Slashdot Mirror


Google Data Liberation Group Seeks To Unlock Data

Several sources are reporting that The Data Liberation Front, a new engineering group within Google, is trying make it easier for users to move their data in and out of Google products. They have already "liberated" about half of Google's offerings (including Blogger and Gmail) and have plans to liberate Google Sites and Google Docs in the near future. "In a blog post this morning, Data Liberation engineering manager Brian Fitzpatrick, uses a good analogy to explain why the company sees this is an important step: 'Imagine you want to move out of your apartment. When you ask your landlord about the terms of your previous lease, he says that you are free to leave at any time; however, you cannot take all of your things with you - not your photos, your keepsakes, or your clothing. If you're like most people, a restriction like this may cause you to rethink moving altogether. Not only is this a bad situation for you as the tenant, but it's also detrimental to the housing industry as a whole, which no longer has incentive to build better apartments at all. Although this may seem like a strange analogy, this pretty accurately describes the situation my team, Google's Data Liberation Front, is working hard to combat from an engineering perspective.'"

167 comments

  1. So... by Drunken+Buddhist · · Score: 4, Funny

    So the idea is that making it easier to leave google makes you more likely to stay with google?

    I need to try this on my girlfriend!

    --
    -1, Disagree is not a valid option. Troll, Flamebait and Offtopic are not a substitute.
    1. Re:So... by Bragador · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You should. If you are not jealous and trust her, she'll feel more "free" in the relationship and stay with you. On the other hand, if you keep watching her and always remind her that she's yours, she'll get away.

    2. Re:So... by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Doesn't the saying goes something like "The harder you squeeze, the more will slip through your fingers..."?

      So yes, in theory is will make people more likely to stay with Google. No fear of being locked means you don't look for a way out, which is a problem for Microsoft right now.

    3. Re:So... by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 5, Funny

      This is Slashdot. The appropriate version of this plattitude goes:"The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers".

      At the suggestive notion of Princess Leia, and the salacious interpretation of "Slip through your fingers", many of the regular posters will now compulsively grasp their crotch, as the OggTheora of "Slave Leia's Supplication" is summoned from Portable VNC on the USB key, once again...

      --
      "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
    4. Re:So... by m.ducharme · · Score: 4, Funny

      Must....not....fap....

      --
      Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
    5. Re:So... by rolfwind · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So the idea is that making it easier to leave google makes you more likely to stay with google?

      This is an excellent idea on google's part. It's like that old IT truism whereby the more necessary a programmer becomes, the sooner you should get rid of him.

      It could help small businesses and organizations decide to go with google, if they have guarantee of local backups as well. Nothing is more annoying than being able to put data in, but not getting it out in any timely, consistent fashion - which is the failure of many web-based solutions. Especially as Google is aiming to have all the productivity tools on the web - email, web, documents, etc.

    6. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Ask Sting: "... If you love somebody, set her free... "

    7. Re:So... by DragonWriter · · Score: 2, Informative

      So the idea is that making it easier to leave google makes you more likely to stay with google?

      No, the idea is that making it easier to leave particular Google services makes it more likely that people will use those services in the first place, not that it makes them more likely to stay with them once they start using them.

    8. Re:So... by danieltdp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      On the other hand (no pun intended), if you completely open your hands, the butterfly will simply fly away.

      As always, the solution lies in the middle: you should neither squeeze nor open your hands, but simply hold it gently :-P

      Coming back to the topic. Being possible do leave will make more people willing to get-in in the first place

      --
      -- dnl
    9. Re:So... by mweather · · Score: 1

      On the other hand (no pun intended), if you completely open your hands, the butterfly will simply fly away.

      Why? It landed there for a reason, didn't it?

    10. Re:So... by tekproxy2 · · Score: 1

      It's like your in my brain.

    11. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or rather, "The more you tighten your grid, Ellison, the more Sun Microsystems (engineers) will slip through your fingers."

    12. Re:So... by l3prador · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is a good strategy if and only you are confident that you are the best option available. In Google's case, this is probably true, but I can't speak for the GP's case. (Although the fact that confidence is attractive to most women might help in this case.)

    13. Re:So... by jdgeorge · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hmmm.... my mind goes back to a girl I left long years ago, who told me, "I, for one, welcome my new, liberating overlord."

      Gah! Meme conflict... or... hey....

    14. Re:So... by ashtophoenix · · Score: 1

      I tried it with mine...and here I am now...on Slashdot.

      --
      Life is about being a Phoenix!
    15. Re:So... by hedwards · · Score: 1

      The point is that it's a selling point as much as anything. I'm more than a little hesitant in general to sign up with a service or use a product that prevents me from taking my business elsewhere if I don't like it. The movement being allowed by Google with their engineers is a pretty firm demonstration of their confidence in their ability to provide people with products they want to use.

      This is also the reason why I asked for a refund from Intuit a couple years back. I've never done that before or since, but with the general pain they made it to get my data into their program and the hostage fees they wanted to charge the institutions I did business with, it just wasn't worth the absurd effort.

    16. Re:So... by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      You know, I've never got the Leia in the Gold Bikini thing, and to be honest, I don't know anyone who does. Yes, she's wearing a bikini, but it's nothing that wasn't in every second 80's film and even BayWatch.

      I think it's a generational thing. I must watched that film at the age of 9 or 10, whereas older people saw it first in their late teens or twenties. First time I even remembered Leia had worn it was when an almost 40 year old cast playing late twentysomethings brought it up on a show called "Friends". Turns out the bikini is now a sex fantasy fetish for a lot of older nerds. In retrospect, it's obvious to me now, but I still regard it as a low point of nerd-dom in general.

      It's just a bikini.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    17. Re:So... by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      I really don't think clamping down on the butterfly is a good idea :( I don't know what you are trying to prove you sick bastard.

      BTW fly murderer, trapping butterflies is just mean, touching them with your greasy hands kills them.

    18. Re:So... by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      I think the idea is that it is the right thing to do. Ethically Google has been doing a great job, aside from youtube of course.

    19. Re:So... by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 1

      In my late 40's.

      Saw SW (no suffix) in '77. The "Lip-gloss Leia" in a slinky gown and raygun? That was a mild grabber, for the close of the Disco years. I thought: "She's not so ugly, for a white girl".

      By the time a third picture showed up? I already imagined I was Paul Weller or Ray Davies reborn. Hell, Weller was still charting!

      Not very likely to get my knicks tightened-in-front by some JAP in a gold-bikini. I was looking for the next P.P. Arnold, and making time with asian birds.

      --
      "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
    20. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's so damn easy, when your feelings are such
      To overprotect her, to love her too much
      And my mind goes back to a girl I left some years ago
      Who told me,
      Just Hold On Loosely, but don't let go
      If you cling too tight babe,
      you're gonna loose control
      Your baby needs someone to believe in
      And a whole lot of space to breathe in.

      (Sure, the Star Wars reference is gonna get way more mod points, but what the heck.)

    21. Re:So... by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 1

      So the idea is that making it easier to leave google makes you more likely to stay with google?

      Those fools! Didn't they learn anything from AOL's incredible success bolstered in great part by their refusal to let customers get away from them without hours customer service torment and continued credit card charges!?! And what's with offering all this stuff for free?! This Google company is just another hare-brained flash-in-the-pan get-rich-quick scheme... I'm glad I abstained from buying from their initial public offering. You guys thought you were worth $100 share?!! Laughable.

