys in power) that adoring trannies or sucking cock or doing the twist aren't prime indicators that you're an enemy of the state?

Regardless, the information being collected on each of us every time one of our ten fingers hits the keypad is enormous - and can be used against us. Make that "will".

Does anyone - anywhere - know of a service that will hunt down and erase all such tracks? Would sure be great to get that off my already overburdened mind.

I know this is slightly off the topic of searches but it's surely cut from the same Stalinesque cloth. Big Brother.

[chefmike]

I know this is slightly off the topic of searches but it's surely cut from the same Stalinesque cloth.

I believe the term is "Bushesque", vanished.

[ottorocket]

Does this sound Bushesque? Its quite clear that Googles founders are dyed in the wool Democrats, and are not in step with privacy concerns of the average American. Google isn't for freedom of information, nor privacy rights, its for posing as an information resource, while it drives its ideologically left search engine through the internet. This whole privacy thing (logging users data) has little to do with this administration, or the Patriot act, or anything to do with the WOT...its about fishing for dollars and running a company with a certain political disposition. And that is fine if they want to do it that way, but lets clear the air here and let the facts lay where they should.


By Jim Hopkins, USA TODAY
SAN FRANCISCO — As it claws for greater power, the Democratic Party has found a newly rich ally in one of the fastest-growing U.S. companies: Google.

Google employees gave $207,650 to federal candidates for last year's elections, up from just $250 in 2000 when it was still a start-up. And 98% went to Democrats, the biggest share among top tech donors, a new USA TODAY campaign finance analysis shows.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...ive-usat_x.htm




WASHINGTON – The company's motto is "Don't be evil."

But, according to a new book on the New Media, that's exactly what Google, the world's largest Internet search engine is – "evil."

In "Stop The Presses," the latest book by Joseph Farah, the author makes what is, to date, the most definitive moral case against Google, with the following indictments:

* The company refuses to give the U.S. government records of impersonal data regarding searches that threaten no one, but happily provides information about potential dissidents to the tyrannical, repressive dictators in Beijing.

* The company disregards commemorations of national American holidays such as Memorial Day, but never forgets to remind users about Halloween and Earth Day.

* The company has refused to link to some news sources critical of radical Islam, but hosts blogs containing homosexual pornography.

* The company hosts blogs promoting "boy love" and sexual relationships between men and adolescents, but refuses to run ads from a Christian ministry to homosexuals.

* The company's top executive presides over a business that makes it easy to find out nearly anything about anyone, but protests when people use his service to find out about him.

* The company has blocked ads attacking Bill and Hillary Clinton, but welcomes ads attacking President Bush and other Republican leaders.

* The company, apparently in its bid to romance Beijing, wiped Taiwan, an independent and free island nation, off the face of its Internet maps.

* The company, one of the great free enterprise success stories of the decade, gives nearly all of its political donations to those who seek to rein in and regulate capitalism.



An entire chapter of "Stop The Presses" is devoted to Google's questionable – and, often, seemingly hypocritical, decisions and policies.

"I became passionate about Google in January 2006 when the company refused to hand over data on search patterns to the U.S. Justice Department in an investigation into child pornography," explains Farah.

Google cited the privacy of its users.

"But understand that the U.S. government was not looking for details about personal usage – only for search patterns that would show the effectiveness of anti-porn filters," Farah writes. "The government was trying to prove that minors could stumble on to child-porn websites by accident by entering quite innocent search terms. Its lawyers say that for its case to be tested, it needs a sample of actual searches."

Yahoo!, Microsoft's MSN and America Online all agreed to cooperate, insisting they would not hand over data that identified individual users. But Google, whose name has become synonymous with searches, refused.

"Now, I find it very, very difficult to rationalize that bad decision at Google," wrote Farah. "But, let's give the Google guys a break and imagine that they are trying to stand up against big government in some principled way. Let's say that they resent centralized authority in general and believe it is dangerous to cave into its demands. There's a little problem. If that were Google's position, it went out the window a week later. When the Chinese government, a totalitarian force unrivaled in the world today for brutality, harshness and freakish control asked Google to censor its search results in China in exchange for more access to the world's fastest-growing Internet market, the search giant caved in without protest."

