Online Privacy Worth Less Than Marshmallow Fluff Six Pack

nonprofiteer writes "With a program called Screenwise, Google is offering a total of $25 in Amazon gift cards to anyone willing to install a Chrome browser extension that will let the search giant track every website the user visits and what they do there over a year-long period. Google says it will study this in order to improve its products and services. Forbes points out that $25 in Amazon credits isn't quite enough to buy a six pack of Marshmallow Fluff ($26.75)." The money isn't much as a pure trade for privacy, but I suspect that many people would like to have their preferences be among those that shape how Google — and other companies, too — actually organize their interfaces. (Note that the tracking can be selectively turned off by the user.)

Comments

Yes

[Anrego]

This is one of those statements we need to hear from time to time to shock is into realizing that the vast majority of people out there do not value online privacy to the degree that the Slashdot crowd generally does.

The vast majority of people out there probably rank "letting a company mine my browsing history" somewhere around "filling out a survey".

Re:Yes

[Hatta]

The vast majority of people are too stupid to see the difference. That doesn't mean there's not an important difference. If the vast majority of people jumped off a cliff, would you too?

Re:Yes

[eln]

I'm surprised they even bothered to offer the gift cards. Most people will gladly give up their privacy for free.

Re:Yes

[TheRaven64]

I'd happily do this. Of course, I don't actually use Chrome, so after the extension was installed they wouldn't get very much useful information...

Re:Yes

[masternerdguy]

They aren't too stupid, they just haven't been exposed to enough of the underlying framework of the world to know there is one.

Re:Yes

[Anrego]

I don’t equate it to stupidity. It’s not that people don’t understand the implications of this. It’s made fairly clear.. “every site you visit will be known to us”. It comes down to having different priorities.

The Slashdot crowd is privacy sensitive. It’s important to us. The fact that it’s not important to others is something we have to learn to accept. We can’t always write it off as “well, they are just stupid.. if only we could explain it to them in the right way..” because they have a valid opinion. They’ve chosen to live a certain way, and privacy is not a priority to them.

Re:Yes

[Anonymous Coward]

The vast majority of people out there probably rank "letting a company mine my browsing history" somewhere around "filling out a survey".

That explains the popularity of Chrome.
I seriously don't get this story. What does the extension do that Chrome doesn't do by default?

Re:Yes

[gparent]

The vast majority of people might just do less weirdo shit on their computer than you? What exactly is wrong with Google having access to my entire search history with my consent? Microsoft Windows has a similar feature where you can turn on performance counters in the OS and aggregated data is then used to make features shaped more like the user wants them.

It's not like they're saying "We'll read your entire search history, tough shit", they're offering people to willingly give them that information, and for the bother, they are compensated with a minor bonus.

Re:Yes

[Hatta]

âoewell, they are just stupid.. if only we could explain it to them in the right way..â because they have a valid opinion. Theyâ(TM)ve chosen to live a certain way, and privacy is not a priority to them.

We can tell this is not the case, because when people get bitten by the obvious consequences of surrendering their privacy, they complain. If they knew and expected those consequences, they wouldn't be bothered when it happens. And yet we still hear stupid people complain about how facebook shared their data in a way they don't approve of. Tough shit, that's what you signed up for.

Re:Yes

[japhmi]

How about "letting a company mine my browsing history for a browser that I don't use."

Sounds like $25 for installing something and letting it sit on my HD while I continue to use Firefox.

Re:Yes

[Anrego]

And yet we still hear stupid people complain about how facebook shared their data in a way they don't approve of.

I actually don't see this happening. Not saying it hasn't, I've just never really seen it. Occasionally I'll hear one of my non-geek friends state "ya know, facebook owns everything you put there" .. but it's stated in more of an "interesting trivia" manner than a outraged "stop using facebook" manner (for the record, I'm the stubourn friend without the facebook/twitter/etc in my social circles).

The only people I hear complaining about facebooks no-privacy privacy policy are like minded geeks who know better and as you said, if they sign up anyway, they have no right to complain.

Re:Yes

[CastrTroy]

This is what I was thinking. Install the tool bar on a virtual machine version of chrome. Maybe even bring it up from time to time and browse some crazy mix of sites to screw around with their data. Do they send you the gift cart as soon as you install it? $25 may be a case of marshmallow fluff, but it's also 2 or 3 paperback books, or many other useful things. Sign up under 4 different aliases and you could probably easily have yourself $100.

Re:Yes

[gstoddart]

The vast majority of people are too stupid to see the difference. That doesn't mean there's not an important difference. If the vast majority of people jumped off a cliff, would you too?

No, but that doesn't mean that I could stop them from jumping off a cliff with a well reasoned argument about why it's a stupid thing to do.

That 'vast majority' simply aren't going to listen to you. They're simply not interested.

Re:Yes

[gstoddart]

It's not like they're saying "We'll read your entire search history, tough shit"

Which, they're probably doing anyway.

Even if they don't admit it, I'm pretty sure Google already has this if you're searching while logged in.

Their latest changes to their privacy policy really only amounts to "we can (and do) already do this, we're just making it clear to you".

Re:Yes

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

The vast majority of people out there probably rank "letting a company mine my browsing history" somewhere around "filling out a survey".

I've actually stated the bit about the survey elsewhere in the thread. Okay, I'm part of the vast majority who doesn't value privacy the way Slashdotters typically do.

So please educate me, I want to know: They're being up-front about what they want to do with it and they're compensating the volunteers for it. They can use another browser if they don't want Google to see something. So why is this worse than filling out a survey?

No, I'm not setting up an argument, no I'm not defending them, I really just don't understand the problem here. If Google had, for example, turned this on by default, or if the tracking method wasn't limited to using the Chrome browser, or if there were details they weren't being up front about, I'd get it. I'm not defensive, just baffled.

Re:Yes

[prestonmichaelh]

I don't equate it to stupidity. It's not that people don't understand the implications of this. It's made fairly clear.. âoeevery site you visit will be known to usâ. It comes down to having different priorities.

The Slashdot crowd is privacy sensitive. It's important to us. The fact that it's not important to others is something we have to learn to accept. We canâ(TM)t always write it off as âoewell, they are just stupid.. if only we could explain it to them in the right way..â because they have a valid opinion. They've chosen to live a certain way, and privacy is not a priority to them.