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    22. Re:So... by bitt3n · · Score: 2, Funny

      You should. If you are not jealous and trust her, she'll feel more "free" in the relationship and stay with you. On the other hand, if you keep watching her and always remind her that she's yours, she'll get away.

      this is one of those situations where either solution will work, just don't use half measures. It's either "complete freedom" or "manacled in a half-mile deep concrete bunker somewhere in a remote region of desert in New Mexico." Mutual respect and devotion, or such abject desolation as sucks out the will to live, leaving a mere husk of a living thing groveling at one's feet for death. Every relationship is different, and romance is always about surprises, so don't hesitate to go with your instincts.

    23. Re:So... by dangitman · · Score: 1

      I don't know about that. I've met plenty of women who love the jealousy and control. If you're not jealous and controlling, to them it means that you "don't care" and aren't serious about them.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    24. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and then u spring the trap

    25. Re:So... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I just got the 9-DVD CAV pre-Greedo-shooting-first LD set and Slave Leia choking a big slug is hot. Just don't know what else to say...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    26. Re:So... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      So the idea is that making it easier to leave google makes you more likely to stay with google?

      Cast thy bread upon the waters: for thou shalt find it after many days.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    27. Re:So... by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      It's either "complete freedom" or "manacled in a half-mile deep concrete bunker somewhere in a remote region of desert in New Mexico." Mutual respect and devotion, or such abject desolation as sucks out the will to live, leaving a mere husk of a living thing groveling at one's feet for death.

      Is that you Phillip Garrido?

    28. Re:So... by GTRacer · · Score: 1

      As always, the solution lies in the middle: you should neither squeeze nor open your hands, but simply hold it gently :-P

      Thank you for that beautiful thought - you just made my morning! /cheer

      --
      Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
    29. Re:So... by HamburglerJones · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've met plenty of women who love the jealousy and control.

      I call those chicks "women I don't want to date."

    30. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It makes me a lot more likely ( > 0% chance ) to start using google applications.

    31. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you think that when a butterfly lands, it never wants do fly away? Either because it was mistaken about the "landing site" or because "the landing site" doesn't listen to her anymore?

    32. Re:So... by danieltdp · · Score: 1

      So you don't like to touch butterflies? What do you prefer? Worms? :-) Just kidding.

      Again, back on topic, if you don't like google, don't touch it. Even if you can liberate your data later.

      --
      -- dnl
    33. Re:So... by INowRegretThesePosts · · Score: 1

      This is a good strategy if and only you are confident that you are the best option available.

      Do you really think like that?
      Once you choose a good person and love her, you don't compare her to other "options" and see if she is the best. You love her as a family member.

      Also, a relationship is supposed to make the couple happy and to build a harmonious environment in which the children may grow. Jealousy and distrust make these goals impossible, so if your girlfriend is jealous and distrustful the relationship is without purpose and you would be better alone.

      I'm not saying your girlfriend should allow you to go to nightclubs (these are inappropriate places in my opinion); I'm saying that she shouldn't be jealous of every female voice in the phone and of every beautiful female coworker; I'm saying she should trust you to do things by yourself (say, play bowling with friends, or travel to another state to visit your mom), even if a beautiful woman will be there too; you should not refrain from doing something something because your girlfriend is distrustful (except for inherently inappropriate things such as going to a nightclub).

      One must choose a trustworthy person to begin with; the idea that one can be with a person she does not trust and ensure fidelity through control and spying is ridiculous.

    34. Re:So... by l3prador · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I actually really needed to hear that.

    35. Re:So... by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      You miss the second part: Actually make her get jealous on *you*, not being quite so sure to be able to keep you when slacking.

      Ok, I'm half-kidding. The basic idea is, that you are worth so much to her, and that she herself will be worth so much more than the men out there, that she will not even want to think about other men.
      And the basic way to do this, is to believe in your and her high value so much, that even if it wasn't the case, you will fulfill that expectation, and that she will get sucked in by your strong reality. (Something that women also find pretty attractive.)

      But don't expect her not to also play value games. ^^
      Keep it fair. After all, you love each other.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    36. Re:So... by mweather · · Score: 1

      If the only places it can fly to would imprison it? Yes. I think the butterfly would stay put.

  2. Do No Evil? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    This is an even-numbered, "Do No Evil" week.

    Watch out next week though.

  3. Your world delivered... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    to the NSA!

  4. The Anti-AOL by chill · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is one of THE major complaints about AOL. Easy to get data in, impossible to get out.

    Just last month I was asked to assist someone to get all their contacts (1,500 or so) out of AOL's mail system. There is no export feature, nor any third-party tool to do it. AOL's official answer is to print it out for a backup.

    I called AOL's support, and after several rounds of phone-tree hell, got a tech who told me flat out "We don't do that. Good luck!"

    I ended up writing a script that parsed the XML-like output of their "print" function. Print to screen, save to file, parse with Perl. It hoses up the contact lists, which are included and just end up creating duplicates. They don't output as lists at all.

    Still, it was marginally better than hiring someone to retype it all by hand.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:The Anti-AOL by tunapez · · Score: 1

      Sorry to hear the export was so painful, Chill. Just wait until you decide to cancel the service altogether... it's going to make this experience seem like a walk in the park. >br>
      PS: When that time comes, save the headaches of contesting the unauthorized charges every month and cancel the credit card they have on file.

      --
      Imagination drew in bold strokes, instantly serving hopes and fears, while knowledge advanced by slow increments...
    2. Re:The Anti-AOL by imunfair · · Score: 4, Funny

      AOL is actually free now, but back when they charged it was more of a feature than a problem that they wanted to retain customers. As long as you were willing to call them every month or two you could obtain completely free service. Sign up for a trial and when it was about to expire just call and say you wanted to cancel - they would usually help you find an excuse to extend your trial by a month or two more. Once the extension was nearly up - call again. As far as I could tell you could do that forever - I tried it for about a year.

      Story bonus: They also had little surveys you could fill out for discounts off your subscription fee ... but if you were on a trial account they would actually mail you a check for the amount you 'earned'. It was only a few dollars but I found it amusing to get paid to have an AOL account.

    3. Re:The Anti-AOL by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1

      If I had mod points I would mod you up just for the use of Perl.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    4. Re:The Anti-AOL by pete-classic · · Score: 1

      It was only a few dollars but I found it amusing to get paid to have an AOL account.

      Not even close to enough.

      -Peter

    5. Re:The Anti-AOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This has worked for me:
      http://www.mozilla.org/support/thunderbird/faq#aol

      I have also successfully used third party tools to import old mail messages to Thunderbird. YMMV

    6. Re:The Anti-AOL by Jay+L · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I left AOL in 2001, but my roommate wrote the original Personal Filing Cabinet, and I can confirm that there's no known official way of exporting any of it, or at least there wasn't last I checked. There are some third-party tools that do a so-so job of the mail itself, but they are very picky about which AOL client version you have, and I don't know if they export the address book itself... and it looks like they've all been abandoned anyway (there was ForMorph, PFCViewer, and FvonGordon's PFC Converter).

      And yes, it's cool to see Google doing this of their own (apparent) volition. It's tempting, when you're the 800-pound gorilla, to view your user base as a captive audience, and to make it as difficult as possible to switch away (we used to call that "flypaper"). But in the long term, it encourages competition, which fosters innovation, which benefits everyone.

    7. Re:The Anti-AOL by Wierdy1024 · · Score: 1

      The export tools they use are never going to export ALL the data - for example, my email program keeps track of my recently used contacts and puts them at the top of the list. If I were to export my contact list and re-import into another app, the order of the list would be reset.

      In a similar way, if I export all my email from one mail service to another, I might loose any labels or flags\stars I had put on the messages, even if my new service supported labels/stars/flags, simply because the export format, being generic, doesn't contain that data.

