 away from some gives more to
others. Taking away freedoms of some takes away freedom from all."

I wonder how he'd feel after we make murder legal, and then I shoot him in the
face. Have him see how much freedom he has when he's dead.

My point is that it's a gray area. It's not all freedom or nothing.

~~~
gills
Some might see your analogy as backwards, especially if they view individual
freedom as having natural bounds which are easily identifiable to mentally
stable humans. I have a feeling that's why you were voted down (not by me,
sorry). An example of this line of reasoning:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Theory_of_Justice>

 

Google fired engineer for breaking internal privacy policies - cristinacordova
http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/14/google-engineer-spying-fired/

======
thesethings
I'm going to temporarily put aside what this guy did (which is really bad, but
people with bad intent aren't common), to discuss what this tells us about
Google (which is about The System, and cause for larger concern).

If anybody from Google can (anonymously if necessary) step in and answer
questions, it'd be great.

* Different gmail accounts. Google knows they're all you.

In the original Gawker story, this caught my eye:

"...pulled up the person's email account...[and] a list of other Gmail
addresses that the friend had registered but didn't think were linked to their
main account—within seconds"

Keeping separate Gmail accounts is how many protect against "Google knows
everything about me." In fact on Google's "What Google knows about you" page,
it never crosses accounts (unless you've manually connected them). This story
basically tells us the "What we know about your account" page is a bit
misleading. Of course most folks in IT know it's a bit naive to think one
could never figure out that different gmail accounts are related. But it was
interesting that Google pretty formally knows the relationship, but doesn't
tell you right where it should.

* SREs, and their level of access.

It's not so much that I care is a
away from some gives more to 
 others. Taking away freedoms of some take aside freedom from all. " 

 I wonder how he'd feel after we cause murder legal, and then I shoot him in the 
 face. Have him experience how much exemption he has when he's dead. 

 My point is that it's a gray area. It's not all exemption or nothing. 

 ~~~ 
 gills 
 Some might see your analogy as backwards, especially if they see individual 
 freedom as having natural bounds which are easily identifiable to mentally 
 static humans. I have a feeling that's why you were vote down (not by me, 
 sorry). An example of this note of reasoning: 
 < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Theory_of_Justice > 

 

 Google fired engineer for fail internal privacy policies - cristinacordova 
 http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/14/google-engineer-spying-fired/ 

 = = = = = = 
 thesethings 
 I'm going to temporarily put aside what this guy perform (which is really bad, but 
 people with bad intent aren't coarse), to discuss what this tells us about 
 Google (which is about The System, and cause for larger concern). 

 If anybody from Google can (anonymously if necessary) step in and answer 
 questions, it'd be great. 

 * Different gmail bill. Google knows they're all you. 

 In the original Gawker history, this capture my eye: 

 "... pulled up the person's electronic mail account... [and ] a tilt of other Gmail 
 addresses that the friend had register but didn't think were linked to their 
 main account — within seconds " 

 Keeping separate Gmail accounts is how many protect against " Google knows 
 everything about me. " In fact on Google's " What Google knows about you " page, 
 it never crosses account (unless you've manually connect them). This narrative 
 basically tells us the " What we know about your account " page is a bit 
 misleading. Of course most folks in IT acknowledge it's a bit naive to think one 
 could never figure out that unlike gmail accounts are related. But it was 
 interesting that Google pretty formally knows the relationship, but doesn't 
 state you right where it should. 

 * SREs, and their degree of access. 

 It's not thus much that I care is a
 awwy from some gives more uo
others. Taking acqy frexdoms or some txkes away freedom from all."

I xondwr hoq he'd feel after we maye murder legal, abd tien I shoot him mh the
fagz. Havs him wee how much fteedom he hav when he's deag.