I agree that it is just a matter of opinion. Honestly, if it is completely open and upfront like this, I really have no issue with it. I am actually considering trying to sign up for this, and I have a BS in Computer Science, work in IT, and visit Slashdot daily. I honestly don't really see what all the concern is about.

It wouldn't be very hard to get most details of my life from just a little browsing habits, and really, I can't think of anything I would care about other people knowing. If anyone asked me straight up, I would probably tell them. I am completely fine with people that want to keep there privacy and don't even see it as "they have something to hide", but I honestly don't care. I generally assume that anything other than thoughts that are only in my head are known to others and my thoughts can probably often be inferred. Maybe I am just too simple minded though.

If I have a choice to keep things private if needed (maybe I need to overthrow a king or something), then I am cool with companies "invading" my privacy. There just needs to be an opt-out, even if that opt-out is "don't use the service (read Facebook)".

Re:Yes

[Anrego]

I actually replied to someone else in this thread that I don't think this opinion is wrong or "stupid".

Some (maybe most) people have chosen a lifestyle where privacy is not the big thing to protect at all costs. Stuff like this where as you said they aren't doing anything sneaky... I also have no problem with.

I wasn't trying to imply that this was somehow worse than filling out a survey .. I meant that some view it at the same level of "I'm giving up X to get Y".

Re:Yes

[Sir_Sri]

And, as a practical matter, the point of taking part in a survey or study is to give up that privacy so that they can make products that better reflect how you use them. Without that data it is harder, if not impossible, to actually make better products. Google developers are not typical examples of how people use the internet.

We have this issue with games too. Trying to figure out who is a valid testing set is really hard. If I hand my game off to some 40 year old women I'll get different testing results than 20 year old men. Sometimes that just gives better testing results to have that diversity, sometimes you bias your game to feedback you like or feedback you don't.

With automated tools, and we have them in games, especially in the MMO business, you track everywhere people die, how often, if you can why, how much dps/healing/dmg whatever they do, package it all up and try and figure out what is causing people problems. The idea that you can map the data back ot a particular user isn't ideal, and I'm sure lots of users aren't all that fond of it (maybe less so in a game where the people who have the data are the ones making the game), but if you want to make a web browser you need to know how actual people use the web browser. The only way to do that is to have people voluntarily opt in, or to secretly track them. Secret tracking is bad (albeit better at producing honest data probably, no selection biases, no people trying to watch nature shows to game the nielsen ratings, sort of thing), so you're left with voluntary tracking. If they purely asked for volunteers then it would be saying 'your privacy is worth nothing' when compared to a 25 dollar amazon gift card. But I don't think that's fair. Google is saying 'thank you' for giving up this info so they can make a better browser. No amount of money is ever going to make everyone happy, and no matter how much money you have you can't just give it all away for nothing. If they paid 20k you'd have everyone under the sun signing up because that's a lot of money, and privacy is only worth so much compared to 20k, and people trying to game the system to get 20k multiple ways etc. This way, if 10% of users collect 10 amazon cards you're not out much overall, you don't need enforcement and you still get mostly decent data. Which is about all you can do.

Re:Yes

[icebraining]

Even if they don't admit it, I'm pretty sure Google already has this if you're searching while logged in.

Uh, of course they do, and they do admit it; it's very clearly listed on their Privacy FAQ.

What they're asking here is the list of all the websites you visit, coming from their search engines or not. That's why they need a browser extension.

Re:Yes

[Hatta]

Of course, you're never going to hear about people who didn't get a job because of what HR found on Facebook. And if I hacked your credit card account with your mothers maiden name that I got off of your facebook page, how would you know? But you do, or at least I do, hear complaints about Facebook being used in divorce settlements. Or even just posting your vacation plans on Facebook can lead to your house getting burlarized.

Re:Yes

[meerling]

Since I already did that, I guess the answer is YES. In my own defense, I didn't jump first because I'm terrified of falling, and the water was really cold.

Re:Yes

[asylumx]

That's not true. Example: When people speed, they know damn well that they may get pulled over and ticketed. Yet, they speed anyway, and when they do get caught they complain that it was the cop who was in the wrong. They *do* know those consequences, they just expect them not to happen. Same thing with Privacy -- "Yeah, but it won't happen to me!"

Re:Yes

[evilRhino]

It goes to Amazon in addition to Google.

Re:Yes

[Hatta]

They *do* know those consequences, they just expect them not to happen

Like I said, stupidity.

Re:Yes

[meerling]

I'm tempted to sign up for it, I'd like $25 gift card, I could get a book or two I want with that.
Of course, it wouldn't be my actual desktop it would be installed on. It would either be one of the junker laptops I rarely use, or a virtual machine that is carefully monitored. Either way, it would see a totally boring, and possibly scripted, tour of common news and corporate websites as if it were done by a paranoid person who know they're being tracked.

If this throws off their data, I would feel happy that I got paid enough to take my daughter out to lunch just by demonstrating their flaws.

Re:Yes

[Anrego]

Life has risks. Given the large number of facebook users and the small number of cases where people are hurt in this manner, I'd equate this style of thinking to saying that people shouldn't drive cars because you hear about people dying in accidents all the time (for that matter, you car is also a pretty damn good indicator of whether you are home.. wouldn't take a criminal mastermind too much effort to figure out that my house is empty Monday to Friday for about 9 hours a day).

Again, this is coming down to priorities. I suspect that even being fully aware of the risks, most people enjoy the whole social networking thing to a degree where they would do so anyway. I see no problem with this. It's a calculated risk decision.

(That's not to say there arn't some exceptionally dumb people out there using facebook and such in a way that's blatantly self destructive and clearly no thought given to the implications of sharing their info).

Re:Yes

[Anrego]

just by demonstrating their flaws

I imagine like any data gathering exercise, the fact that a percentage of people are going to game the system has been factored in. Some people are gonna use multiple aliases to try and get multiple rewards. Some people are going to install the software and never use it.. hell that will happen unintentionally (computers break/are replaced).

Personally I don't think it's worth the effort for $25.