    8. Re:The Anti-AOL by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      It's also good sense.

      If you have two apps, apparently equal on features, and you're looking to switch from your old application (for whatever reason), which one are you going to try out first?

      The one that you can't get your data out of again?

      Or the one you can?

      If you don't like it, you can move on to the next one. But there's a chance you'll like the first one, you know, the one you tried first, because it was less risk.

    9. Re:The Anti-AOL by tunapez · · Score: 1

      but if you were on a trial account they would actually mail you a check for the amount you 'earned'. It was only a few dollars but I found it amusing to get paid to have an AOL account.

      Wow.

      My old high school friend was not on that program, she decided last December to cancel her account of 10+ years. She was dinged monthly up until May, calling and disputing the charges every month. Saddest part is, she has had broadband for 4 years and paid AOL for all that time b/c she thought it was a required portal to the intertubes and didn't want to lose email addy.

      The phone reps lied(misled, if you're a word-parser) to keep her paying, despite my assurances. Not an isolated incident, long-time MSN users get the same treatment. Often.

      --
      Imagination drew in bold strokes, instantly serving hopes and fears, while knowledge advanced by slow increments...
    10. Re:The Anti-AOL by yuhong · · Score: 1

      Yep, interesting side effect. I mean, why do you think they want to find an excuse to not cancel your service?

    11. Re:The Anti-AOL by cffrost · · Score: 1

      I called AOL's support, and after several rounds of phone-tree hell, got a tech who told me flat out "We don't do that. Good luck!"

      Those guys are AsshOLes.

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    12. Re:The Anti-AOL by YourExperiment · · Score: 1

      I found it amusing to get paid to have an AOL account.

      I always found it amusing that anyone would have an AOL account without getting paid.

    13. Re:The Anti-AOL by fulldecent · · Score: 1

      >> I called AOL's support, and after several rounds of phone-tree hell, got a tech who told me flat out "We don't do that. Good luck!"
      >>
      >> I ended up writing a script that parsed the XML-like output of their "print" function. Print to screen, save to file, parse with Perl. It hoses up the contact lists, which are included and just end up creating duplicates. They don't output as lists at all.

      Link please and/or fulltext.

      --

      -- I was raised on the command line, bitch

  5. Interesting atitude, "Anti-lockin"... by nweaver · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is both the big advantage (for providers) and disadvantage (for customers) with SaaS-type "cloud" services: data lock-in. Its interesting that Google believes that they can compete enough on quality that lock-in is no longer an advantage to them because it scares away more potential customers than it traps.

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
    1. Re:Interesting atitude, "Anti-lockin"... by QuantumRiff · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They have a HUGE upside to helping people move their data out of Exchange servers (emails, contacts, appointments, etc) into the paid Google Apps service.. Last time I looked, their tools for doing just this were coming along nicely. That was one of the biggest complaints, getting the email and archives out. This same thing was a big pain, when MS wanted people to migrate from Groupwise and Lotus Notes to Exchange. MS made a nice little importer, but they didn't make their data easy to Export.

      That can lead to very tempting sales pitches, give us 6 months, (or a year, or whatever) and if you don't like our service, we'll help you go right back to what you had before.

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    2. Re:Interesting atitude, "Anti-lockin"... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      This is both the big advantage (for providers) and disadvantage (for customers) with SaaS-type "cloud" services: data lock-in. Its interesting that Google believes that they can compete enough on quality that lock-in is no longer an advantage to them because it scares away more potential customers than it traps.

      Actually, I think Google thinks that avoiding lock-in itself is a competitive advantage that is bigger than lock-in itself would be. If people are afraid to use your product for critical uses because of fear of lock-in, it doesn't help you that they can't leave once they start.

    3. Re:Interesting atitude, "Anti-lockin"... by ducomputergeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's why we give our customers 5 methods of export: PDF, Word, Excel, CSV, and XML. Every order, customer, report, and product can be exported for back up or to take elsewhere. The only thing they can't get to is credit card details. And we won't release those for obvious reasons. So that might be a headache if they switched to another service, but...

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    4. Re:Interesting atitude, "Anti-lockin"... by CodeBuster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Its interesting that Google believes that they can compete enough on quality that lock-in is no longer an advantage to them because it scares away more potential customers than it traps.

      With the rise of strong or at least credible competition from many open source products and a greater user awareness (although still not universal) of the perils of lock-in, the use of lock-in as a strategy by proprietary software vendors is becoming progressively less valuable. In fact, a tipping point may already have been reached whereby, as you stated, the number or users entrapped is not outweighed by the number of users scared away by the trap. This is a good thing for both consumers and the marketplace because it removes or lessens the impact of a classic barrier to entry in the software business. Google is wise to recognize and exploit this against other large competitors, such as Microsoft and Autodesk (which is infamous for their proprietary file format lock-in on their AutoCAD products), that have historically favored lock-in or at least done little or nothing to facilitate interoperability.

  6. Bad analogy by jo42 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Data Liberation engineering manager Brian Fitzpatrick, uses a good analogy ... you cannot take all of your things with you

    This a bad analogy. When you move your stuff out of your apartment, you are actually removing the stuff - not making copies. With Google The Evil (tm), you have no guarantee that they haven't stashed a "backup" somewhere in their dark recesses. You don't really take your stuff, you just make a copy.

    1. Re:Bad analogy by Yvan256 · · Score: 3, Funny

      No way dude, they wouldn't do something evil like that. I really take my stuff and they keep the low-quality copy!

    2. Re:Bad analogy by jfengel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The analogy, as with most analogies, is useful for precisely the things it was designed to be useful for, and is misleading when extended.

      There is a legitimate fear of Google's tools that you can't apply any other tools to your data. These guys are trying to fix that problem.

      There is another legitimate fear that you can't delete your data for certain and ever. That's Somebody Else's Problem, and also not covered by the analogy.

      Analogies can be useful to explain things, but they're rarely valid for actually proving things. They're useful for proofs only when the analogy is so precise that it's no easier to understand or manipulate than the original thing.

    3. Re:Bad analogy by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 2, Funny

      Dude, did you know the government puts fluoride in the drinking water? It's true!

    4. Re:Bad analogy by QuantumRiff · · Score: 1

      But how awesome would it be if your landlord said "don't worry about paying for renters insurance when your with us. if you lose something, due to fire, theft, or whatever, we'll just replace it, whether its the couch, TV, whatever...

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    5. Re:Bad analogy by tamird · · Score: 1

      You're right, it's a bad analogy, but you're also missing the point. This isn't about privacy, it's about lock-in. This group is trying to make sure Google customers are able to pack up and take their business elsewhere. While Gooogle's privacy practices are questionable, there's nothing evil about them giving you freedom to abandon them.

    6. Re:Bad analogy by c0d3g33k · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No. The reason it's a bad analogy is because it misses the key and only crucial point: the fundamental disconnect between "your things" and "cannot take" when the latter is arbitrarily imposed on you by a party that has no legitimate claim on the former. The landlord has no claim on "your things" unless you have breached contract somehow, like not paying rent. Otherwise taking "your things" with you when moving out is an activity not to be questioned at all. A better analogy might be that the mere act of moving in resulted in the landlord claiming "your things" were now "his things" without any justification supported by law or common cultural practice. The Google Data Liberation Group is (belatedly, IMHO) expending energy to rectify a situation that should never have existed in the first place. A laudable effort, to be sure, but one that should not have been necessary.