Google agreed to create a unique address for China to ensure its people would not get access to information the government deemed threatening.

"You can be sure no one in China will be able to Google the content of, say, WorldNetDaily.com," writes Farah. "To get the Chinese license, Google agreed to omit Web content that the country's government finds objectionable. Incredibly, Google will base its censorship decisions on guidance provided by Chinese government officials. In other words, in case you don't yet see the point, Google flouts reasonable government requests designed to protect children from the emotional and spiritual ravages of porn, but accedes without protest to the demands of dictators only interested in denying their people information."

(Story continues below)

Google's decision means Chinese Internet users will continue to be sheltered from reading about subjects such as Taiwan's independence movement, 1989's Tiananmen Square massacre, citizens protests about the environment and the country's one-child population-control policies.

Google officials say they "agonized" over the decision.

"That suggests they know they did something wrong," concludes Farah. "When you struggle with your own conscience like that, there's a reason. But the bottom line and the continuing appeal of communism with weak-minded 'progressives' like those who run the company, won the day. No wonder Google hasn't been using the 'Don't be evil' slogan much: They can't live by it – and they know it."

How do Google executives justify their actions?

"We firmly believe, with our culture of innovation, Google can make meaningful and positive contributions to the already impressive pace of development in China," said Andrew McLaughlin, Google's senior policy counsel.

Farah says that translates: "We need this marketplace – at all costs. While we will never pay a price for fighting the U.S. government's reasonable requests, we know there will be a huge economic impact for refusing Beijing's demands."

"This is a real shame," said Julien Pain, head of Reporters Without Borders' Internet desk. "When a search engine collaborates with the government like this, it makes it much easier for the Chinese government to control what is being said on the Internet."

Farah writes: "Google has clearly chosen sides in the struggle for freedom in the world. It has chosen the side of slavery – and higher profits. It's despicable. It's evil. It's immoral."

What is the definition of irony?

"A company that gives nearly all its political money to the Democratic Party but bans searches of the word 'democracy' in countries that don't permit it," writes Farah. "When I say Google gives nearly all of its political contributions to one party, I am not exaggerating. As I reported in 2005, in the three previous election cycles, Google employee contributions went to the Democrats to the tune of $463,500, with a paltry $5,000 going to the Republicans."

What made Farah track the money?

"Way back in the Watergate era we were told to 'follow the money,'" he says. "It says so much about motivations. You can tell where people's hearts are by watching their pocketbooks. And, if that saying is true, the hearts of Google employees – from the lowest level to the highest level – belong in the Democratic Party."

Of approximately 200 individual Google employee political contributions to political candidates in 2004, 2002 and 2000, all but six went to Democrats, Democratic Party organizations and Democrat-supporting organizations such as MoveOn.org. One $250 contribution went to Ralph Nader, one went to President Bush's campaign and three went to Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch's campaigns.

Google Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Eric Schmidt was by far the biggest benefactor, giving $100,000 to the Democratic National Committee in 2000, $25,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2004, as well as maximum $2,000 contributions to 2004 Democratic presidential candidates Sens. John Kerry and Joe Lieberman, Gov. Howard Dean and Rep. Richard Gephardt.

The most striking thing about the list of Google political activists is the one-sided nature of the giving, Farah contends. From programmers to engineers to scientists to business development staff to general managers, there is near unanimity in support of Democrats and Democrat organizations.

"Now, should it surprise us when we see Google's political values reflected in its content?" asks Farah. "I believe when you see that kind of rigid political regimentation and unity in a company, it should surprise you if you don't see it."

[Paladin]

I just searched in google for one of my screen names..

It came up with FOUR matches. I've been using that name for 10 years.

I also clean out all internet cookies, temp files, etc EVERY day. If I want to re-visit a site, I bookmark it. I also use at least one NAT to keep my actual IP address hidden from google, yeah they can trace to a provider, but they won't get any other information.

and I try not to use the internet extorter...

Bottom line always practrice safe computer sex (and don't splooge on the keyboard either!)

[help!!!]

some scary shit i just googled my other username i tend to use and every forum i go one bar one came up

also my netlog myspace facebook and bebo

the forum that didnt come up i spoke to the admin and is apparently unsearchable and it seems to be the case

could it be implemented into this forum i wonder?