Big Brother may be spying on your bus ride

Photo via Wired.

Is Wired promoting a conspiracy theory mindset, or should there be a legitimate concern? Related to that, is it being too alarmist (as in stereotypical media) about how it raises such concern?

Given that at least some of the money is from DHS, first, that's one reason to be legitimately concerned. Second, having the surveillance hyper-visible is often something deliberate, whether just to get people more mannerly, or to deliberately remind them of Big Brother, or to even encourage snooping.

Third, remember the school district that was remotely viewing students via laptop cams? True, that was not the "public square" and this is; nonetheless, it does raise some parallels.

As for the ideas raised under my "second" point, I raised the issue of the Overton window when a friend posted this on Facebook, before I shared it. And I was accused of pop-sociology bullshit.

Sorry, but I disagree. In matters of propaganda and similar, the government has, in WWI, WWII, the War on Drugs, and the War on Terror shows a repeated desire to shift the window on what it wants the public to consider as legitimate surveillance, whether the legitimacy factor is one of legality or one of ethics. In the War on Terror, let's not forget waterboarding, warrantless wiretaps, drone warfare with kill lists and more. And, again, let's not forget that on all but the first, Obama has pushed that window further than Bush.

And, per "public square" arguments that say the government has a right to do this, whether Big Brother is the government (in this case) or Big Business, "legal" does not equal "ethical."  Per Wired, the fact that in one case, a local government had constitutional worries show that this isn't being overhyped.

Google Chrome nice but not platinum

JavaScript speed, from-scratch platform, and Google interoperability all pluses, but “cloud computing” focus raises new round of Google as Big Brother questions

Google is coming after both Firefox AND Internet Explorer with its own web browser.

Contra the Microslob spokesperson touting IE8 (in beta now), given how slow IE7 loads pages, AND given that it has fewer features in many ways than FF2, let alone 3, I ain’t downloading IE 8. Beyond that, IE8 is supposed to use twice as much memory as IE7, itself a memory hog.

Meanwhile, Chrome has seriously souped up JavaScript speed.

Faster, especially much faster page loads mean it can load more complex ads, as well as webpages, which means more ad dinero, as CNET explains.

Over at The Dallas Morning News, Victor Godinez says this could be the Firefox death knell.

A full $56 million of Mozilla’s $66 million of revenue last year came from its Google partnership, which ends in 2011.

I disagree with Godinez, though, that Chrome will ONLY hit Firefox. (He claims that IE 8 won’t be hurt because many businesses require its use, and many home users aren’t aware of other browsers.

Victor, this is Google we're talking about. With Google marketing, etc. With Google's own autodownloader program. With Google's Blogger platform likely targeting bloggers to get special blog-related apps on Google.

And, on the business side, Google may push for a package of Google software to be preinstalled on computers.

Wired also disagrees with Godoniz on Chrome vs IE:

It’s an aggressive move destined to put the company even more squarely in the crosshairs of its rival Microsoft, which long ago crushed the most fabled browser of all, Netscape Navigator.

And, it runs JavaScript 10x faster than Firefox or Safari.

Oh, and based on info from Download Safari pages will render correctly in Chrome.

So, the idea of Safari for Windows, at least, should be considered dead.

Sayonara, Steve Jobs, on that baby.

And yet more info on Chrome, specifically in its Terms of Use, indicate Google is intent on becoming more and more of Big Brother all the time.

Given this, I doubt I’ll be any more likely to use Chrome than I will IE8. Indeed, it’s that concern that keeps me from using Google as my RSS reader.

The “Big Brother” worry about Google? Basically, it’s all about the fact that “cloud computing,” at least as Google is now pushing it, represents a loss of control, As John C. Dvorak simply and forcefully details.

In a nutshell, Dvorak says that for some specialized apps, a cloud-based bit of software may well be the superior solution. It’s hard to find what you want as a downloadable app, plus there’s what he calls “nagware”: the update reminders, etc.

Read the whole story for more.

That said, Chrome is NOT necessary, and a cloud-based, cloud-focused or partially cloud-based web browser offers no special convenience.

Move over Firefox AND IE

Google is coming after both of you with its own web browser. Right now, it’s only available in a PC version, with Apple and Linux apps to come. Google has had an ad partnership with Firefox, to take on Microslob’s Internet browser presence indirectly, but apparently decided it was time to strike.

That said, per the story, I didn’t even know Google HAD its own IM.

At the same time, contra the Microslob spokesperson touting IE8 (in beta now), given how slow IE7 loads pages, AND given that it has fewer features in many ways than FF2, let alone 3, I ain’t downloading IE 8. Beyond that, IE8 is supposed to use twice as much memory as IE7, itself a memory hog.

Meanwhile, Chrome has seriously souped up JavaScript speed.

Faster, especially much faster page loads mean it can load more complex ads, as well as webpages, which means more ad dinero, as CNET explains.

Over at The Dallas Morning News, Victor Godinez says this could be the Firefox death knell.