    7. Re:Bad analogy by Thinboy00 · · Score: 1

      No. The reason it's a bad analogy is because it misses the key and only crucial point: the fundamental disconnect between "your things" and "cannot take" when the latter is arbitrarily imposed on you by a party that has no legitimate claim on the former. The landlord has no claim on "your things" unless you have breached contract somehow, like not paying rent. Otherwise taking "your things" with you when moving out is an activity not to be questioned at all. A better analogy might be that the mere act of moving in resulted in the landlord claiming "your things" were now "his things" without any justification supported by law or common cultural practice. The Google Data Liberation Group is (belatedly, IMHO) expending energy to rectify a situation that should never have existed in the first place. A laudable effort, to be sure, but one that should not have been necessary.

      What if the landlord assisted you in acquiring (legally) the items in question (i.e. Google Docs helps you make documents, you don't make them all on your own, though you contribute all of the actual creativity)? If e.g. he helped pay for them, on the assumption that doing so would raise the rent and help him re-rent it to someone else later (once you're gone/moved-out), then it might be reasonable for him to at least request compensation for the items. Depending on the contract, he might be able to force such compensation. IANAL.

      --
      $ make available
    8. Re:Bad analogy by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      The landlord has no claim on "your things" unless you have breached contract somehow, like not paying rent.

      I don't think that's true. Even if you haven't paid rent, the landlord can't hold your stuff hostage. What he CAN do is sue you in a court of law, but he doesn't get to take your stuff because you owe him money. AFAIK, only secured loans actually set that up, but its done so by contract. I haven't seen a lease yet that gives a landlord the right to hold your stuff for none payment... and I'm not sure that's legal, since if you're not paying rent you lose your right to be there (including your stuffs right to be there), but the landlord isn't out anything except your back rent (i.e., he still has the building).

    9. Re:Bad analogy by fermion · · Score: 1
      It is a bad analogy, and has little to do with real situation. Reminds me of the reel world and the real world they did on MST3k.

      In the reel world people with no visible income can afford luxurious apartments. In the real world people must often compromise on their accommodations to eat. In the reel world people can afford any arbitrary level of privacy. In the real world we make compromises on privacy to minimize opportunity costs. In the reel world every person can manage their own computers and server and has redundant backups. In the reel world, people have cheap PCS and all they understand is how to work the web browser.

      I think what google is doing is dangerous, and I would prefer that users understood the implications. OTOH, I understand, to use the analogy, that given a free room and board that some might compromise on privacy. Obviously, being a for profit company, one must assume that value of the privacy in some way exceeds that value of the service provided, but that point is often not relevant for people who have a choice of having or not having.

      Look at credit cards and short terms loans. People seem perfectly happy to pay double to have something today instead of tomorrow. So why would they not do the same with google? As the previous weekend shows, you can get all sort of response when you tell people their free stuff is going to be taken away, even if it is only an illusion.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    10. Re:Bad analogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks. This is a much better response than the previous post which concocted a bogus scenario in an awkward attempt to be contrary. You're right. There are few situations imaginable where the landlord could hold one's property. Thus the position held by many providers of online services seem all the more ridiculous.

    11. Re:Bad analogy by Schmorgluck · · Score: 1

      There is another legitimate fear that you can't delete your data for certain and ever. That's Somebody Else's Problem, and also not covered by the analogy.

      And that's just an example of why a data retention legislation can be useful.

      --
      There's nothing like $HOME
    12. Re:Bad analogy by bill_kress · · Score: 1

      I'm starting a new habit of reading through Google stories, no matter how positive, and commenting on the first comment calling Google evil.

      You win today.

    13. Re:Bad analogy by Abreu · · Score: 1

      This a bad analogy.

      ...because it's not a car analogy!

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    14. Re:Bad analogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about Google services that capture users' data (i.e., Usenet posts) and archive them for what could be all eternity?

      Users aren't deliberately putting their data into Google Groups, and a 7-day hold on honoring X-No-Archive almost completely guarantees someone will quote the post and then it will be archived.

      It should be easy enough just to remove those posts, even moreso if they weren't posted using Google Groups or the predecessor that they purchased, DejaNews/Deja.com.

      So does user privacy trump the perceived historical/blackmail/instant job denial usage of a number of posts from a user who really just doesn't want their posts in the archive? *That* will be the true test of how easy it is to get user data out of Google.

    15. Re:Bad analogy by cffrost · · Score: 1

      And in ice-cream. Childrens' ice-cream!

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
  7. The Life of Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Guy 1: Are you with the Data Liberation Front?
    Guy 2: No, we're with the Liberation Front for Data!
    Guy 1: Oh, well at least you aren't with the Front for Data Liberation!

    1. Re:The Life of Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      SPLITTERS!

      so, aside from free search, email, blogging, maps, docs, apps - what has Google ever done for us?

    2. Re:The Life of Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent and GP up for being awesome.
      For those who don't get it, these are references from Monty Python's "The Life of Brian".

    3. Re:The Life of Google by Tokolosh · · Score: 1

      No evil...?

      SHATTUP!!

      --
      Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
  8. If Microsoft did this... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    ... the members of that data liberation group would quickly be "liberated" from their jobs!

    (I'm basing this on experiences trying to get data out of Outlook and over to another client)

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:If Microsoft did this... by LordLimecat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are you unaware of their export-to-CSV capabilities..?

  9. So to escape from Google Docs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I need to use the esoterically named called "Export to" command, and save the document in another format on my computer? Thanks Google Liberation Front for this helpful information!

    I think that getting data out of proprietary document formats with no export functions is a bigger concern for me at the moment.

  10. Google Pervasiveness Front by 2phar · · Score: 1

    The easier it is to move data in and out of Google, the more data Google get to monitor.

    1. Re:Google Pervasiveness Front by lwsimon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While this is a valid concern, you can take it too far. As a private citizen, it doesn't really bother me that Google crawls my email and my contacts' email and uses keywords to target ads. As a business, it would be more concerning, but even then only for certain types of data.

      At the end of the day, they provide a service and need to be paid. They get paid through targeted ads - so if you don't want to see targeted ads, you're not "paying" Google, and why should they do things for you then?

      It would be "evil" if they weren't up front about it or denied it - but data mining is Google's primary business, and they aren't hiding it. I've yet to see any instance of them declaring data sacred and then parsing it for their own purposes, either.

      In short, I see no evidence that Google is "evil" - merely that they aren't doing things the way that a lot of F/OSS folks would prefer. They aren't making their money off support though, so that's expected.

      --
      Learn about Photography Basics.
  11. MapMaker vs. openstreetmap by stvn · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm very curious how they are going to liberate the user added data in Google Maps/Mapmaker. Right now the 'community' adds raw data like streets & locations but 'only' get back PNGs with colors representing streets and locations. Granted this is enough for most people. But Openstreetmap has been doing similar work and allows users access to the raw data, resulting in totally different uses than just simple PNG-maps. It would be awesome to tap into the raw mapmaker data and combine it with raw openstreetmap data for for instance routing, vector based maps for mobiles (smaller!) etc

    1. Re:MapMaker vs. openstreetmap by noidentity · · Score: 1

      Moral of the story for me (but I've already learned this in the past): before you even start spending time accumulating data in some format or with some service, be sure you can easily migrate that data out of said format or service. As a last resort you can almost always manually look at each piece of data and re-enter it in some other format, but the time and energy required to do that often exceeds the value of the data, effectively resulting in the data being unusable if you need to change formats/services.

    2. Re:MapMaker vs. openstreetmap by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      I'm very curious how they are going to liberate the user added data in Google Maps/Mapmaker.

      I'm not sure if this covers the "user added data" you are concerned about, but -- from the Data Liberation Front page linked in TFA -- the main mechanism for getting your data (either "My Maps" or "Saved Locations") out of Google Maps is via KML export.

