Google is planning to launch a censored version of its search engine in China that will blacklist websites and search terms about human rights, democracy, religion, and peaceful protest.
Documents seen by The Intercept, marked “Google confidential,” say that Google’s Chinese search app will automatically identify and filter websites blocked by the Great Firewall. When a person carries out a search, banned websites will be removed from the first page of results, and a disclaimer will be displayed stating that “some results may have been removed due to statutory requirements.” Examples cited in the documents of websites that will be subject to the censorship include those of British news broadcaster BBC and the online encyclopedia Wikipedia.
The service, called Dataset Search, launches today, and will be a companion of sorts to Google Scholar, the company’s popular search engine for academic studies and reports. Institutions that publish their data online, like universities and governments, will need to include metadata tags in their webpages that describe their data, including who created it, when it was published, how it was collected, and so on. This information will then be indexed by Dataset Search and combined with input from Google’s Knowledge Graph. (That’s the name for those boxes that pop up for common searches. So if dataset X was published by CERN, some info about the institute will also be included in the results.)
Google is reportedly working on an A.I.-based health and wellness coach.
Thanks to its spectrum of hardware products, Google would have a notable advantage over existing wellness coaching apps. While its coach, as reported, would primarily exist on smartwatches to start, Android Police noted that the company could include a smartphone counterpart as well. The company could also eventually spread it to Google Home or Android TV. The latter is unchartered territory for these kinds of apps, which are typically limited to smartphones and wearables. With availability in the home, lifestyle coaching recommendations could become increasingly contextual and less obtrusive. If you ask for a chicken parmesan dinner recipe, it could offer a healthier alternative instead; or if you’re streaming music at 10 p.m. and have set a goal to get more sleep, perhaps it could interrupt your music playback to remind you start getting ready for bed. A smartwatch or phone could do this too, of course, but by linking up its product ecosystem, Google could deliver helpful notifications in the context that makes the most sense.
Confidential Mode will push users further into Google’s own walled garden while giving them what we believe are misleading assurances of privacy and security.
It’s important to note at the outset that because Confidential Mode emails are not end-to-end encrypted, Google can see the contents of your messages and has the technical capability to store them indefinitely, regardless of any “expiration date” you set. In other words, Confidential Mode provides zero confidentiality with regard to Google.
But that’s only the beginning of the problems with Gmail’s new built-in IRM. Indeed, the security properties of the system depend not on the tech, but instead on a Clinton-era copyright statute. Under Section 1201 of the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA 1201”), making a commercial product that bypasses IRM is a potential felony, carrying a five-year prison sentence and a $500,000 fine for a first offense. DMCA 1201 is so broad and sloppily drafted that just revealing defects in Google IRM could land you in court.
We believe that using the term “Confidential Mode” for a feature that doesn’t provide confidentiality as that term is understood in infosec is misleading.
Results are obtained -via proxy- from Google, Yahoo, Bing, etc. to ensure you will not disclose any personal or behavioural data to these companies. These results are “neutral” ie. not influenced by your profile (you are out of the “filter bubble” designed to serve you ads you are more likely to click…).
…vos signets, vos courriels, vos contacts, vos fichiers sur Google Drive, toutes les informations citées ci-dessus, vos vidéos YouTube, les photos que vous avez prises sur votre téléphone, les produits que vous avez achetés en passant par Google et les sociétés qui vous les ont vendus…
La société détient également les informations de votre calendrier, vos hangouts Google, l’historique de vos déplacements, la musique que vous écoutez, les Google books que vous avez achetés, les groupes Google dont vous faites partie, les sites Internet que vous avez créés, les téléphones que vous avez eus, les pages que vous avez partagées, combien de pas vous faites par jour…
Since the beginning of 2017, Android phones have been collecting the addresses of nearby cellular towers—even when location services are disabled—and sending that data back to Google. The result is that Google, the unit of Alphabet behind Android, has access to data about individuals’ locations and their movements that go far beyond a reasonable consumer expectation of privacy.
Google plans to implant a “Google Campus” in Kreuzberg, Berlin. We, as a decentralized network of people are committed to not letting our beloved city be taken over by these tax-evading criminals who are building a dystopian future.
Google is trying to open a 2500m² “campus” in Kreuzberg to attract, detect and buy profitable companies and ideas.
Sold as a “community” project, in reality it aims at attracting “entrepreneurs” who will increase Google’s profit.
This project will turn the neighborhood into a large-scale laboratory for the deployment of their new invasive technologies.
Instead of a nice friendly “campus” we see a Google farm for harvesting Kreuzberg’s brains and talents, or a Google mine in which ideas and data will be extracted out of Berlin.
a plausible urban future based on cities acting as important sites for ‘data extractivism’ – the conversion of data harvested from individuals into artificial intelligence technologies, allowing companies such as Alphabet, Google’s parent company, to act as providers of sophisticated and comprehensive services. The cities themselves, the project insisted, would get a share of revenue from the data.
La Oficina [Open Data Barcelona], que es parte del Plan de Transformación Digital del Ayuntamiento que dirige la Comisionada de Tecnología e Innovación Digital, Francesca Bria, pretende el gobierno público de los datos en un trabajo en tres líneas: captación y almacenamiento, analítica y predicción, y comunicación y difusión. Es decir, el organismo captará información por sus propios medios y sensores pero también los pedirá a compañías que operan en el entorno urbano (telefónicas, energéticas y otras), los analizará y empleará para hacer con mejor tino sus políticas y los podrá a disposición de la ciudadanía, la universidad o quien los requiera.
Una oficina para “remunicipalizar la información” y convertir los datos en lo que son, un bien común.
[Sidewalk Labs] …el modelo urbanístico de Google no está tan lejos del de Blackstone (recuerdo: uno de los grandes imperios inmobiliarios del mundo) pero suma a éste la apropiación de la información, su gestión y su uso. Es decir, ya no sólo se trata de privatizar el espacio público, sino los datos que se generan en él (y en los espacios privados de cada familia y empresa que habite el barrio).