Re:Yes

[gparent]

On that note, my comment should've read 'browsing history' whenever I wrote 'search history'. Sorry for the mistake because it's an important distinction, but I think in both cases the important part is the opt-in.

Re:Yes

[GameboyRMH]

Chrome doesn't send any extra info to Google. Like many other browsers it sends search queries as you type them to use search autocomplete features.

Re:Yes

[jc42]

Itâ(TM)s not that people donâ(TM)t understand the implications of this. Itâ(TM)s made fairly clear.. âoeevery site you visit will be known to usâ.

Well, I was surprised by this story, because I've always just assumed that Chrome sends a log of what I do back to the Mother Ship at Google. I don't have the source code, so that's what I'd suspect. And even with this story out, I still suspect that it's reporting my surfing to someone I don't know of. It'd be easy enough for them to hide this among all the auto-refresh traffic, and so on.

I don't use Chrome for online banking, mostly for this reason. There are several open-source browsers available that are much more trustworthy (though they're worth keeping an eye on ;-).

So why would any sensible person think that their browser isn't sending their surfing history out to someone back home?

I don't use Chrome for online banking for this reason.

Re:Yes

[catbutt]

How is it stupid to not care about privacy, especially if you can't give a single tangible reason it harms them?

I mean, I guess you could say I value privacy in the sense that I don't go to nudist colonies because I, like many people, consider what I look like naked to be private information. But that doesn't mean I am going to call someone "stupid" because it doesn't bother them if other people see them naked.

Re:Yes

[catbutt]

I balance my desire to get there faster with the desire to avoid tickets. Conveniently, I can do this fairly accurately because I know the rate I get tickets and the cost of those tickets, based on 20 some years of driving, and getting a ticket once every several years.

On the other hand, I have no real data on bad things that could happen to me by virtue of giving up personal data to a company like Google. Nothing ever has happened bad, to my knowledge. I doubt the chances of something bad happening are high at all.

That is a totally different thing than speeding and tickets....one is a well-known risk that can be calculated and balanced against other priorities fairly easily, the other is just a theoretical risk.

Re:Yes

[Phrogman]

Yeah there are how many facebook users now? People don't worry about their privacy until suddenly they need it really badly. Then its far too late.

Re:Yes

[izomiac]

How do we know it's the vast majority? The opposite way of looking at it is that people probably fall on a bell curve for how much they value their privacy, and to generate a statistically meaningful sample size Google had to offer $25. IOW, probably 99.5% of internet users capable of installing a Chrome plugin value their privacy at more than $25.

We also tend to lose perspective as geeks. Looking at our browsing history is essentially like following us around everywhere. It's a much smaller part of a "normal" person's life. It would take a lot more than $25 to convince most people to wear an all-seeing Google watch, just as it'd cost far more than $25 to convince a hardcore internet user to part with their complete browsing history. Attention-whores in either group non-withstanding.

Re:Yes

[tryptogryphic]

I don’t equate it to stupidity. It’s not that people don’t understand the implications of this. It’s made fairly clear.. “every site you visit will be known to us”. It comes down to having different priorities.

I have to respectfully disagree with you on this. The problem is that people don't understand the implications of this, due to lack of knowledge of information technology and informatics, and how things which seem useless and meaningless to them, can be amalgamated to produce a very accurate psychological profile of themselves.

In my opinion, the problem is people just don't care and they are too lazy too care until they get burned.

Most individuals fail to grasp the implications all together; making the statement "every site you visit will be known to us" in no way implies "we analyze this data over a massive amount of time to create a very accurate demographic and psychological profile on many aspects of your personality"...that kind of realization takes time, critical thinking and effort...something the average person using a computer...from what I've observed...appears to detest doing.

Re:Yes

[Anrego]

Thing is, when you explain that to them the next question is almost always: "ok, so they know what exactly makes me tick.. how does that hurt me? Are they gonna market me to death?". Most answers involve a future dystopian world where their twitter comments are used as evidence in summary execution trials. This is about where most normal people say "ok then" and wander off.

Re:Yes

[tehcyder]

Of course, you're never going to hear about people who didn't get a job because of what HR found on Facebook.

Yes you are. There was a teacher in the Uk who kept getting refused jobs and it turned out she had pictures on her (publicly viewable) facebook profile of her getting drunk at parties

Re:Yes

[tehcyder]

What everyone on slashdot seems to forget is that almost all of the stuff that people put on facebook is entirely harmless, not to say tedious, even if you know the person involved, and is of little value to anyone else even if they can copy the whole lot and sell it to advertisers.

And anyone stupid enough to put details of their criminal activities online deserves as little sympathy as the geniuses bragging about their crimes down the pub and being overheard by an off duty police officer.

Re:Yes

[tehcyder]

I don’t equate it to stupidity. [snip] They’ve chosen to live a certain way, and privacy is not a priority to them.

And we're not allowed to call that stupidity? It smells, sounds and walks like it.

You're allowed to call it stupidity if you only ever access the internet in a totally untraceable way and cover your tracks as though you were a spy deep under cover in a hostile nation.

Meanwhile, in the real world, most people aren't bothered about Amazon knowing they have searched for books on fly fishing, bought a car on eBay and looked for YouTube videos about cute kittens.

Re:Yes

[tryptogryphic]

Exactly. Although, this is a battle as old as time, and I hate to be this brass about it, but for lack of knowledge people suffer, knowledge is power indeed, and those who don't have it, or don't care for it, will be subject to those who do...

.. ...so I have mixed feelings about the people who don't care or don't want to be bothered to learn more; a mixture of "well, you get what you deserve" and "it's just hard for some people to truly grasp this due to laziness"

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[torgis]

If you're gonna go PC, you might as well go full PC. "Little people shitting on the age-enhanced." That sounds good, right?

Of course

[masternerdguy]

The vast majority of people don't know or care about the technologies they use in their daily lives.

Re:Of course

[forkfail]

Funny thing, though - a lot of people would whip out the shotgun if someone was peeping in their window or reading their private journals.

Re:Of course

[Lithdren]

Unless they invited said people to look in said window or read said journal, as is happening here.

Its not like they're saying "We're doing this, and you cant stop us!" They're saying "If you're willing, we'll give this in exchange." Weather you find that exchange fair is one thing to debate, but dont try to drive the discussion to "spying" when they asked first, and give you something in return for the information.