    3. Re:MapMaker vs. openstreetmap by Killer+Orca · · Score: 1

      A cursory look at openstreetmap shows that it lacks the ability to plan a route, pretty much the onyl reason I stop by Google maps. Is there a viable alternative for that?

    4. Re:MapMaker vs. openstreetmap by Richard+Fairhurst · · Score: 1

      Try maps.cloudmade.com - there are numerous others. The point of OpenStreetMap is to make the data free so anyone can build a routing site, custom map or whatever - and not so much, in itself, to be an all-singing all-dancing alternative to Google Maps.

    5. Re:MapMaker vs. openstreetmap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm very curious how they are going to liberate the user added data in Google Maps/Mapmaker.

      I'm not sure if this covers the "user added data" you are concerned about, but -- from the Data Liberation Front page linked in TFA -- the main mechanism for getting your data (either "My Maps" or "Saved Locations") out of Google Maps is via KML export.

      These are legal problems, not technical problems, retard.

    6. Re:MapMaker vs. openstreetmap by Richard+Fairhurst · · Score: 3, Informative

      But there's not a lot point exporting the data if you don't have the rights to use it.
      That's what the top-ranked Data Liberation suggestion is talking about - great that we can get the data out; but now allow us to use it elsewhere without fear of being sued for breach of copyrighted.

    7. Re:MapMaker vs. openstreetmap by stvn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm very curious how they are going to liberate the user added data in Google Maps/Mapmaker.

      I'm not sure if this covers the "user added data" you are concerned about, but -- from the Data Liberation Front page linked in TFA -- the main mechanism for getting your data (either "My Maps" or "Saved Locations") out of Google Maps is via KML export.

      There are some caveats on this KML export, for instance you're not allowed to bulk export data: "Also, you may not use Google Maps in a manner which gives you or any other person access to mass downloads or bulk feeds of numerical latitude and longitude coordinates."
      This is a vague limitation; can I get all my tens of bicycle paths back and what about the tens or hundreds friends of me did etc.
      I do understand that entering 'public' data (where roads are) is different from private data (gmail). So the DLF is doing a good job on the latter, but I'm curious about the former: user contributed public data. I can see the result of an added road by user X, so why can I not access the raw data?
      There is an interesting discussion going on on Ed Parsons (google) blog http://www.edparsons.com/2009/09/liberating-your-my-maps-data/

    8. Re:MapMaker vs. openstreetmap by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      But there's not a lot point exporting the data if you don't have the rights to use it.

      Maybe its just me, but I'd much rather be able to get the data out of the system even if there was some dispute over the parameters of the legal right to use the data, then to not have any means to export the data but to nonetheless have an undisputed right to use the data if, somehow, I could get it in the first place.

    9. Re:MapMaker vs. openstreetmap by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      I do understand that entering 'public' data (where roads are) is different from private data (gmail).

      I think a better phrasing of the distinction is your data which is stored on Google servers (e.g., gmail) vs. data that isn't yours which is accessible to you as a consumer of Google apps.

      I can see the result of an added road by user X, so why can I not access the raw data?

      You can see the result of, say, Google spidering the web and applying PageRank, but they won't let you download their complete database of underlying data, either. Sure, its a more extreme example, but its part of the same continuum. I think that just by publicizing the Data Liberation effort, Google is moving the debate forward on just what the parameters of data portability can and should be.

      There is an interesting discussion going on on Ed Parsons (google) blog

      Yeah, I think the social nature of web applications mean that these kinds of issues are important, and hopefully the attention this is getting will produce a community-friendly result.

    10. Re:MapMaker vs. openstreetmap by bendodge · · Score: 1

      Does downloading as KML fit the bill? (The View in Google Earth link.)

      --
      The government can't save you.
  12. OMG by sonicmerlin · · Score: 3, Funny

    I am SO sick of Google. They are giving every corporation a bad name by being so unevil.

  13. interesting analogy by Trepidity · · Score: 1

    I was initially going to comment that this analogy is a bit off:

    Not only is this a bad situation for you as the tenant, but it's also detrimental to the housing industry as a whole, which no longer has incentive to build better apartments at all.

    The obvious problem is that no particular landlord is interested in "the housing industry as a whole": they're interested in their own corner of it. And so it's not clear why the landlord would want to do something to make it easier for tenants to move out, just because the end result is good for "the industry as a whole", unless they're altruists.

    But in this case, I think the analogy might actually work well. What if the landlord controlled, say, more than half of the housing industry? Then they might well want to do what's good for the housing industry as a whole, because they'll gain more customers from increasing the size of the industry as a whole than they'll lose to competitors within the industry. Google plausibly controls such a large proportion of "the cloud" that that's their interest.

    It does reduce the competitive moat, though. It may make it easier to grow by doing something like this, but it also makes it easier for some future competitor to much more quickly poach Google's customers. It looks like that's a risk they're willing to take, but many companies aren't. I think that's because many companies realize they are where they are at least partly due to luck, and can't count on staying there without taking active measures to cling to that position.

    1. Re:interesting analogy by andymadigan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Even for a minority member of the market it is to their advantage. Advertising that it is easier to move (and scaring consumers that other vendors/landlords "lock you in") gets you customers. This either means you end up with more customers, or you force everyone in the industry to add the ability to move. If they choose the latter, then you can compete on features and be able to easily pull customers from other vendors.

      --
      The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
    2. Re:interesting analogy by volsung · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think often people confuse "altruism" with "long term self-interest," and that may be the issue Google is considering here. In the short term, you can make it hard for tenants to move out, and maybe gain a little bit of rent that you would not have otherwise gotten. However, people talk and, in the long term, behavior like that can lose you potential customers. You will be forced to drop your rent in order to keep your units full.

      (This relates to the best description of "business ethics" I've heard: Ethical business requires that you balance the needs of and try to act in the best interest of your owners, employees and customers. Otherwise, in the long run, you will find yourself without capital, labor, or revenue. Thus, business ethics is about long term self-interest, not some kind of abstract altruism. Sometimes the "long run" takes a really long time, encouraging people to risk unethical behavior, of course.)

      Making it easier to leave Google applications helps grow your potential customer base in the future (such as those who are wary of lock in), at the risk of losing current customers who are unhappy with your service. That is a motivation well-rooted in self-interest, as long as you think your product is better than everyone else's.

    3. Re:interesting analogy by Red+Flayer · · Score: 2

      The obvious problem is that no particular landlord is interested in "the housing industry as a whole": they're interested in their own corner of it. And so it's not clear why the landlord would want to do something to make it easier for tenants to move out, just because the end result is good for "the industry as a whole", unless they're altruists.

      Landlords would want to make it easier for tenants to move out because then it's easier to get tenants to move in. You'd get more people interested in being tenants, if they knew they wouldn't have to leave all their stuff behind when they left. This increased demand for rental spaces means that existing capacity is more likely to be filled, and new capacity built as demand makes it profitable.

      But it's a little much to expect people to follow a clumsy tenant/landlord analogy when a perfectly good car analogy can be made.

      This is like you rent a truck for a big shopping trip, but when you return the truck you also have to hand over all the stuff you bought. The Google Data Liberation Group is working to ensure that you get to keep all the stuff you bought on your excursion, and you'll even be able to put it in the back of a competitor's truck if you decide to rent another one.

      Except Google has old-tymey magickal replicator technology, and they kept a copy of all your stuff, and detailed records of how and where you bought it, so that they can make sure that you're bombarded with ads for products and services related to what you bought.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    4. Re:interesting analogy by Trepidity · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It raises risks, though: not only do you have to think your product is better than everyone else's, but that it'll stay that way indefinitely. I think a lot of companies aren't that confident that, sometime in the future, someone else won't come along with a better---maybe even much better---product. Then they're suddenly out of business, unless they've made it harder for people to quickly switch. If they did make it hard to switch, though, they'll have residual business for years after being obsoleted, from locked-in "legacy" customers.