A full $56 million of Mozilla’s $66 million of revenue last year came from its Google partnership, which ends in 2011.

Meanwhile, Mozilla’s CEO whistles in the dark with this comment:

As much as anything else, it’ll mean there’s another interesting browser that users can choose.

I disagree with Godinez, though, that Chrome will ONLY hit Firefox. (He claims that IE 8 won’t be hurt because many businesses require its use, and many home users aren’t aware of other browsers.

Victor, this is Google we're talking about. With Google marketing, etc. With Google's own autodownloader program. With Google's Blogger platform likely targeting bloggers to get special blog-related apps on Google.

And, on the business side, Google may push for a package of Google software to be preinstalled on computers.

Wired also disagrees with Godoniz on Chrome vs IE:

It’s an aggressive move destined to put the company even more squarely in the crosshairs of its rival Microsoft, which long ago crushed the most fabled browser of all, Netscape Navigator.

And, it runs JavaScript 10x faster than Firefox or Safari.

Beyond that, Mozilla itself has a services suite in the works that could compete with some Google apps. And, per Google’s IM, Business Week notes that a number of Google products lost steam soon after launch.

Oh, and based on info from Download Safari pages will render correctly in Chrome.

So, the idea of Safari for Windows, at least, should be considered dead.

Sayonara, Steve Jobs, on that baby.

And yet more info on Chrome, specifically in its Terms of Use, indicate Google is intent on becoming more and more of Big Brother all the time.

Given this, I doubt I’ll be any more likely to use Chrome than I will IE8. Indeed, it’s that concern that keeps me from using Google as my RSS reader.

The “Big Brother” worry about Google? Basically, it’s all about the fact that “cloud computing,” at least as Google is now pushing it, represents a loss of control, As John C. Dvorak simply and forcefully details.

In a nutshell, Dvorak says that for some specialized apps, a cloud-based bit of software may well be the superior solution. It’s hard to find what you want as a downloadable app, plus there’s what he calls “nagware”: the update reminders, etc.

Read the whole story for more.

That said, Chrome is NOT necessary, and a cloud-based, cloud-focused or partially cloud-based web browser offers no special convenience.

So, yes, Mozilla should have an eye to its financial future. But, no, it shouldn’t be sweating bullets right now.

Obama riffing on Google with Big Brother-type cybercampaign

Like Google, which is playing Big Brother to you and I with your Google search parameters and Google ads, Barack Obama wants to run his presidential campaign by using selective advertising targeted on a developed profile of you.

You know, of course, that Obama has your e-mail address. You may not have realized that he probably also has your phone number and knows where you're registered to vote — including whether that's a house or an apartment building, and whether you rent or own. He's got a decent estimate of your household income and whether you opened a credit card recently. He knows how many kids you're likely to have and what you do for a living. He knows what magazines and catalogs you get and whether you're more apt to get your news from cable TV, the local newspaper or online. And he knows what time of day you tend to get around to plowing through your in box and responding to messages.

Fortunately, as of right now, at least, Obama’s cybercampaigning just appears to be targeted to people on his e-mail list.

BUT …

What if Obama starts buying the e-mail lists of liberal activist organizations, such as the ACLU, Sierra Club, etc.?

For other reasons, I’ve not renewed my membership in either one of those. Given Obama’s FISA vote, it’s unlikely the ACLU would sell its list to him, anyway, beyond its privacy policies. But, Sierra? It’s got the stereotypical Volvo-driving, Brie-eating big money enviros that his campaign wants to cultivate.

In short, riffing to the “soccer mom” idea of four years ago, it appears the Obama campaign wants to target subgroups such as NOW- or NARAL-member soccer moms, Sierra soccer moms, hybrid-driving soccer moms, etc.

Not just that, but with geographic targeting down to the ZIP code level, or even voting precinct level, these days, voters on the Obama e-mail list, or purchased e-mail lists, are going to be targeted for their location.

Given that, I don’t doubt that, whether done by his campaign or some 527, Internet-based, or e-mail based, push polling, etc., is coming next.

For a laundry list of obvious reasons, Obama’s campaign didn’t really want to talk to Salon’s Mike Madden for the story.

Defeat Google’s Big Brother ad targeting

Google wants to target ads at you based on your previous search history. Given Google’s partnership with Yahoo, using Yahoo for searches may not be an answer.

I suppose you could use Jeeves or something, but here’s the snarkier idea.

Once every day, throw some HUGE outlier into your searches. (Warning: Try this only at home, not on an office computer.)

For example, look for “gay Albanian porn.” Or “Betty Crocker” + “John F. Kennedy” + “secret relationship.”

You get the idea.

Once a day, drive Google crazy.

Note: I actually searched for “gay Albanian porn” after starting this post and got five hits!

Or, here’s another twist. Do a normal Google search, but add the words “Sergey Brin” in front of it.

That said, should Google ever disappear this blog, Blogger being a Google-owned product, look for me at socraticgadfly.wordpress.com or something.