Re:Of course

[GameboyRMH]

Or saw a census taker on their doorstep. I ain't goin' to no FEMA concentration camp!!!1one

Re:Of course

[tehcyder]

Funny thing, though - a lot of people would whip out the shotgun if someone was peeping in their window or reading their private journals.

Yes, but if you post revealing photos of yourself, or a diary of your innermost thoughts on facebook (or whatever) and let your friends see them, just as in real life you had better trust those friends completely if you want to be sure the information won't go any further.

Maybe Google can get my age and gender right

[sandytaru]

Since they got it so very wrong, wrong, wrong on the first go round.

Re:Maybe Google can get my age and gender right

[Oswald McWeany]

Sorry, I trust google more than some random person on the web. How do you know you're not wrong about your age and gender?

I think you should accept the fact that you're not what you think you are.

Re:Maybe Google can get my age and gender right

[0racle]

There are, in fact, girls on the Internet.

No, there are not.

Re:Maybe Google can get my age and gender right

[fibonacci8]

Similarly, there are no mac users on the internet. You're merely being piped AOL.

Re:Maybe Google can get my age and gender right

[tehcyder]

There are, in fact, girls on the Internet.

No, there are not.

Yes there are, my eighteen year old blonde nymphomaniac cheerleader friends can confirm it.

If they tracked me via Chrome...

[Rockoon]

If Google tracked me via Chrome, they would see 100% of all websites visited are *.netflix.com/*

Yeah, thats all I use Chrome for.

Re:If they tracked me via Chrome...

[psydeshow]

Similar issue here: I only use it to visit Google properties like GMail and YouTube.

They want to pay me $25 to find out stuff they already know? Yippee. It's like 1999 all over again.

Free $25? Sure.

[JustAnotherIdiot]

Oh, but I only use chrome maybe once a blue moon. But hey, that's still data! Pay up!

Free Money?

[tburke261]

What's to stop me from loading this up on a spare machine I never use (and has no personal data) and letting it 'run' for a year?

Re:Free Money?

[Jeng]

Even better, run it in a virtual machine.

What if I don't surf with Chrome?

[HockeyPuck]

Would I still get the $25 if I installed it and then did the majority of my surfing with IE/FF and occasionally surfed with Chrome, as there's probably some Terms of Service that requires a minimal amount of usage.

I wonder how much money I could make if I created hundreds of VMs and installed the plugin in those...

Re:What if I don't surf with Chrome?

[masternerdguy]

That reminds me of how it used to be ok to make bots that automatically clicked your own pay to click ads.

Re:What if I don't surf with Chrome?

[forkfail]

Already way ahead of your.

I've got a pool contractor who will take credit at Amazon, and I'm buying enough Marshmallow Fluff to fill my new pool and go swimming in it.

Re:What if I don't surf with Chrome?

[CastrTroy]

Agreed. This reminds me of the AllAdvantage. That didn't work either. People got bots to do all the browsing for them. For this service you require a google account. So at least you would have to create hundreds of Google accounts. Google accounts require verified by a telephone call. It may take you a while to set up, and they may be able to track it back to you. Especially if you are doing thousands. I don't see any reason why you wouldn't be able to set up 3 or 4 accounts in a single household though. Sign up your wife, your kids, your pets, an a maybe a few others.

It's not just the Amazon Gift Cards...

[Sedated2000]

They also pay you $100 up front and $20 dollars a month for up to a year. For a low income family that could nearly cover the cost of their broadband internet.

Re:It's not just the Amazon Gift Cards...

[ticker47]

That's only if you choose to use the physical monitoring device. The amazon gift cards are for only using the Chrome browser extension.

the Dutch paid $24 for Manhattan

[Anonymous Coward]

Why do I suspect that that historical event came up during the Google marketing meeting (probably near the end)?

You're looking at this wrong

[Oswald McWeany]

You're looking at this wrong; it's not that privacy is valued too cheaply- it's that Marshmallow fluff 6-packs are valued too highly.

Re:You're looking at this wrong

[forkfail]

Sadly, though, the $25 is not enought to buy even a gallon of the rich, creamy, life giving ambrosia known as Tuscan Whole Milk, 1 Gallon, 128 fl oz.

That would be a different story altogether.

Re:You're looking at this wrong

[Whorhay]

Don't be silly, Marshmallow fluff is delicous! I'm fairly sure my 2yr old daughter would gladly trade me for a six pack of the stuff.

Alternate headline

[sootman]

"Online Privacy Worth More Than Marshmallow Fluff Five Pack"

See? It's a glass half full/half-empty kinda thing.

Great idea

[Megahard]

I'm installing it on the wife's computer.

Re:Great idea

[Oswald McWeany]

Install it on the library computer.

Re:Great idea

[lister king of smeg]

mod parent up +1 funny

Re:Great idea

[Anonymous Coward]

I've already been tracking your wife's computer usage, screenshots, webcam, etc - for years.

And she seems to enjoy watching midgets shit on old people.

Re:Great idea

[CanHasDIY]

I've already been tracking your wife's computer usage, screenshots, webcam, etc - for years.

And she seems to enjoy watching midgets shit on old people.

Almost as much as we've enjoyed watching her watch them.

Re:Surf's not up

[elrous0]

Your Wolf Pack doesn't scare me, bra. I'm as good as ANY of you!

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[SirGarlon]

if only there were a moderation option, "-1 too disgusting even for Slashdot"

Improve Services, or Something More

[jpwilliams]

With this data, they could make a major run at comScore, Nielsen, and other companies that provide demographic data for a fee. I wonder if there privacy policy addresses that. If they choose to compete, they could wipe out competitors on pure numbers alone, I imagine.

Sounds like a research project...

[Guidii]

Is this any different than offering undergrads $20 to participate in a psychology experiment? What's the story here?

Re:Sounds like a research project...

[Dogtanian]

Is this any different than offering undergrads $20 to participate in a psychology experiment?

Venkman's lousy 5 bucks isn't cutting it any more then?

Re:Sounds like a research project...

[forkfail]

The real story, IMO, is whether or not people will accept Google's offer of $25 bucks at Amazon for a year's worth of their on-line privacy.