      Depending on how you value risks, it might not be irrational to accept slower growth (scare off customers due to lock-in) in return for diminished chance of rapid, large-scale customer desertion (they can't easily leave, due to lock-in).

    5. Re:interesting analogy by sukotto · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It reduces the competitive moat yes. BUT it also give people more incentive to try your product. "Hey, if it doesn't work out you're not locked in. so why not START with us and if you're ever unhappy then you can move on.". The best next step for them is to make it really easy to get your data into their product line from their competitors. Like that guy upthread who was trying to extract 1.5k contact cards from AOL, for example.

      This is good press for them on multiple levels.

      --
      Come play free flash games on Kongregate!
    6. Re:interesting analogy by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      (This relates to the best description of "business ethics" I've heard: Ethical business requires that you balance the needs of and try to act in the best interest of your owners, employees and customers. Otherwise, in the long run, you will find yourself without capital, labor, or revenue. Thus, business ethics is about long term self-interest, not some kind of abstract altruism.

      So something sort of like this then? (See graph on page four of the presentation.)

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    7. Re:interesting analogy by lwsimon · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I'm an Objectivist, but I'm offering some products online for free for limited use, and I contribute to F/OSS. The idea is that in the first case, my customers will gain confidence in my products and purchase more expensive services in times, and in the second case, that F/OSS will not only become better, but will better fit my own needs in the future.

      One doesn't have to be altruistic to benefit others. There are no conflicts of interest amongst rational actors.

      --
      Learn about Photography Basics.
    8. Re:interesting analogy by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      It raises risks, though: not only do you have to think your product is better than everyone else's, but that it'll stay that way indefinitely.

      Or, it requires you to believe that your target market will view portability itself as having value; if its easier to move off Google than any competing platform, that inherently makes adopting any other platform (all other things being equal) riskier than adopting or continuing to use Google. The absence of lock-in isn't just a reflection of confidence in quality, its a competitive selling point in and of itself.

    9. Re:interesting analogy by Phurge · · Score: 1

      No not quite. Sure you have to be confident about your product, but it also means you can't take your eye of the ball.

      So in that way opening yourself up to competition means that you have to stay focused on what your customers want. Which although it means more work, is good for the long term health of your product.

      --
      I'll see your hokum and raise you a boondoggle.
    10. Re:interesting analogy by umberto_soprano · · Score: 1

      Making it easier to leave Google applications helps grow your potential customer base in the future (such as those who are wary of lock in), at the risk of losing current customers who are unhappy with your service. That is a motivation well-rooted in self-interest, as long as you think your product is better than everyone else's.

      ..and moreover it will give them arguments against claims based on more strict privacy protection laws wich are starting to be enforced in several countries.

    11. Re:interesting analogy by Narnie · · Score: 1

      Another point for long term self interest:
      After filling a 7 Gig inbox, Google may want a way to purge your data after you leave their service. Powering on a bunch of servers and hard drives to retain data that's not going to be used gets expensive after a few years.

      --
      greed@All_Evils:~#
    12. Re:interesting analogy by Syniurge · · Score: 1

      Otherwise, in the long run, you will find yourself without capital, labor, or revenue. Thus, business ethics is about long term self-interest, not some kind of abstract altruism. Sometimes the "long run" takes a really long time, encouraging people to risk unethical behavior, of course.)

      Haha, tell that to the 99% business who have little regards for anything beyond their navel and are perfectly successful.
      The rise of MBA-types just reflects that the system tends to promote unlimited greed instead.

      I wouldn't be so sure that Google is entirely driven by self-interest.
      Sure they have obligation to make profit from their activities, but their ecclectic behavior might simply arise from the fact that Google might have truly different views from those of most business on what should be the purposes of human activity.

  14. Data Liberation ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As in... The Data Liberation Front ?...
    Oh well...
    never mind...

  15. hippies by ArhcAngel · · Score: 4, Funny

    Damn capitalist hippies!

    It's getting where an evil mega-corp can't make a bazillion bucks anymore.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  16. Useful email backup tool by imunfair · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've been looking for a good way to get a bunch of old email out of my yahoo account for a while without paying for a premium account... this actually looks like a good option! Judging from the screenshots I can import my email into gmail and then grab it via POP/IMAP.. now off to try it :)

    1. Re:Useful email backup tool by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      Why not just switch to gmail at this point?...

  17. Isn't it kinda ironic ... by neonprimetime · · Score: 1

    ... that Google is trying to liberate it's own data?

    1. Re:Isn't it kinda ironic ... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      ... that Google is trying to liberate it's own data?

      Not really. The project is to ease exporting data from and importing data to Google's offerings. Its essentially a product to improve the functionality and documentation of a set of features that are important to users in a way which crosses products. I don't think its "ironic" that company would do that.

    2. Re:Isn't it kinda ironic ... by neonprimetime · · Score: 1

      ... but ideally google would have designed their products to cross like that in the first place ... instead of pinning their data into an inescapable hole ... and then having to "liberate their data" after the fact ... right?

    3. Re:Isn't it kinda ironic ... by Nerdposeur · · Score: 1

      Maybe so, but better late than never. Does Hotmail let you export everything? Does Yahoo?

    4. Re:Isn't it kinda ironic ... by neonprimetime · · Score: 1

      >>> Does Hotmail let you export everything? Does Yahoo?

      nope. i was not really comparing it to anything tho. i agree it's a good thing, and better late than never. i was just pointing out the irony that they are liberating data from THEMSELF ... it's like building a shed around your lawn mower, then realizing that you forgot to put in doors, so now you have to figure out how to get your lawn mower out!

    5. Re:Isn't it kinda ironic ... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      but ideally google would have designed their products to cross like that in the first place

      And, ideally, every GMail account would come with a free pony.

      instead of pinning their data into an inescapable hole

      Most of the apps at issue weren't "inescapable holes" before this project was announced. Improving the export and import features of the services (and awareness of them) doesn't mean that those features haven't existed for a long time.

    6. Re:Isn't it kinda ironic ... by Nerdposeur · · Score: 1

      I agree that it seems funny, but then again, until there were a bunch of people using, for example, Gmail, nobody needed to export. Or to put it another way, you're going to launch a product with X features. If nobody uses it, you'll never add any more. If it becomes popular, you'll keep adding features. The ability to export data isn't an obvious starting feature - on day 1, nobody even HAD any data in Gmail.

  18. Smart move by Pascal+Sartoretti · · Score: 0, Troll

    A very smart move, if they really implement it as described.

    But remember that there will be a price to pay : google may easily provide you with an export of all the information you gave them, but they will certainly keep a copy.

    1. Re:Smart move by TrippTDF · · Score: 1

      -and that's where the house analogy breaks down: Of course the landlord wants you take your stuff: he gets to keep it, too.

      I have yet to see any company really come out and say "we'll get rid of your data when you leave".

  19. Here is an idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why don't they start by allowing people to close their accounts on Blogger after they moved away their data?

  20. In Soviet Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Data unlock liberation group!

    Yours In Murmansk,
    Kilgore T.

  21. Mistaken analogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Doesn't he mean, "You wouldn't choose to enter into that lease in the first place."

    I.e. people won't use Google products until they can avoid lock-in.

  22. First change the Terms of Service by cheros · · Score: 1

    Google's Terms of Service suck. Clause 11 needs to become much narrower, and preferabbly have some permission process in it. Until they fix that, the whole effort is just bla bla.

