[LINK] Google going for 'gold'

[TKoltai]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: link-bounces at mailman.anu.edu.au 
> [mailto:link-bounces at mailman.anu.edu.au] On Behalf Of Rick Welykochy
> Sent: Wednesday, 11 January 2012 11:39 AM
> To: Jan Whitaker
> Cc: link at mailman.anu.edu.au; privacy at lists.efa.org.au
> Subject: Re: [LINK] Google going for 'gold'
> 
> 
> Jan Whitaker wrote:
> > [Note the mention of privacy comes at the very end of the article.]
> >
> > Google gets more personal with search results
> >
> > 2:03 PM, Jan 10, 2012
> >
> > 
> http://www.9news.com/news/article/241357/188/Google-gets-more-personal
> > -with-search-results-
> >
> > SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Google is sifting through the photos and 
> > commentary on its blossoming social network so its Internet search 
> > results can include more personal information.
> >
> > The additional personal touches that began to roll out Tuesday mark 
> > another step toward one of Google's most ambitious goals. 
> The Internet 
> > search leader eventually hopes to know enough about each of 
> its users 
> > so it can tailor its results to fit the unique interests of each 
> > person looking for something.
> 
> Have a look at "The Filter Bubble" which cogently addresses 
> many of the more serious issues surrounding the personalised 
> Internet. From perils affecting an individual's perception 
> and participation in the bigger picture to the assault 
> personalisation makes on our democracies, Eli Pariser writes 
> with deep background knowledge and experience. Highly recommended.
> 
<http://www.thefilterbubble.com/>
>
>Google, Facebook and a few other such sites feature very prominently in
his book. His credentials include "former Executive Director of MoveOn
(and now the >board president), [and] a co-founder of Avaaz.org".
>
>
>IMHO, intelligent and informed discussion should begin on how we as
users of the Net can avoid the perils of personalisation (i.e, "the
bubble") and 
>maintain a decent sense of both anonymity when required, and a broad
view of the Internet, always.

Rick, you said intelligent and informed discussion.
Unfortunately, intelligent and informed discussion has led to a serious
breach of Moores law[1] in relation to app development where the
exponential growth has bypassed all potential iteration combinations
possible of Moore's underlying tenets.

Intelligent and informed discussion on security matters has created so
much competition in the Malware world, that users are unable to keep up
with the variants and forced to compile their own operating versions
(which conversely, was made possible by Android and lots of intelligent
discussion).

In the IP world, we are now seeing intelligent discussion being self
censored in hindsight as being to close to the bone regarding commercial
in confidence (e.g.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11ad) 

I have been thinking about this for some time. 

Obviously virtual machines via VPN's is one option, but I think humanity
needs a "personal cloak" as well.
Someone needs to write a new browser that can carry with it a number of
"host" masking options. 
E.g. Rentable Avatar :"Google+ User id: Harry, Mozilla 1.5, 640 x 480,
440 MHz, located at ip 127.0.0.2 in Madagascar".  
WITH a call centre managing the avatar details.
In fact wouldn't it be cool to be able to have an entire MLPA between
Telco's pooling a set of unused IP's for cache search purposes.

The Music industry implemented a simialr tactic with fake files to
counter P2P, with considerable delaying success.
Various orgs are implementing it to spread the "good oil".
It seems that "we the people" need to implement something similar to
allow "We the people" to continue to have some privacy.

Hmmm, the concept seems almost worthwhile. But I think we should just do
it, without the intelligent discussion. And of course, once it's done,
membership by invitation only. Preferably without any unencrypted
intelligent discussion.

[1] Where each instruction set in a programme has the presumed
equivalency of one transistor.

TomK