This comment has been removed by the author.
We will be having the Microsoft CPO on #PrivChat this Tuesday at Noon ET.Join us !Shaun Dakin
I think this latest attack campaign might require a more visible smackdown.Average people don't read this blog...
I looked at your blog and the one from Microsoft. + for Google: readers are encouraged to comment, and other readers can view those comments. - for Microsoft: readers can't comment, they can only mail the blog author, see http://blogs.technet.com/b/microsoft_blog/archive/2012/02/01/gone-google-got-concerns-we-have-alternatives.aspx
Perhaps its time to spend a little money on lobbyists?I know the system is corrupt but the stakes are high here.
I am to submit a report on this niche your post has been very very helpfull tucson security
Microsft you need to enable comments in your blog because we have some question lol -M +G = G :) <3
Why Microsoft campaigns always consist in trolling competitors and show misleading information? What do Microsoft fear?
1. Reduce the hurdles (per app privacy) to data sharing within your single sign on ecosystem.2. Bind (them) with Google+ profile (real names, identifiable consumers) with now unified service policies, click through legal terms.3. Easier to launch new services/products with this more platform centric model (leveraging common policy, data sharing API (future a la Amazon), accounts, etc).4. ???????????????????5. Profit
The World Economic Forum has been running a major project called 'Re-thinking Personal Data' which is driving new governance models in this space, as well as stimulating new innovative 'personal data services' for individuals. The principle is to see the user as a 'producer' of valuable commercial and social assets (data), rather than just a 'consumer' of services (eg. search or social networking), and then think about structures to enable these assets to be leveraged...by the user, for the user. the approach is to put the user fully in control of how their data is exploited, and create 'trust frameworks' (laws and technologies) to support this. We will be sharing more of the output from this project at the upcoming New Digital Economics event in San Francisco at the end of March: http://bit.ly/xX0HCC. Google and MSFT will be participating among other important players and stakeholders in this space...
As the cost of the software is so high, so that the medium standard people are not able to use it in their office or industry to get more advantage. The cost of the software include the maintenance so that within a perod of time if that software shows any problem then the software developer team will repair it without cost. Also due to the high cost of the software most of the or student always trying to use the free version of that software and not able to get the real benefit of that software.http://www.restaurant-pos-software.com/Products/RetailPosSoftware.aspx
In the policy, when you said "Can be deleted" I read "It won't be visible". At the end of the day we (the users) have no real control over our own info.
Wow, really interesting comments. You should all remember that Google provides a "free" service, and You are NOT obligated to use it in any way! Get an iPhone, search Bing, use Mozy... or whatever else. If You feel this insecure about Google, use a service You trust.
Too bad most people will be too stupid to realize the actual facts, and the fact that Google ever so carefully worded these facts to make them legally accurate, but in reality avoid each myth (each of which are mostly true).
"No one reads your email but you. ... as well as show ads that are relevant to you."How will you show ads relevant to me without knowing what that email contains? How will you measure the success of that ad campaign without capturing my click info to that ad?You can kid people who don't understand ad server technologies but this statement creates lots of contraversy on its own if you don't disclose the details.
Google: "[O]ur computers scan messages to ... show ads that are relevant to you."Again, Microsoft didn't say Google employees read our messages, but Google the company. So what you're saying, Big G, is Microsoft is actually right about you.Outside of that, I couldn't make heads or tails from the corporate double-speak.
these words i just read are the beginning of the end of the zuckerberg-era...Google has the answer right here...it's also in their company mantra "dont be evil"...facebook cant prove they work honoustly and it even feels rather evil or at least too tricky again and again while Google still is holding nothing back...people need to be made aware of this and the first crack in the facebook empire is made...keep your mantra alive be the peoples safe haven in the end Google
J.D.: "Microsoft didn't say Google employees read our messages, but Google the company."What difference does that make in the face of ads like these? : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDbrX5U75dk
@Hugo: The difference would probably be a slander & libel lawsuit against MSFT if they did say the employees were reading our e-mail. Or if it was true, how many potential breach of contract suits would be filed against GOOG, but IANAL.
The comments on this blog belong only to the person who posted them. We do, however, reserve the right to remove off-topic or inappropriate comments.