    --
    Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
  23. my favorite essay on who has your data by NewToNix · · Score: 2, Interesting
    One of the best essay's about where you keep your data I've ever read:

    http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Essays/winolj.html/

    Rick Moen . . .

    INOLJ-OOW2.0C (Is Not On LiveJournal Or Other Web 2.0 Cults)

    It's worth the read.

    1. Re:my favorite essay on who has your data by Abreu · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but even a teen girl's MySpace page is easier to read than this website...

      Please do some research on how to format text in a way that doesn't kill the eyes:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Readability
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Readability_survey
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Readability_test

      wait a sec... is Wikipedia included in the Web 2.0 Cult list? I couldn't read the whole of it!

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    2. Re:my favorite essay on who has your data by NewToNix · · Score: 1
      sorry you had a problem with it, but I had nothing to do with the site --I just read it some time back and liked it.

      You should maybe point out the problems with it to the author: Rick Moen. He's an editor over at http://linuxgazette.net/

      The essay displays fine for me is all I can say... and I did rather like it as an essay --that's my entire involvement with it.

      Thanks for the links, anyway.

    3. Re:my favorite essay on who has your data by Abreu · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I though you were the author.

      Nevermind then

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    4. Re:my favorite essay on who has your data by LeadSongDog · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the link. Very well said indeed.

      --
      Oh, I'm sorry sir, I thought you were referring to me, Mr. Wensleydale.
  24. Most important use case missing by mwvdlee · · Score: 3, Informative

    So you can get your data out when you want to move to different sites/applications.
    What about getting your data out if Google decides to stop the site/app, decides to stop the "Liberation Group", decides to delete your data from it's systems or somehow has to stop business.
    This "Liberation Group" thing simply ensures you can get your data only when you least need to.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    1. Re:Most important use case missing by DragonWriter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What about getting your data out if Google decides to stop the site/app, decides to stop the "Liberation Group", decides to delete your data from it's systems or somehow has to stop business.

      If Google gives you the tools to export your data on demand (which is what most of this amounts to, on the export side), then you can decide how frequently you want to archive it to protect against that kind of eventuality, just as you would with local storage. Yes, you run some risk of catastrophic, no-warning failure/cancelation of Google as a whole or the particular service, but you do that with most forms of storage under your own control as well, and, in either case, you can backup your data to mitigate the risk.

      This "Liberation Group" thing simply ensures you can get your data only when you least need to.

      That seems to require accepting a particularly odd definition of "when you least need to".

    2. Re:Most important use case missing by metrometro · · Score: 1

      Presumably the option to 'leave' implies the option to periodically back up your data as well. Compare that to 37 Signals's online collaboration product Basecamp, which has a uploaded file backup policy of "go screw yourself". They have argued that since you put all the files in, you already have a copy. But if this were an accurate picture of how business works, then no one would need their product.

    3. Re:Most important use case missing by robot_love · · Score: 1

      I get so tired of this narrow-minded garbage. By your logic, no one should use any code they haven't written themselves.

      When will you recognize like most of the rest of us have that it's in a company's best interest to treat its customers as best they can. Sure, shit happens, but shit will always happen. Let people and companies like Google do what they do best so that the rest of us, whose specialty is not IT, can do what our specialty is, whatever it is.

      Or do you only fly on planes you've built yourself?

      --
      .there is enough of everything for everyone.
    4. Re:Most important use case missing by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Or do you only fly on planes you've built yourself?

      When I fly a plane, after I get off the plane I no longer have to worry about the company going broke.

      When I use applications, I don't want to worry about my data being lost after a company goes broke. Using local applications with open file formats tends to take away my worries. Using google's online apps doesn't.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    5. Re:Most important use case missing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it is truly easy to get your data out, then that should mean you can have a continually updated local copy. For example, with GMail, I leave a POP client open so any e-mails I get are saved locally. On the other hand, this is not a complete copy of my data as it does not save labels and stars properly (IMAP does a better job).

  25. Obligatory car analogy by noidentity · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Imagine you've been driving your car for years, and have accumulated lots of map notes, music, and playlists in your car's navigation and music systems. When you decide you want to buy a new car from a different manufacturer, you're free to do so, but you can't simply transfer all your settings to the new vehicle, even though it has similar systems. The only way to move it all over is to manually re-enter/recopy each item, which would take many hours.

  26. Data Liberation Front? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    - Splitters! Splitters!
    - We're Data Liberation Front...
    - Oh. I thought we were Data Front of Liberation.

  27. Names by dazjorz · · Score: 3, Funny

    Google More Obvious Name Group Seeks To Make Names More Obvious

  28. Easy export, easier import by tetsukaze · · Score: 1

    Google is pretty keen on staying on the good side of the industry, but there is another aspect to consider. By focusing on making the data mobile you can go both ways. A modular and standardized method of storing data makes it easier for people to move over to google as well as move out. I could even see some sort of service for migrating data between different services come out of this group.

    1. Re:Easy export, easier import by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Google is pretty keen on staying on the good side of the industry, but there is another aspect to consider. By focusing on making the data mobile you can go both ways.

      That's not really "another aspect to consider", its right there in the announcement. "The Data Liberation Front is an engineering team at Google whose singular goal is to make it easier for users to move their data in and out of Google products." (emphasis added)

      The only reason the discussion focusses on the "out" portion is that a company trying to make it easier for people to move onto their platform is nothing special.

  29. It's a *perferct* analogy by mangu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    With Google The Evil (tm), you have no guarantee that they haven't stashed a "backup" somewhere in their dark recesses. You don't really take your stuff, you just make a copy.

    No, you take out your stuff, they may keep a copy.

    The leased apartment is a perfect analogy in this respect. No one can be sure that the landlord didn't use his master key when you were away and took pictures of all your stuff. Maybe he has his own apartment decorated exactly like yours.

    But why should he? Unless you are a world-famous interior decorator, what reason would anyone have to copy your layout? Likewise, what incentive does Google have to keep copies of your data? They may keep information about you, for statistics, just like a marketing researcher may look into your trash can to see what products you buy, but that's not such a big deal.

    I think people are too nervous about the assumed value of their on-line data. Think of how much data about you was public long before home computers existed. Your phone number and address are written in a book that's given for free to everyone who has a telephone. You carry a plate with a unique id code on the outside of your car. Every cheque you use to pay something has your signature and bank account number. All these items can and *have* been used by fraudsters in the past. Why should we get more nervous just because the data is in a digital format?

    1. Re:It's a *perferct* analogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They may keep information about you, for statistics, just like a marketing researcher may look into your trash can to see what products you buy, but that's not such a big deal.

      It is a big deal. There has never been so much information produced by individuals and collected by organizations. What you call sifting through people's trash will tell you almost everything about that person unless they put in great effort to destroy and disguise what they put on the curb. In the "olden days," when people lived in small towns, everybody knew everything about everybody else. Pretty much. But the central government didn't. Governments a world away didn't. Large multinational corporations didn't. Information is no longer local, and this means anyone, anywhere who may not like something you do or have said can have an inordinate power over you, just by sifting through your trash, as you put it.

      As long as Google's treasure trove of data remains private, and as long as Google remains a "do no evil" organization, there should be little threat to anyone. But we have seen corporations capitulate to intrusive government inquiry, when the time is right. Pour all those petabytes of data into the government data warehouse and it will never come out again. A whole generation will be transparent to the intrusion of government power.

      Legislation ought to mandate the strict handling and digital shredding of all non-aggregate information held by Google and other IT powerhouses to limit the potential for abuse.

    2. Re:It's a *perferct* analogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should we get more nervous just because the data is in a digital format?

