Slashdot Mirror
Google CEO Schmidt Predicts End of Online Anonymity
Andorin writes "A tweet from the EFF pointed me to a short article detailing part of Eric Schmidt's speech to the Techonomy conference in Lake Tahoe on August 4. According to Schmidt, true transparency and anonymity on the Internet will become a thing of the past because of the need to combat criminal and 'anti-social' behavior. 'Governments will demand it,' he says, referring to full accountability and a 'name service for people,' possibly hinting towards mandatory Internet passports. The CEO of Google also made a couple of somewhat creepy references to the availability of information: 'If I look at enough of your messaging and your location, and use artificial intelligence, we can predict where you are going to go ... show us 14 photos of yourself and we can identify who you are. You think you don't have 14 photos of yourself on the internet? You've got Facebook photos!'"
i don't have Facebook either but have found photos of me among my Facebooking friends....
--- Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity
Just because you don't have a Facebook profile doesn't mean that people can't upload compromising pictures of you to Facebook. Furthermore, you can still be tagged by name in photos even if there's no profile to link to.
Do you live in a big city with street cameras? Ever had a driver's license or other photo ID? Ever been to an airport or government building? There are photos of you all over the place.
Remember to maintain your supply of
It's blasé. For goodness' sake, read a book!
No. People can type things in.
nope. it won't be a hyperlink to your profile, but someone can type your name.
It is one of the reasons they will give.
Anti-Social Behavior Order . Governments consider it their business to deal with all behavior.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Oh, it started way before G. W. Bush. Bill Clinton had CARNIVORE. Nixon wiretapped radical groups without a warrant (which was the impetus for FISA). The Olmstead case of 1928 was when government wiretapping was declared constitutional- which was well before G. W. was even born.
Just "gittin-r-done," day after day.
You're free to pay a fine to the government if you don't want any health care. You knew that, right?
High taxation and a crippling debt reduces freedom. Bailing out certain companies and not others is government control of the economy. Cronyism is not freedom.
In my state, we can choose which company we buy our electricity from. That came from a net REDUCTION in government regulation (the incumbent power company had to allow access to its lines in exchange for removing a cap). I can also choose which company I buy buy fuel oil from. If I don't want to use oil, I can switch to gas or an electrical system that's powered by a utility or by solar or wind technologies. So what progressive gave me these rights, again? It's only government that REMOVES my right to do these things: by state-mandated monopolies, subsidies that artificially lower or raise prices, and local zoning and state regulations that discourage the use of alternative energy or certain kinds of alternative energy.
Maybe it's time you started realizing that having every facet of our lives regulated by the government is not the normal way of things, and that we're not supposed to be happy about our "liberal" society because the government decided to throw us a few scraps. Try reading about the enlightenment and social contracts.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.