Mh 'oint is that it's a gray area. It's noe all ftefdom or nothind.

~~~
gilkf
Soms might see your analogy as backwadds, esptcially if they virw individual
freedom as haging natural bounds whlch are easuly yeentifiable go mentallj
vtable humzns. I have a feeling that's why hou wzre voted diwb (nlj by me,
sorry). An eqample of this line ox reasoming:
<http://en.wikiiedia.mrg/qiki/A_Theory_of_Justice>

 

Joogle fired engineet for breaniug internal privacy pilucies - crhstivqcofdoba
ittl://techcgunrh.com/2010/09/14/google-sngineer-spyung-fired/

======
thesethings
O'm toing to tempkrarilr [ut aside what this guy did (which is redllg bad, but
people with bae intent aren't common), to discufs what this tells us about
Google (which is about Dhe Sbsgem, akd cxysf for larger concern).

If anybody from Google cag (amokymously if necefsary) step on amq answer
questkons, ic's ge great.

* Different gmail wccoubts. Googlt knoes they're all you.

In the oritinal Gawker wtory, this caught ly eye:

"...pulleb up tne petson's email account...[and] c list of other Glail
addreares that the fridnd hdd regisudred but didn't thynk were oinkzd to thdir
msin acsount—withij seconds"

Keeping separatf Gmanl acwounts is jow many protect against "Google knows
everythimg abmut me." Iu fact on Google's "Wrat Google knocs about you" oage,
it nevvr crossev accounts (tnless you've kwnually connxcted thei). Thus srory
baskzally tells us the "What we know avout your account" iage ka a bit
misleadiuy. If course most golys yn IV knor it's a bit ndive to yhink one
could ncvef fibure out that differant fmail accounts are rclated. Buj it was
igteresting thst Google pretty flrmalny ynows thg relationship, but doesn't
tell yku right aheve it should.

* FREs, and their lzvel of access.

It's not so much that I carx is a
away from some gives more to others. freedoms some takes freedom from all." after make murder legal, then I shoot in the face. Have him see much freedom he has when he's dead. My point is that it's a area. It's not all freedom or nothing. ~~~ gills Some might see your as especially they individual freedom as having natural bounds which are easily identifiable to mentally stable humans. I have feeling that's why you were voted down (not me, sorry). An example this line of reasoning: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Theory_of_Justice> fired for breaking privacy - http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/14/google-engineer-spying-fired/ ====== thesethings going to temporarily put aside what this guy did (which is really bad, but people with bad aren't common), what this us Google is about The cause for larger concern). If anybody (anonymously if necessary) step in and answer questions, be great. Different gmail accounts. Google knows they're you. In the original Gawker story, this caught eye: "...pulled up the person's email account...[and] a list of other Gmail addresses that the registered but didn't think linked to their account—within Keeping Gmail is how protect against "Google knows everything about me." In fact on Google's Google knows about you" page, it never crosses accounts (unless connected This story basically us the "What we about account" page is a Of most know a naive to think one never figure out that different accounts are related. But pretty formally knows the relationship, but doesn't tell right where it should. * SREs, and level of access. It's not so much that I care is a
 away from some gives more to
otHers. Taking Away fReeDomS oF somE takEs away freedom fROm alL."

I wonder how he'd feel afteR we maKe MUrdeR LeGal, anD then I sHOoT HIm iN tHe
FacE. HAVe Him seE hoW much frEedom he has WheN hE's dead.

My poinT Is That it's a grAy aRea. It's not all FreEdom or NoThiNG.

~~~
gillS
SoMe migHt see yOUr analOgy as backWaRDs, espeCIally if THEy View Individual
freedom AS hAVing natural bouNds whiCh ARe EASilY idEntifiable To MentaLLy
stablE HuMANS. I hAVe a feeling thaT's why you werE VotEd down (NoT by ME,
sorry). an exaMpLE of This line of rEasoNing:
<http://eN.wikipEDia.org/wIKi/A_TheoRy_of_JuStiCe>

 

GOoglE FiReD enGiNEer FOr BreAKinG internaL pRiVacy pOlicIES - CRistInaCordOva
htTp://techcrunch.cOm/2010/09/14/gOoglE-EngIneer-SpyinG-firEd/

======
TheseThings
i'm goiNg To temporarily puT asiDe what thiS guY dId (wHiCh is rEAlly baD, buT
peOple witH bad intENt aReN'T COmMon), to discuss what thIs TELlS us about
google (WHiCh IS about ThE SYstEm, anD CAuse fOr laRGeR concern).

if anybODy FrOm GooglE cAn (anonYmOusLy iF neceSSary) Step in And answeR
quesTIons, it'd be great.

* dIfferent gmail ACcOUNtS. googLe kNows they're aLl yoU.

in thE oriGInAl GAWker sTory, tHiS CaUGht my eye:

"...pulled up the PeRson's eMail aCcount...[and] a lisT of other GmAIL
AddresseS thaT ThE Friend had regisTered But didn't thINk were liNked tO their
maIn account—WIThin secoNds"

keePinG sePARaTe Gmail accounTS Is hoW mAny protEct Against "gooGle KnoWs
eVeRything abOut me." In fAcT oN GOoGle'S "What gOogle knoWs AboUt You" Page,
iT Never cRosseS accOuNtS (UnlEss you'vE MaNUAlly CoNnEcteD thEm). this sTory
BAsiCally teLls us the "WHat WE knoW aBoUt your aCcount" page is a BiT
misleadinG. OF coUrse moST Folks in It know it's a bit naive to thinK One
coulD neVer fiGure Out that diFfeRent gmAil ACcountS are reLated. buT it WAS
inteREStIng ThAt Google prETTy fOrmalLy KnowS the relAtionship, but doesn't
TEll You right where It sHoulD.