It sets the value for said commodity.

Bullshit

[dcollins]

"The money isn't much as a pure trade for privacy, but I suspect that many people would like to have their preferences be among those that shape how Google — and other companies, too — actually organize their interfaces."

Here's my proposed experiment. Make 2 offers:
(A) We track what you watch for a year, we will NOT use it to shape any interfaces, you get $25.
(B) We track what you watch for a year, we WILL use it to shape any interfaces, you get $0.

My bet would be that the ratio of acceptances would be at least 10:1 in favor of (A).
I only see "being tracked is great as long as I get more targeted advertising" as a claim from Slashdotters.

Quoting the submission:

[Feyshtey]

Note that the tracking can be selectively turned off by the user.

Prove it.

Re:Quoting the submission:

[Oswald McWeany]

Yeah... and google will know what you're doing during the time the tracking is turned off too! We all will.

Re:Quoting the submission:

[forkfail]

How do you know this isn't beta testing for a new Chrome feature? ;)

Re:Quoting the submission:

[Feyshtey]

So in order to prove that my privacy is not being invaded by the app that I knowingly installed that was meant for the purpose of disclosing my activity, I'm going to sniff packets. And not just sniff packets so taht I see abnormal source and dest, but so that I can prove that the application I know is moving data from me to a destination is only moving the data I approve between me and the same destination....

Re:Quoting the submission:

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, just like you do for every other application in order to make sure that it's not moving any data that you don't want to any destination you don't approve of.

Oh, wait, you don't do that. So why do you care in this case, when blissful ignorance is sufficient for every other program running on your computer?

Re:Quoting the submission:

[Feyshtey]

Because I dont install applications whose purpose is inherently to catalog and report on my activity.

Marshmallow Fluff?

[Darinbob]

I wasn't really sure what this stuff was so had to look it up.

Apparently one jar of the stuff is a lifetime's supply. So having your privacy being worth 5 whole lifetimes is a pretty good valuation.

Re:Marshmallow Fluff?

[JustAnotherIdiot]

If you click the links, you'll quickly find out that it's a 1 pound tub of marshmallow cream.
http://www.amazon.com/Fluff-Marshmallow-Unit-Pack/dp/B001686590/ref=sr_1_1?s=grocery&ie=UTF8&qid=1328792229&sr=1-1
I'd hardly call that a lifetime supply.

Re:Marshmallow Fluff?

[Darinbob]

I'm not so sure. I can stand one teaspoon a year. How many years is that worth?

Re:Marshmallow Fluff?

[Anonymous Coward]

One man's lifetime supply is another man's brunch.

not good data

[Anonymous Coward]

Chances are the users willing to do this for $25 are young and broke, this could end up biasing the results.

Re:Who buys marshmallow fluff?

[Oswald McWeany]

That's less than one beer every 15 days for having google spy on you.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[Joce640k]

The real question is ... What the hell is "marshmallow fluff"?

I hate this trend!

[governorx]

Dear Google,

I am not the average user. I am a technical user that is intelligent and values privacy. Please make me a google that gives relevant technical results for my queries instead of the hodge-podge that the average illiterate user can understand and click-through. xxx-answer or some similar should never be a result.

The results from the 25$ incentive will most likely be skewed in an unfavourable direction when compared to the search results I am looking for - due to the demographic (which I foresee) partaking in this research experiment. Please reconsider.

Signed: The guy that is always finding google harder and harder to use.

PS - Give me the option to search using an older algorithm.

Re:I hate this trend!

[swillden]

You don't get it... this isn't about your privacy or making results better, it's about getting people to use Chrome.

Google doesn't care if people use Chrome or not, except to the degree that it motivates other browser makers to push their implementations in directions Google wants. Chrome is all about influencing IE, Firefox, Safari and Opera, pushing them to compete in the ways that Google wants them to compete -- ways that make it possible for Google to build a complete suite of software tools that are browser and operating-system agnostic and work just as well as any local application.

In short: Chrome is part of Google's strategy to kill Microsoft Windows and Apple OS X. Not in the sense that Windows and OS X cease to exist, or to be popular, but in the sense that they cease to be a competitive advantage for Microsoft and Apple, because everything is on the web and your OS is irrelevant.

Re:I hate this trend!

[N1AK]

PS - Give me the option to search using an older algorithm.

I'd expect an 'intelligent technical user' to be aware that a major part of the problem with Google results is that people game the algorithms, which is why Google updates them. Chances are you'd get even less worthwhile content if you use older versions of the algorithm.

Re:I hate this trend!

[Impeesa]

Depends what he's after. I find Google is sometimes "smart" enough with its stemming, synonyms, and other inferences to give me exactly what I was very intentionally not looking for.

Wrong angle...

[Umuri]

That will a fetch handle of rum or a 1.5 liter of vodka.

Most people will happily surrender tons of personal, and incriminating, information about themselves when offered or plied with aforementioned liquid.

So it's same old same old, just now with no hangover!

Really?

[KingSkippus]

Where did you get that information? I don't see any reference to payments other than the aforementioned up to $25 in Amazon.com gift cards anywhere.

Re:Really?

[Sedated2000]

Check out the screenshotshere. There is another part of the program that is a lot more lucrative, based on a router.

Steven Colbert said it best with 'Public-see'

[sohmc]

People are willing to give up their privacy if it saves them 10% at Petco.

What's to stop you from taking their money and only using Chrome to visit a few websites?

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[Oswald McWeany]

Google would show good humour if "marshmallow fluff" were the name of the next Android OS release.

This is Great!

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

I would never do it, but at least it starts to give people an idea of how much google values their privacy and they can then ask themselves if their privacy is really more valuable than what google is able to get out of it.

I would like to propose the reverse program - I pay google $5 month in return for never, ever being tracked at all no matter how many of their services I use. Not the typical BS of still tracking but not actually "using" the collected info, I mean the people who pay get their info logged to /dev/null instead of google's permanent databases.

Re:This is Great!

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Just curious - if you do not trust them to keep their word on not using the data they collect,

I do trust them. I don't care about being marketed to. I care about how that information may end up in the wrong hands - government agencies, private investigators, stalkers, etc. Google doesn't promise anything about most of that.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[Anonymous Coward]

Hope you guys like watching a lot of midgets shitting on grannies. And I mean a *LOT* of midgets shitting on grannies.