      Because now the exploitation can be done automatically? Or because it can be done remotely, by Texans or Russians or Indians or 4'000'000'000 other people I never had to worry about earlier?

  30. The Liberation Front of Data? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was I the only one who wondered if these guys were affiliated with the Judean People's Front? ...or perhaps it was the People's Front of Judea?

    1. Re:The Liberation Front of Data? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SPLITTER!

  31. Exporting the data is only half the battle. by queazocotal · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The highest rated suggestion - over a thousand votes - on the data liberation site is about Google Maps.

    Specifically - the rather loose definition of what we can and can't do with the data.

    http://moderator.appspot.com/#15/e=43649&t=4364a

    You can extract a kml from a my-maps thing you've drawn on top of googles satellite imagery easily.

    But what can you do with this?

    Google have made vague and unclear statements that 'bulk' use is not allowed - without saying what this is.

    Yahoos terms and conditions allow uses like this, and much of OpenStreetMap has been helped by this for example - people able to trace streets, streams, and ...

    But the license for data derived from maps is still unclear - can I for example take a list of 3000 river crossings from google, crowdsource how easy they are to get across with a 4x4 or a donkey, and then publish this list?

    And if I sell the list, or publish a book of maps using this data combined with openstreetmap data?

    1. Re:Exporting the data is only half the battle. by legirons · · Score: 1

      All your mashups are belong to us!

      Seriously, trace all you like on google maps (in your geography lessons, at work, in your council meetings) because we're going to take all your data and put adverts on it.

      regards, Ed.

    2. Re:Exporting the data is only half the battle. by chrb · · Score: 1

      Yahoo has been explicit in stating that the satellite image license they have allows tracing. Maybe Google's license doesn't say the same. 'Bulk use' is a different thing to tracing - it's probably defined as downloading many tiles covering an area and caching them locally, like Maemo Mapper and some other local applications can do. This bypasses the Google interface entirely, which is probably not the greatest thing for Google's advertising based service...

    3. Re:Exporting the data is only half the battle. by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > But the license for data derived from maps is still unclear - can I for
      > example take a list of 3000 river crossings from google, crowdsource how easy
      > they are to get across with a 4x4 or a donkey, and then publish this list?

      In the USA, yes. That's mere data, not creative expression.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    4. Re:Exporting the data is only half the battle. by queazocotal · · Score: 1

      And the US is not the whole world.

      We (uk) - the EU too - have both database right - copying a substantive portion of a database is an infringement of this right, and the 'sweat of the brow' doctrine of copyright.

      If I spend a significant amount of effort collating some data - then my collation of that data has a copyright seperate to that of the original data.

      On the flipside - we have a slightly less broken patent system.

  32. and the street photos? by legirons · · Score: 1

    so how about doing something useful with all those aerial/street photos (like letting openstreetmap trace them, rather than have them sitting unused hoping someone at googleplex will find a way to paste ads on the pics before they become out-of-date)

  33. what about my search data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about my search data? Will Google let me take all they've learned about me through my searching the last 5 years and carry that to a new search provider?

    1. Re:what about my search data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  34. With Apologies to The Eagles by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

    On the information super highway, mousemat underhand
    Pages choc full of banners, sites filled up with spam
    Up ahead in the distance, I saw a shimmering light
    Plain simple front page, with a clean white design
    I surfed down to the site
    There they stood in the doorway;
    Names were Page and Brin
    And I was thinking that this site
    could be made out of fail or made out of win
    Then I clicked on the search link, and they showed me the way
    There were posts all over the interwebs,
    I thought I read them say...

    Welcome to the hotel googleplexia
    Such a lovely page (Such a lovely page)
    Such a lovely cage
    Plenty of hits at the hotel googleplexia
    Be it far or near(Be it far or near)
    You can find it here

    They got web search and Youtube, they got scholar and trends
    They got gchat and email, and know all your friends
    Click about and see websites, can't see a threat
    You might not remember, but they never forget

    I called Larry and Sergey
    Asked, "why put this online?"
    They said, we know everything you've done since, 1999
    And still I click web search results by night and day
    Seems wrong but the results are so right
    Can almost hear them say...

    Welcome to the hotel googleplexia
    Such a lovely page (Such a lovely page)
    Such a lovely cage
    Livin' your life at the hotel googleplexia
    Looks like a paradise (Looks like a paradise),
    if you're a private eye....

    Then a got a bad feeling
    what if they stop being nice
    They said; "Your just a customer here, and we know your price"
    And in the marketers chambers,
    They gathered for the feast
    Troll all the data on people's lives
    And they will never cease

    Last thing I remember,
    I had said I'd take no more
    Need to get private data back
    To the way it was before
    Relax said the G-man
    We have programmed to deceive
    You can checkout any time you like,
    But your data can never leave!

    Welcome to the hotel googleplexia
    Such a lovely page (Such a lovely page)
    Such a lovely cage
    Plenty of hits at the hotel googleplexia
    Be it far or near(Be it far or near)
    You can find it here

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
  35. What Wolfie Smith would say... by PipingSnail · · Score: 1

    POWER TO THE PEOPLE! (For those of you not in the UK, or those of you too young to recognise this, look up "Citizen Smith").

  36. No Export of Emails from Gmail by Chromax · · Score: 0, Troll

    I went to their site... what a fake group, just a total front for google. Nowhere did I find a way to export the emails from gmail to .dbx files for Outlook/Express. So of all google's services, gmail is the most used, and of that service, the vast majority of its data is the emails themselves. Yet, this largest volume from the largest service is not at all liberated. Liberation for that stuff is not even mentioned, not even on the map.

    1. Re:No Export of Emails from Gmail by umberto_soprano · · Score: 1

      I went to their site... what a fake group, just a total front for google. Nowhere did I find a way to export the emails from gmail to .dbx files for Outlook/Express. So of all google's services, gmail is the most used, and of that service, the vast majority of its data is the emails themselves. Yet, this largest volume from the largest service is not at all liberated. Liberation for that stuff is not even mentioned, not even on the map.

      A way to import all you emails from gmail to outlook is pop3, isnt it?

  37. Not to be confused with the ILF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Information Liberation Front, kickin' it old school.

  38. It's been made easier by RichardDeVries · · Score: 1

    I already have the means to export all my Google data. Contacts and calendar can be easily exported thru the web interface. For mail I use IMAP: Evolution syncs everything. For the docs I use a Python script called GDD. It's getting easier though, and I like this move by Google. They're committing themselves to keeping their services on a level where you don't want to leave, even if you easily can.

    --
    Error 001
    Security Scan and Virus Detection do not work with your operating system.
  39. Datatech Fitzpatrick of the Data Liberation Front by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    Now they just need a colony pod and they're set!

    "What's more important, the data or the jazz? Sure, sure, 'Information should be free' and all that --but anyone can set information free. The jazz is in how you do it, what you do it to, and in almost getting caught without getting caught.
    The data is 1's and 0's. Life is the jazz."

                    -- Datatech Sinder Roze,
                          "Infobop"

  40. Liberate the Registry? by macraig · · Score: 1

    Maybe next they can liberate all the data held hostage in the Windows Registry? Maybe they can kidnap Ballmer and hold him hostage until he cries uncle-Bill? They could tie him to a chair and then throw it around the room.

  41. What about google chat? by the_B0fh · · Score: 1

    it says gmail is liberated - but they turned off extracting chat a couple of years back.

  42. May I recommend this: by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    http://pictureisunrelated.com/2009/09/15/if-i-have-to-live-with-this-image-so-do-you/
    (Click at your own risk. But we all must live with that picture now. ;)

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.