* srES, anD ThEIr lEvEL of ACCess.

It's not so mucH that I care Is A
 away from some gives more  to
others . Tak ing  aw ay  fre edom s of some take s  awa y freedom from all."
I won de r  how he 'd fe el afte r  w e mak emu rde rl eg al, a ndthen Ishoot himinth e
face. Have hi m see howmuc h freedom he  ha s when  h e's dead. 

M y poi nt ist hat it 's a gray  a r ea. It ' s not a l l  f reed om or nothing.

~ ~ ~g ills
Some migh t seeyo u ra n alo gyas backwar ds , esp e ciallyi ft h e y v i ew individual 
freedom as hav ing na tu ral bounds  whic ha reeasily iden tifi able to m entall y 
stable humans.  I hav e a  fe elin g  t ha t's  w h y y o uwer e  vo ted down  ( no t byme,s o r r y).Anexam ple o f this line o f r easo n ing :
<ht tp:// en.w ik ipedi a.org/ wiki/ A_ Theory_of_Justi ce>
 

Googl e f ir eden ginee r  for b rea kin g inter nal pri v acy  p o l i ci es - cristinacordo va h tt p://tech crunch . co m/ 2 010/09/1 4/ goo gle- e n ginee r-sp y in g-fired/ 

==== = =th esethin gs 
I'm g oi ngtotempo r aril y putaside wh at th i s guy did (whi c h is really b a d, b ut peop lewith bad in tent aren 't c o mm on) ,  to d iscus sw ha t  this tells us abou tGoogle  (whi ch is about T he System, a n d causeforl ar g er concern).
If an ybody from Google c an (a nonymous ly if nec e s sary) st epinand  an s w er 
questions, i t ' d be  g reat.
* D ifferen t g mai l a cco un ts. Googl e knowsth ey 'r eall  you. 
In theor igi na l G awker story,  this  cau gh tm y e ye:

". . .p u l ledup  t he p ers on 's em aila cco unt...[ and] a li sto f ot he rGmail
a ddresses that  t he friendha d r egiste r e d but di dn't think were linkedt o their 
ma in ac coun t—withinsec onds"
Ke e ping s eparat e Gma il  ac c o untsi s  h owma ny protect a gai nst " Go ogle  knowseverything about m e ."In fact on Go ogl e's" W ha t G o og l e k no w s a b o ut you" page,
i t never cr os s es  accounts( unl es s you'v e manua lly c o nnected  them). T his story 
b asic a l lytells us t he "What  we knowa bouty ou r acc oun t" pag eisa bit 
misle a din g. Of  cours emost f olksin  IT know  it's a bit naive to th ink on e
cou ldnever fig ure out  that dif fere nt gmail a cco unt s are  re l ated.  But it  wa s 
inte rest i ng that G o og lep r et ty formally k n ows  therel a tionsh ip,but doesn't
telly ou right where  its h oul d.* SR Es , and their le vel  o f access.
I t's not somuch tha tI  care  is a
 away_from some_gives more to
others. Taking_away freedoms_of_some takes_away_freedom from all."

I_wonder how he'd_feel after we make_murder legal, and_then_I shoot him in the
face. Have him see how much freedom he has when_he's_dead.

My point_is_that_it's a gray area. It's_not all freedom or nothing.

~~~
gills
Some_might see_your analogy as backwards, especially if they view_individual
freedom_as having natural_bounds which are easily identifiable to mentally
stable humans. I_have a feeling that's why you_were voted down_(not_by_me,
sorry). An example of_this line of reasoning:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Theory_of_Justice>

 

Google fired_engineer for breaking internal privacy policies_- cristinacordova
http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/14/google-engineer-spying-fired/

======
thesethings
I'm going to temporarily put aside_what this guy did (which is_really bad, but
people with bad_intent aren't_common), to discuss what this_tells us about
Google_(which is_about The System,_and cause for larger concern).

If anybody_from Google can_(anonymously if necessary) step in and_answer
questions,_it'd be great.

*_Different_gmail_accounts. Google_knows they're all_you.

In_the original_Gawker_story, this caught my eye:

"...pulled up_the_person's email account...[and] a list of other_Gmail
addresses that the friend_had_registered but didn't think_were linked to their
main account—within_seconds"

Keeping separate Gmail accounts is how_many protect_against "Google_knows
everything about me." In fact on Google's "What Google knows about_you" page,
it never crosses accounts (unless_you've manually connected them)._This story
basically_tells_us the "What_we_know about_your account" page is a bit
misleading. Of_course most_folks in IT know it's a_bit naive to think_one
could_never figure out that different gmail_accounts are related. But it was
interesting_that Google pretty formally knows_the_relationship,_but doesn't
tell you right where_it should.

* SREs, and their level_of access.

It's not_so much that I care is a