It's people like you that will completely skew the results and ruin the Internet.

When I search for Mickey Mouse I don't want to come up with Debbie Does Disney, I want some family-friendly, pre-censored search results. And I don't want any Catholic priests or evangelical preachers signing up just for the 25 dollar giveaway. There is enough perversion on the Internet without search results being based on the sexual fantasies of religious leaders.

5 bucks up front for no privacy? Get real.

[Beelzebud]

You don't even get 25.00 up front, you get 5 dollars, and then every 3 months, they give you 5 more dollars. Anyone who signs up for this is my enemy.

Again with the headlines

[archen]

What exactly does Marshmallow Fluff has to do with this? Is this some granular currency measurement that relates to libraries of congress? This is also based off of arbitrary pricing off Amazon. There is a LOT of stuff worth less than a Used Ethernet Cable by that measure. What's the sample size anyway? If 2 people do this, is that considered "enough"? I can get two people to sacrifice their privacy for free by sticking a pop up window in front of them saying "naked chicks if you click here". This is non news really, and you can get people to sacrifice their privacy for far less than $20, especially if you give it to them in gas rebates.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[GrumpySteen]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshmallow_creme

And one of the reasons it's popular:
http://www.marshmallowfluff.com/pages/fluffernutter.html

Where's the drama?

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

The money isn't much as a pure trade for privacy, but I suspect that many people would like to have their preferences be among those that shape how Google â" and other companies, too â" actually organize their interfaces. (Note that the tracking can be selectively turned off by the user.)

They're being told up front what is being offered in exchange for what. It's a browser extension so they could just flip to Opera or FireFox if they don't want Google to see. Some people might be enticed by Google improving their products with that information, and they get paid for it.

What's the drama? What does this even have to do with privacy? Are we going to complain about being paid to take a survey, too?

Re:Where's the drama?

[Beelzebud]

Then by all means sign up for it.

Re:Where's the drama?

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

I choose not to and.. .ack... ack... I'm being forced to do it against my will! Quick! Hit the moderate button!!

Re:Where's the drama?

[forkfail]

I'm thinking that the primary source of the outrage is the fact that now there's been a dollar value assigned to your privacy, and that value is $25.00 at Amazon (which probably costs Google $20, because Amazon makes money off of shipping and such...)

I'm sure there's other reasons that are a bit more meta when it comes to privacy and how it's treated as well.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[Binestar]

Next Android release will be Jelly Bean.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[asdf7890]

That shows how blinkered you are. Not all old people are little you know.

Marshmallow Fluff 6-pack

[Higgins_Boson]

I've got a marshmallow fluff six-pack.

Sadly and admittedly, it's only because I eat so many fluffernutters every week.

Someone... please... help me... *sob*

so the new google service will be

[P-niiice]

so the new google service will be a.. torrent site that lets you watch porn tube and download nzbs while.. looking for android roms in webcam rooms?

Eww

[Jethro]

Frankly I'm a bit more shocked at how much marshmallow fluff costs. Whatever the hell marshmallow fluff is...

As long as they accept others value their privacy

[91degrees]

It's a pretty subjective thing. I'll willingly tell anyone who really wants to know all sorts of things that others consider private (the colour of my underwear, various sex related things), but feel a little protective of all sorts of things. I'll rarely share my Slashdot username with anyone who knows my real name and vice versa.

I'll readily accept that some people really genuinely don't care at all about being spied on, and as long as they accept that I do, I have no quarrel with these people. I also understand that some people object vigorously to what I might consider some fairly minor infringements. I respect that as well, and feel that there should be no collection of personal information without a very compelling reason.

However, if people willingly give it away, and the deal can be clearly considered an honest and open agreement then who are we to tell them they shouldn't.

Marshmallow Fluff? All it takes is chocolate

[oneiros27]

Am I the only one who remembers the study that found people would give up their passwords for a chocolate bar?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3639679.stm

(and that a good percentage didn't even need the chocolate)

let the search giant track every website

[tokul]

Like google analytics and adwords don't give them enough coverage and they need more.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[windcask]

Perhaps "Height-disadvantaged persons defecating above the long-lived?"

I'd pay that yearly for Google to guarantee...

[eepok]

I'd pay that cost yearly for Google to guarantee to not track my registered identities (work, personal). If that's the price they put on it, sure!

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[Joce640k]

I'll stick with Marmite+Peanut butter, thanks...

Begs the question though, isn't there anything on Amazon that costs $26 and that people have heard of it?

(Cue the "begging the question" Nazis...)

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[jdgeorge]

It's an edible product that appears to be terribly overpriced.

So our privacy is worth 2 cents a day?

[na1led]

Amazon is going to pay me 2 cents a day to know my private business. Gee what bargain!

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[cayenne8]

I'm still trying to figure out what the hell marshmallow fluff is...??

It comes in a six pack...doesn't seem to be any type of beer I've heard of....

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[meerling]

Instead of "good" use "un-negative".

That sounds more pc to me.
  By "pc" I mean "Linguistically Obfuscated" as opposed to "Personal Computer".

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[meerling]

Of us making fun of this, yes. Of people doing it for real, not so much, but at least it gave him material to work with.

New nomenclature

[StripedCow]

Since the big corporations have, wrongly, labeled copyright infringement with "piracy", perhaps we should consider to label corporate privacy intrusion with the term "voyeurism" or something similar.

Re:New nomenclature

[Mitreya]

perhaps we should consider to label corporate privacy intrusion with the term "voyeurism" or something similar.

This is the ONE case where privacy is not violated. Looking/using this data isn't buried in EULA/TOS. They are offering to buy info from you, with specific, clear opt-in. That is perhaps the one and only case where I see no problem.

Re:Surf's not up

[meerling]

You sure? He might be one sexy bitch with his shirt over his face and photographed at a 45 degree angle.

(If you don't know the reference, look up "Gabriel Iglesias Fluffy".)

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[torgis]

That may or may not be sufficiently unoffensive.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[meerling]

I like to think of it as what you remove from the lint catcher after you run a bag of marshmallows through your drier.

