@roberto0315
Profile
Registered: 3 months, 4 weeks ago
Reasons not to use Google
To avoid main different folks astray, fetishbreak.com please do not confer with movies utilizing the host name youtube.com or its aliases. Instead, make a hyperlink to invidio.us or one of many associated proxy websites. Lead individuals to what is nice, not to what's dangerous! Just be sure that not to choose a proxy that is "protected" by Cloudflare, since that sends its personal nonfree software program. This way of referring is probably fail-secure: it might stop to work, but it's going to probably not begin main individuals to run nonfree software program. There is also a Firefox add-on to bypass that Javascript code. IceCat comes with that add-on by default. But that will not overcome the blockage of entry by way of Tor. If Google defeats the invidio.us proxies, I can ell you the way I will not reply. I cannot surrender to youtube's nonfree software and surveillance. I take pleasure in having access to the music and video there, but I can't do foolish or determined issues to maintain that entry. You shouldn't both! You do not need a special "platform" to post an audio or video on the net. You may submit an audio or video file on any internet site. Just put the file on the location and hyperlink to it as if it had been an abnormal web page. All graphical browsers can handle that.Google censored set up of Samsung's advert-blocker, saying that blocking ads is "interference" with the sites that advertise (and surveil users by means of adverts). The advert-blocker is proprietary software program, identical to the program (Google Play) that Google used to deny access to put in it. I might refuse to have both of them on my computer. Using a nonfree program offers the owner energy over you, and Google has exercised that power.
Surveillance
To establish your self to a Google service is a grave error. - Google shops a listing of all purchases a person has made that in any means mention the user's a gmail account. A user can delete purchases from this record, but just one buy at a time. Then that buy disappears from the listing that the user sees. Whether it stays in one other checklist, we have no idea, however I'd anticipate Google to answer that question with doubletalk. The article talks about what Google cites as its motive for doing this, however the motive is irrelevant - as a result of it's not an excuse.- Google's alarm system, "Nest Secure", seems to have contained a microphone all alongside - however only recently started listening.- Google "sanitizes" its whole search logs, then publishes them; but it surely declines to describe the process of "sanitization", and there is proof that customers may be tracked through them.
The article also mentions two-issue authentication, which in and of itself could be a helpful technique (although I've read that crackers can now defeat it), but has the flaw of requiring a mobile phone. My rule #2 for digital security is not to have a mobile phone.
- Gmail was planned from the start as an enormous surveillance system, to make psychological profiles not only of Gmail customers but of everyone who sends mail to Gmail users.- Google quietly combined its ad-tracking profiles with its browsing profiles.- Google has discovered a method to trace most bank card purchases within the US, even these not finished by means of a phone, and correlate that with people's online actions.
Google cannot do either facet to me, since I pay cash and do not carry a cell phone, and it would not know what web pages I look at.
- Google Play sends app builders the non-public details of customers that set up the app. Merely asking customers' "consent" for this is not enough to legitimize that. We know that almost all customers have given up on studying simply what they're "consenting" to, and the reason being that they are accustomed to being told, "If you want to use this service, you will need to consent to blah blah blah." To actually protect individuals's privateness, we should cease Google (and different firms) from getting this private data in the first place!- Google shops an enormous amount of data on every consumer. This could include, along with the person's search history and advertising profile: - A timeline of the user's location throughout every day- Data on the usage of non-Google cellphone apps- 'Deleted' emails and files uploaded to Google Drive
Facebook and Google joined with ISPs to defeat a privateness initiative in California. Collecting the some ways Google is concerned with US authorities surveillance, abroad and in the US, quantities to quite a package deal.
Google invitations folks to let Google monitor their cellphone use, and all internet use in their homes, for an extravagant fee of $20.
This malicious performance isn't a secondary facet of a program with another function; this is the software's sole purpose, and Google says so. But Google says it in a way that encourages most people to disregard the details and remain unaware of the extent of the spying. Anyway, mere consent doesn't legitimize massive surveillance.
Amazon and Google need "smart" devices to report all exercise to them.
In other phrases, you probably have a "good" (learn "spy") lightbulb with that proposed feature, and tell an Amazon or Google listening machine about it, thenceforth any time you switched it on or off irrespective of how, it will ship a report to Amazon or Google.
Even right now, the one option to make "sensible" merchandise safe is to make sure they cannot connect with anyone else's programs.
Another piece of Google's surveillance capitalism: when stores mail receipts to a gmail.com account, Google figures out and information who bought what.
I think that the shop itself shouldn't get this data, which is why I all the time pay money and never give my title.
*Google faces lawsuit over tracking in apps even when customers opted out.*
- Google cuts off accounts for users that resell Pixel telephones. They lose entry to all of their mail and documents saved in Google servers underneath that account. It needs to be illegal to put any "phrases of service" on a physical product. It should also be illegal to shut an account on a service without letting the user obtain no matter was stored there. These events provide one other purpose why colleges should by no means ask a student to use a service account linked to the student's title.
Censorship
- Amazon and Google have cut off area-fronting, a feature used to allow people in tyrannical countries to reach communication techniques that are banned there.- French blogger Claims YouTube Tried to Censor Juncker Interview.- Google has agreed to carry out particular censorship of Youtube for the federal government of Pakistan, deleting views that the state opposes. This may help the illiberal Pakistani state suppress dissent.
- Youtube's "content ID" routinely deletes posted videos in a way copyright regulation does not require.- YouTube has made private offers with the copyright business to censor works which can be truthful use. More info.
- Google shut off Alexa O'Brien's Google Drive account, denying her access to it, as a result of her reporting on Chelsea Manning's trial included copies of al-Qa'ida propaganda that was offered as proof.- Google is deleting porn artists' porn videos from their very own private accounts, quietly and mysteriously.
Never trust a remote storage firm to maintain anything however a spare backup copy. Once you store that, put your information into an archive and encrypt it so that the company cannot tell what's in them - not even their file names.
- Vox attorneys obtained Youtube to take down criticisms of a video published by Vox, and threaten the critics with punishment, too.
The videos were nearly certainly honest use, however Youtube determined against the critics anyway. This reveals how Youtube's common submission to the copyright business constrict's folks's rights.
Miscellaneous
- Google is a tax dodger. In fact, it is not the just one, but that is no excuse.- Google helps the TPP due to three largely-evil provisions that might profit Google.- Google has made it so that Chrome now routinely installs the DRM module. This makes it harmful for security researchers in the US to analyze doable insecurity in Chrome. More data.- Support is growing for reverting US antitrust legislation to what it was earlier than Reagan weakened it. That's the reason Google is using its affect to weaken those that campaign towards this.
How I Got Fired From a D.C. Think Tank for Fighting Against the ability of Google.
- Google instructed a reporter in 2011 that web pages without "+1" buttons could be punished with lower search rankings. When she published a narrative in Forbes about that, Google pressured Forbes to take it down.
Website: https://fetishbreak.com/
Forums
Topics Started: 0
Replies Created: 0
Forum Role: Participant