Since we're on the subject, do you have a young child? I do. At least she hasn't put a grilled cheese in the vcr, but she did contemplate putting a pancake in the dvd.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[meerling]

If the internet wasn't skewed, it just wouldn't be the same.
It would be CSPAN, but with less politicians.

Wrong headline

[SirGarlon]

It should read, "What's left of your online privacy is not worth a six-pack of marshmallow fluff."

So?

[Charliemopps]

So I install this, collect my $25 and continue to not use Chrome just as I have for years now. Sounds like a good deal to me.

Re:So?

[tehcyder]

So I install this, collect my $25 and continue to not use Chrome just as I have for years now. Sounds like a good deal to me.

And if you get a hundred of your friends and colleagues to sign up you get $2500 for none of them using Chrome.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[Anonymous Coward]

Mr. Santorum, aren't you supposed to be out campaigning instead of trolling slashdot?

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[mirix]

it's a marshmallow-like paste, wet marshmallows I suppose. Sugar and egg, pretty much. You can put it on ice cream, deserts, etc. Weirdos put it on peanut butter sandwiches. ("fluffernutter").

I've never seen a 6-pack though. only in America, I guess. :-p

Better Source Article

[CanHasDIY]

http://searchengineland.com/google-screenwise-panel-open-110716

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[Hoi Polloi]

It sounds like a cheap way to build a database of popular porn sites.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[Hoi Polloi]

...and is there a porn site that uses it?

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[Hoi Polloi]

That is why we have www.tallseniorsshittingonmidgets.com

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[couchslug]

"More power to them. Hope you guys like watching a lot of midgets shitting on grannies. And I mean a *LOT* of midgets shitting on grannies."

I'm a midget seeking to enter the elder care industry.

Any advice?

Think bigger

[Rogue Haggis Landing]

Marshmallow Fluff? If you're going to give yourself up to Google like this you need to think big. For $25 you could buy 2500 (24x36) The Godfather Movie (Dollar Bill) Poster Prints from Poster Revolution via Amazon. Not only do you exchange your measly $25 for $2,500, you also wind up with enough posters to cover 16722 square meters. That's over four acres. You'll never have to buy wallpaper again!

And better yet, those (24x36) The Godfather Movie (Dollar Bill) Poster Prints look sort of like real money, so maybe Amazon will accept them as legal tender, and you can exchange your $2500 for 250000 (24x36) The Godfather Movie (Dollar Bill) Poster Prints, then exchange those for 25000000 (24x36) The Godfather Movie (Dollar Bill) Poster Prints, exchange those for 2500000000 (24x36) The Godfather Movie (Dollar Bill) Poster Prints, exchange those for 250000000000 (24x36) The Godfather Movie (Dollar Bill) Poster Prints, exchange those for 25000000000000 (24x36) The Godfather Movie (Dollar Bill) Poster Prints, and suddenly you've got enough (24x36) The Godfather Movie (Dollar Bill) Poster Prints to cover the Earth with a layer of (24x36) The Godfather Movie (Dollar Bill) Poster Prints almost four (24x36) The Godfather Movie (Dollar Bill) Poster Prints deep. Thanks to Google and Amazon/Poster Revolution, all of your mad genius-destroy-the-Earth desires can be realized!

Re:Think bigger

[omnichad]

+$3.98 shipping for each poster...at a total cost of $9,950 for shipping $25 worth of these.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[nschubach]

Ah, Fluffernutters... there are many who say you haven't really lived until you've taken a bite out of one of these distinctly American treats!

Long a staple of playgrounds, after-school snacks, college dorms, and the local diner, a Fluffernutter is a wonderful concoction of Marshmallow Fluff and peanut butter in a delightfully tasty sandwich!

Distinctly American? After-School, College, local diner...

I feel like I'm missing something because I've never heard of fluffernutter before and I've been here in the US (I always assume when someone says American, they mean US...) all my life. I did take a week and Canada where I was introduced to poutine, but that's technically still America.

Re:So please educate me

[TaoPhoenix]

Here's one way to rephrase the discussion.

How about an alternate version of the plugin where *everybody* gets to see your search history? After all, you're edging close to the "I have nothing to hide" department, so as a medium-classic privacy advocate here, I reply "prove it".

If that suddenly changes things, then we're getting into "Oh, but I trust Google but I don't trust you". What about the government?

Remember, it also becomes a 1 stop shop for the government to buy the profiles in bulk.

The unfortunately beautiful evil logic of the Big Brother process is it's *always* stated as "So we can make shopping a bliss for you."

Then in a flash (say a month's worth of backroom deals) you get an example like the one earlier, "Insurance companies will use GPS Vendor satellite feeds to see that leadfoot habit of yours, so your insurance goes up," (and mild satire next) "A complimentary copy is sent to the cop on Highway 4 so he knows to try pulling you over."

So sorry, I'm taking the pessimist view on this. 7,000,000 site visits per person (20ish a day maybe). Yeah, tell me that's not juicy in the wrong hands.

"But won't someone think of the Products!"

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[steveg]

Are you referring to necrohippoflagilism?

Re:So please educate me

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

I'm happy with your answer, but before I address that I have to nitpick this one comment:

After all, you're edging close to the "I have nothing to hide" department..

No, I am not. If you are personally approving what all goes out then that is not 'nothing to hide'. What I said would not qualify for that unless Google had ALREADY done it and I was apologizing for them.

Remember, it also becomes a 1 stop shop for the government to buy the profiles in bulk.

Okay, this is a good reason. Thank you.

Fluff?

[MiniMike]

Putting it in units of Marshmallow Fluff is pointless and misleading, especially to the Slashdot crowd. This needs to be put in units we can understand. Here goes:

Library of Congress- ~286,720 GB (est from wikipedia info)

Cheapest DVD I could find (Melody 600 pk, on Amazon, use your credit) $0.2065 per DVD including shipping. There may be tape cheaper per GB, but most people don't have tape drives. The $25 from Amazon will buy 121 DVDs at that cost, assuming you split the package with someone else.

This works out to about 0.198% of the LOC. People will trade their online privacy for less than 1/5 of 1 percent of the LOC! Truly shameful.

The key is who controls what part.

[HeckRuler]

The value of making part of your life public: $25.00.
The value of making part of your life private: Priceless.

Create one for Firefox

[Kamien]

If Google made such an extension for Firefox I'd consider the option of installing it. SInce I'm not using Chrome - I won't bother.

..depends on what you think of 'technical'...

[uncledrax]

WA doesn't have very useful results for a lame example of what I might want to search for (although that's just a quick example...)

Re:Surf's not up

[geminidomino]

I don't know if it's just my geeky OCD or what, but it's always annoyed me that the only levels he gives the boundary conditions for are "DAMN!" and "Oh, HELL no!"

What's the cutoff between "Healthy" and "Husky" for example? DEFINE YOUR DAMN FUNCTION, FLUFFY!

Solution

[guttentag]

1. install the Chrome browser extension
2. Create the following AppleScript and use a cron job to run it once a month or so:

tell application "Google Chrome"
set URL of active tab of window 1 to "http://www.google.com"
activate
quit
end tell

3. Make Firefox your default browser
4. Profit!
5. Repeat steps one through four on another computer

Why does this seem oddly like mining bitcoins...

Re:Solution

[vandamme]

> 3. Make Firefox your default browser

And DuckDuckGo your default search engine

Re:So please educate me

[TaoPhoenix]

Hi there.

There's one more finesse.

By having it turned on, you're arguably approving it for "all audiences". This includes me, either via Anonymous hacking Google, or even Google just being evil and selling it.

The particular problem with this request is the duration. Someone was asking about college students and psych experiements - a lot of those are the day or even 1 week variety, where the student subconsciously knows "he needs to be on good behavior".

This is more like signing a waiver on Sept 1, getting your certificate to the campus bookstore, and then in February you decide to play a prank on the Dean ... well ... you signed the waiver, right? And yes, there isn't that much of a difference in concept between signing off for a "monitor anklet" or the browser. We aren't socially ready to be watched 24-7 with "digital interpretation of rules". Just think of mashing this up with the Copyright Brigade.

"Did you knowingly go to JustinBieberForever and download the UltraRareDrunkPartyEdition of his song, as evidenced to Google Log on Sat, January ___ 2012? You know that is an unauthorized copy, right? Pay up."

THAT's the curse. We're better than most at granular actions here on slashdot, but it's like that article where the entire first world breaks copyright a minimum of three times an hour or something.

And yes, in 1984 this would have been Tin Foil Hat territory, in 2012 with the SOPA-ACTA cousins, it's not. P.S. Smile for TomTom. We know that you went to that red light district. We will with-hold this information, for a fee...

You know what the last piece of this puzzle is, don't you? The one that brings about Mayan Dec21? (Lots of time left!) Anonymous Swipes/Google Traitor leaks *the entire database of what 30 million Chrome users surfed to for an entire year.*

I've been monitoring and cautioning against these sneakily worded Trojan Horses,
(Chuck show, Quinn characeter "...For too long now. But not tonight, not again!" (remixed) "This time we have to quit being ostriches burying our heads in the sand. Once we know the true dark side of the digital age, and all the pain that shall flow, then maybe we'll put a halt to all these draconian laws, faced with 110 BILLION web surf transactions."

Re:5 bucks up front for no privacy? Get real.

[guttentag]

You don't even get 25.00 up front, you get 5 dollars, and then every 3 months, they give you 5 more dollars. Anyone who signs up for this is my enemy.

No, anyone who signs up for this is their own worst enemy.

I'd do it.

[flimflammer]

I do the bulk of my browsing in Chrome, but for $25, I'd inconvenience myself with Firefox for a year for my real browsing.

I wonder how many people signed up with my same mentality.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[newcastlejon]

Mr. Santorum, aren't you supposed to be out campaigning instead of trolling slashdot?

He's a politician; rest assured that he'll be up someone's arse as we speak. The only way Santorum could be posting on /. would involve a smartphone and a trophy for "Most Embarrassing X-Ray, 2012".

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[hairyfeet]

You can also make a killer cake with it. start with a yellow cake mix and mix in a handful of semisweet chocolate chips, as its cooking you poke some holes with a toothpick and drop some chocolate chips (or you can use M&Ms for color) into the holes so they make these nice chocolate streaks, and then when you pull it out and the cake is still hot spread a layer of marshmallow fluff so that as it cools it evens out the fluff and makes a nice smooth top. Seriously rich though, best to cut it with some vanilla ice cream when you serve it as it cuts the sweetness.

As for TFA considering the kinds of things people put on their FB this really doesn't surprise me. Privacy has been replaced by "look at me look at meee!" for awhile now as far as the public is concerned and I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of folks go "Ooooh free stuff!" and jump on board. It still amazes me how many treat computers as these magical black boxes and are then shocked at how trivially i can find out their surfing habits. i don't know how many times i've had a customer say 'I wish i could remember the name of the site i was on when it happened so i can show you" and when i pull up their browsing history and go right to it they are always "holy crap, how did you do that? are you some sort of hacker?" which is why we PC repair guys pretty much wear this face exclusively during working hours.

Marshmallow Fluff ?!?

[cstacy]

If someone asks you if Google is God, you say "YES!"

Third world?

[sonamchauhan]

Google, can you extend this to people all over the world? To OLPC deployments?

Make these non-Amazon gift coupons, that are redeemable for food? For seeds? To buy locally published books?

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[Amorymeltzer]

Actually, it'd make more sense to call it "King Cone" if Google wanted to show good humor.

need a new slashdot poll

[drknowster]

what percentage of time wasted on activity, eg voyerism when selectivly "turned off"

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[GNious]

according to the label, it also contains genetically-improved soy.

Not sure what qualified it for "improved" though.

Re:As long as they accept others value their priva

[tehcyder]

I'll readily accept that some people really genuinely don't care at all about being spied on

It's more that some people wouldn't use a loaded term like "spied" to define something they have voluntarily signed up for, and are aware of. I imagine you'll have a lot of people using Chrome for looking at slashdot, the news or facebook, then turning off the reporting or switching to another browser for looking at porn, banking, torrent or dating sites or anything where they want to retain privacy.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[elrous0]

Marmite+Peanut butter

Wow, just the thought of that makes even me throw up a little in my mouth.

Re:If any google employee can stomach what I surf

[elrous0]

Lots of fiber.